|
Grandad Gaz
3,729 posts
115 months
|
Mintyhit said: My new car is a Japanese import. I frequently flash my lights when I want to wash my windscreen and vice-verse, am I still guilty officer? Ah, that sounds like a very good excuse  My Honda Accord has them the other way round from the van.
|
|
|
roachcoach
2,960 posts
24 months
|
10 Pence Short said: SS2. said: The lighting regulations provide that no headlamp shall be used so as to cause undue dazzle or discomfort to other persons using the road. Partisan magistrates aside, I wonder how the police would go about proving the above if one of the life threatening headlamp flashers declined the kind offer of fixed penalty, opting instead to have the matter heard in court..  For instance, would HM's finest be providing statements from motorists confirming that they had indeed been unduly dazzled or had suffered discomfort from the flashing antics of others ? I did wonder about that. I assumed the 'other person' would be the Police witness who reports, rather than relying on a member of the public to do so. Would using s42 of the RTA to punish people for obstructing (in the absence of sufficient evidence to prosecute for the latter) constitute an abuse of process by the Police, or would it be accepted that a breach of the lighting regs was a breach and that was that? One wonders, even if it was a police officer, about proving the intent being to dazzle/distress etc. As I say, farcical.
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,605 posts
86 months
|
There's no need to prove any intent- it's a strict liability offence.
|
|
|
roachcoach
2,960 posts
24 months
|
I admit, I didnt look but led from SS2's emphasis on the section starting "used to" and inferred from there that intent was needed.
|
|
|
LocoCoco
598 posts
45 months
|
Finlandia said: BertBert said: I presume it's just the fact that it's speeding that's the problem? As I said, there are crimes and then there are "crimes". I wouldn't warn a stabber or murderer, but someone possibly driving faster than a random number on a stick, yes. Or are all crimes treated as equally bad? Sorry, this was from a bit far back in the thread but I always thought speeding wasn't a crime? You can't get a criminal record for it? Therefore motorists warning speeders aren't guilty of stopping the police catching a criminal?
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
pitmansboots
1,058 posts
56 months
|
I think the Lancs tactic is interesting and I wouldn't criticize its use as it is reasonable and lawful IMHO. I would have used a different tactic; I would have used covert enforcement and publicized it. Not the location and time, just that covert enforcement was going to be used to counter the actions of those who believed they were 'being helpful'. Over to the flashers to reap the reward for prompting the use of covert enforcement. 
|
|
|
Tango13
2,604 posts
45 months
|
Many years ago a friend of my dads had parked his car quite legally out side his house in a 30 limit. A Police officer knocked on his door and asked him to move the car onto his drive as they were running a speed trap just down the road and his car was slowing the traffic and preventing them from raising revenue catching any one speeding. Needless to say the car wasn't moved and the Police officer went away with a flea in his ear to put it mildly 
|
|
|
Jasandjules
45,411 posts
98 months
|
It is sad that those in power wonder why the police don't get anywhere near as much support from the public as they deserve. They need look no further than this type of situation.
|
|
|
Gene Vincent
4,002 posts
27 months
|
This matter is on the JV show from midday on BBC R2.
|
|
|
rewc
1,603 posts
102 months
|
With a bit of luck it will be local people who have been caught for speeding and for warning of the trap. When you call in the authorities for this sort of community concern action then that is what normally happens. Beware what you wish for.
|
|
|
pitmansboots
1,058 posts
56 months
|
Gene Vincent said: This matter is on the JV show from midday on BBC R2. Oh good; we stand to get all of the right answers then. 
|
|
|
rewc
1,603 posts
102 months
|
Jasandjules said: It is sad that those in power wonder why the police don't get anywhere near as much support from the public as they deserve. They need look no further than this type of situation. I don't think the authorities care. They will say they are responding to community concerns. I think though that they get the public support they deserve.
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,605 posts
86 months
|
pitmansboots said: I think the Lancs tactic is interesting and I wouldn't criticize its use as it is reasonable and lawful IMHO. I would have used a different tactic; I would have used covert enforcement and publicized it. Not the location and time, just that covert enforcement was going to be used to counter the actions of those who believed they were 'being helpful'. Over to the flashers to reap the reward for prompting the use of covert enforcement. If you were to do that, what effect do you believe it would have on public support? Assuming those who support speed enforcement by overt or covert means would automatically support such measures would more than likely be a mistake.
|
|
|
pitmansboots
1,058 posts
56 months
|
10 Pence Short said: pitmansboots said: I think the Lancs tactic is interesting and I wouldn't criticize its use as it is reasonable and lawful IMHO. I would have used a different tactic; I would have used covert enforcement and publicized it. Not the location and time, just that covert enforcement was going to be used to counter the actions of those who believed they were 'being helpful'. Over to the flashers to reap the reward for prompting the use of covert enforcement. If you were to do that, what effect do you believe it would have on public support? Assuming those who support speed enforcement by overt or covert means would automatically support such measures would more than likely be a mistake. I don't think it would be. There you go, both opinions are valid. What it will do is increase the deterrent effect of the deployment of speed enforcement systems. At the moment there are a number, a large number of drivers who manipulate the system by driving in compliance only when enforcement is apparent; some drivers even assist them to do that. If the manipulators were not able to predict the enforcement positions would they be confident enough to carry on their manipulation and exceed the limit? Most would not. Your premise that such a move would be generally unpopular surmises that the majority of drivers do not support the use of speed enforcement and the possibility of increasing the effectiveness of that enforcement; your premise, in my experience is incorrect. The number of people ranting against the enforcement effort is very small; just look at the numbers commenting here....it ain't large is it? I grant you that the small numbers do get a lot of air time; it's popular in among the press for some reason. The red-tops put articles in mainly for light entertainment reasons, as does the BBC.
|
|
|
Gene Vincent
4,002 posts
27 months
|
pitmansboots said: Gene Vincent said: This matter is on the JV show from midday on BBC R2. Oh good; we stand to get all of the right answers then. Yeah, I doubt we'll get any answers too... but we might see how much disgust there is in the general public in being penalised for doing what is right and how much self-harm the police do themselves in going for going down this road.
|
|
|
Dr Jekyll
5,524 posts
130 months
|
pitmansboots said: If the manipulators were not able to predict the enforcement positions would they be confident enough to carry on their manipulation and exceed the limit? Most would not. But they can't always predict enforcement positions, yet they do exceed the limit. I've never seens anyone on a motorway flash opposite direction traffic to warn of a speed trap, but I've seen plenty of drivers exceeding 70.
|
|
|
10 Pence Short
27,605 posts
86 months
|
pitmansboots said: I don't think it would be. There you go, both opinions are valid.
What it will do is increase the deterrent effect of the deployment of speed enforcement systems. At the moment there are a number, a large number of drivers who manipulate the system by driving in compliance only when enforcement is apparent; some drivers even assist them to do that. If the manipulators were not able to predict the enforcement positions would they be confident enough to carry on their manipulation and exceed the limit? Most would not. You assert there are a large number of drivers who manipulate the system and that by having unpredictable positions they would cease to do so. What evidence do you have to back this assertion? I am aware in Cumbria that the positions of enforcement are unpredictable, yet there are still considerable numbers of vehicles caught not complying. This would appear to contradict your assertion. pitmansboots said: Your premise that such a move would be generally unpopular surmises that the majority of drivers do not support the use of speed enforcement and the possibility of increasing the effectiveness of that enforcement; your premise, in my experience is incorrect. The number of people ranting against the enforcement effort is very small; just look at the numbers commenting here....it ain't large is it? Not for the first time, you make an assumption of my position that is not supported by anything I've said. I have not claimed that drivers do not support speed enforcement. This makes the rest of that paragraph, and your post, redundant.
|
|
|
roachcoach
2,960 posts
24 months
|
10 Pence Short said: I have not claimed that drivers do not support speed enforcement. This makes the rest of that paragraph, and your post, redundant. From every number I've ever seen the 'majority' of drivers basically support enforcement for everybody else but not them. Indeed, this Select Committee on Transport, Local Government and the Regions quote is perfect: gubbernmt said: The problem is that: "Most drivers and pedestrians think speeds are generally too high but 95 per cent of all drivers admit to exceeding speed limits . I find it hard to take any stock in 'public' opinion with hypocrisy running quite so strongly You know, its a bit like the mentality many hold where everyone going slower than you is a bimbling fool and anyone going faster is a nutter with a deathwish. @10PS, not replying to 'you' per-se, but your quote is the convenient one
|
|
|
3Dee
2,544 posts
90 months
|
Ahh, well!
Just as expected....JV is making a right dogs-dinner of the subject with irrelevances, sensationalism and emotional red-herrings! I think 30 sec was actually on the flashing bit...
So sad....
|
|
|
Vipers
15,534 posts
97 months
|
3Dee said: Ahh, well!
Just as expected....JV is making a right dogs-dinner of the subject with irrelevances, sensationalism and emotional red-herrings! I think 30 sec was actually on the flashing bit...
So sad.... He admitted he had no idea what the hc said about flashing lights, plonker. But you know it makes sense, carry on guys regardless. 
|
|
