Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: BazaJT on 16 July 2016, 07:09:35
-
Just watched an episode of Highway Patrol[Australia] where the police had set up a speed camera.This was on a straight two lane road running through a wooded area-so no houses etc.The speed gun was operated by one officer whilst another officer beside him used a radio to communicate with patrol cars that then pulled the offenders.The camera was set up in the tree line and hidden from view by camouflage netting! I know people shouldn't speed and therefore wouldn't be caught,however I imagine that many of us do "inadvertently"stray above the limit on the odd occasion,but hiding a camera in this way is just downright sneaky and not playing the game at all.
-
Thanks. You've just reminded me that I got flashed by a speed camera a few days ago in France >:(
-
Does anyone remember the Police policy of "prevention, not prosecution"? This meant that their actions were always clear and open, not entrapment. When did this change - or has it not changed but they have just "forgotten" about it in the interests of revenue collection
Ron.
-
What you need to understand is that in Australia speeding is viewed as a very serious offence. There is very little tolerance and just a few km over the limit will see you get demerit points and a fine. Because of this, most people actually stick to the speed limits so it seems to work :y
That was certainly my experience anyway.
-
Yes the Western Australia police deploy light aircraft and helicopters to catch people speeding on the Eyre Highway in the Nullabor Desert, a vast area of nothingness and long long straight roads where the only thing you are likely to hit are the odd Road Train or camel! ::)
God knows what it must cost the tax payer, but anyone who rails against the EU should try living in Australia, which is far from the free and easy place of popular imagination. ;)
-
Does anyone remember the Police policy of "prevention, not prosecution"? This meant that their actions were always clear and open, not entrapment. When did this change - or has it not changed but they have just "forgotten" about it in the interests of revenue collection
Ron.
Just the same as using a plain car to catch public on their mobile phones, if we were in a great big batten-burg marked car, they wouldn't do it (mind you some are that engrossed in their call they don't). I've never been one for stopping anyone doing 2-3 miles over the limit and never will do. Its the morons who 'drive like they stole it' who always get my attention.
And as for revenue collection??????? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D If we got out what we put in we'd easily have enough for more bobbies & kit, however that's clearly not the case.
-
You have made my point for me, Jason! The purpose of the law is to control behaviour and direct people to behave as “Society” dictates.
If you advertise your presence in a battenburg or other high-visibility way, as you correctly stated, compliance with the Law would ensue – exactly the desired result, surely?
Any other “safety” excuse is precisely that: an excuse.
No other area of public activity is subjected to such vigilant monitoring/persecution as road speed, including the habitual law-breaking of cyclists; I have yet to see a single cyclist apprehended for reckless cycling on pavements, even when haring past a uniformed officer on foot. At £30 per “collar”, that would certainly help your budget, considering the number of offenders there are!
Ron.
-
You have made my point for me, Jason! The purpose of the law is to control behaviour and direct people to behave as “Society” dictates.
If you advertise your presence in a battenburg or other high-visibility way, as you correctly stated, compliance with the Law would ensue – exactly the desired result, surely?
Any other “safety” excuse is precisely that: an excuse.
No other area of public activity is subjected to such vigilant monitoring/persecution as road speed, including the habitual law-breaking of cyclists; I have yet to see a single cyclist apprehended for reckless cycling on pavements, even when haring past a uniformed officer on foot. At £30 per “collar”, that would certainly help your budget, considering the number of offenders there are!
Ron.
Do you really think in this day & age anyone would stop on a bike??? No me neither, same with motor bikes they won't stop & you're not allowed to pursue them, and as for £30 tickets helping our budget, we'd be lucky to see 1% of it.
We're damned if we do & damned if we don't catching speeders, only the other day in the local news I have read of one particular stretch that I used to police catching speeders in full uniform (flouescent jacket & white hat), broad daylight, fully visible, 40mph speed limit. Average speeders between 50-60mph, I could get on average 6 a hour only for residents & businesses complain that we were just a cash making scheme. Well now someone sadly has passed away due to a serious bump & all the residents are out complaining that the road is like a race track and 'we never see the police' and other comments such as 'if the police carried out regular speed checks here this wouldn't have happened.
-
That's a fair point, Jason and I do sympathise with you, since as I said before, speed is such an emotive and contentious issue. Your job is not easy.
I didn't know that you weren't allowed to pursure offenders - why not? What about all the car chases so beloved of our TV series?
There isn't a need to pursue anyway with cars - we have to wear Number Plates - and I firmly believe that making cyclists wear them too (and pay for road use, like we have to) would curtail their law-breaking.
Oh, and I do hope that you are on the mend?
Ron.
-
Policy says motorcycles aren't allowed to be puraued in case the poor misunderstood darlings hurt themselves. And their promising football careers get cut short.
I think thats what it said anyway...
-
Now you are taking it to the extreme - when I said 'we can't pursue them' there is no policy for pursuing bikes or motorbikes, anyone who does & the 'offender' has an accident or worse dies, the officer pursuing is in court on a dangerous driving charge! That's why we don't pursue - its not worth it!
Oh & wearing number plates won't tell me the name & address of someone who has stolen a car :P
P.S. Doing fine, I'll be back driving a desk as of Tuesday ::) ::) ::)
-
You have made my point for me, Jason! The purpose of the law is to control behaviour and direct people to behave as “Society” dictates.
If you advertise your presence in a battenburg or other high-visibility way, as you correctly stated, compliance with the Law would ensue – exactly the desired result, surely?
Any other “safety” excuse is precisely that: an excuse.
No other area of public activity is subjected to such vigilant monitoring/persecution as road speed, including the habitual law-breaking of cyclists; I have yet to see a single cyclist apprehended for reckless cycling on pavements, even when haring past a uniformed officer on foot. At £30 per “collar”, that would certainly help your budget, considering the number of offenders there are!
Ron.
As a very keen leisure cyclist Ron i must admit that i do agree with some of your post. I biked up town today and was going the right way on a one way street when this guy poodled round the corner and went past me with a smirk on his face, (the road he came out of mean,t he was riding the wrong way there as well). As we passed i said to him that his actions gave cyclists a bad name. He stopped smiling a told me to f**k off. Thought, nice , and carried on, not totally suprised.
-
"ronnyd", thank you for that. I have no quarrel whatsoever with responsible cyclists, but the other, increasingly more prevalent types who feel that safety (in the form of helmets) applies to them, but the safety of others is of no consequence and of course traffic laws do not apply to them either.
I usually agree with Jasonm, too, but not where number platres are concerned - if cyclists had to register - for an annual fee - and display them front and rear, they would be readily traceable when offending, just like motorists.
Ron.
-
"ronnyd", thank you for that. I have no quarrel whatsoever with responsible cyclists, but the other, increasingly more prevalent types who feel that safety (in the form of helmets) applies to them, but the safety of others is of no consequence and of course traffic laws do not apply to them either.
I usually agree with Jasonm, too, but not where number platres are concerned - if cyclists had to register - for an annual fee - and display them front and rear, they would be readily traceable when offending, just like motorists.
Ron.
In an ideal world perhaps.........However if you physically had to collate all that information (circa roughly 9 million cycles & rapidly rising), dump it somewhere on some kind of server have to be new (they would probably kill the PNC system) ready for some admin person(s) to trawl through, then send the equivalent of a NIP through the post to the owner, then find out who the owner is / was, then send them a £30 fine..............
It would never get sign off.
-
Could I use that excuse to throw away my Number Plates and argue that it would involve too much administative effort to pursue me?
There are many times more than 9 million motorists, yet they definitely do manage to fine/prosecute us.....
Ron.
-
Could I use that excuse to throw away my Number Plates and argue that it would involve too much administative effort to pursue me?
There are many times more than 9 million motorists, yet they definitely do manage to fine/prosecute us.....
Ron.
Yes do! see how far it gets you!!!!!!!!!!!
I ain't disagreeing with you all I'm saying is for a £30 fine do you really think that the government is gonna spend million of ££££ to set up a new database for none endorsable fines???????
There are loads of laws / procedures we'd like to see changed, but trying to even implement such is like trying to plat fog!!!!
How far would you have us go??? Sitting outside someones house in plain gear waiting for them to leave on their unregistered / licensed pushbike??? Oh hang on a minute, that'll be entrapment ::) ::) ::)
-
Jason, I never said the fines were to be non-endorsable - let's make it the full Monty, including compulsory 3rd party insurance to cover the injusies that they are bound to inflict on pedestrians as they tear along pavements.
Are you saying that entrapment never takes place anyway? Hmmm.....
Ron.
P.S. We are on the same side, really - and great to hear that you will be a shiney-arse next week!
-
Jason, I never said the fines were to be non-endorsable - let's make it the full Monty, including compulsory 3rd party insurance to cover the injusies that they are bound to inflict on pedestrians as they tear along pavements.
Are you saying that entrapment never takes place anyway? Hmmm.....
Ron.
P.S. We are on the same side, really - and great to hear that you will be a shiney-arse next week!
& how the hell would you police that then??????
You'd have to license EVERYONE that rides a bike - from 5 yr old Billy to 80odd year old lycra clad grandad!!! Oh and get each & every offence(s) & codes passed in parliament (that's if the license even made it that far)
Oh and while we are on about entrapment as you call it :-
In criminal law, entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit. It is a conduct that is generally discouraged and thus, in many jurisdictions, is a possible defense against criminal liability.
If someone is speeding down the road and an officer is stood 1 mile away with a speed gun how can the officer induce the person to commit the criminal act of speeding?????????? How can he have any impact on the driver putting his foot on the accelerator??? If he's speeding, he's speeding and would be whether the officer was there or not!
-
Jason, I never said the fines were to be non-endorsable - let's make it the full Monty, including compulsory 3rd party insurance to cover the injusies that they are bound to inflict on pedestrians as they tear along pavements.
Are you saying that entrapment never takes place anyway? Hmmm.....
Ron.
P.S. We are on the same side, really - and great to hear that you will be a shiney-arse next week!
In WWI with US ships being sunk by German Uboats, a US politician was asked what the US Government should do to solve the problem? The politician replied: "Just boil off all the water in the Atlantic and the Uboats will have nowhere to hide!" When he asked the politician how that can be achieved? The politician said: "My job is to make policy, implementation is somebody else's problem." :o :o :o
IMO your bicycles and number plates, fits into the same category as the above.. UK cyclists unlike UK vehicle drivers don't kill 3000+ of themselves and other road users a year. :(
-
No "5 year old billy" would ever be arrested since, as you of all people will know, he would be below the age of criminal responsibility.
My entrapment comment did not relate to speeding and it was rather disingenuous to suggest it did as it was meant to express my incredulity about claims that police never employ such tactics. Press reports give us cause to doubt that claim!
Ron.