Reap what you sow?
Discussion
Pete317 said:
What's all the fuss about anyway?
There's less than f
k-all difference between 34 and 35mph anyway
According to the Officer Dibble's on here there is, that extra 1mph is worth a hundred nicker, 3 points or the bored to death lecture(sac) why it was so dangerous doing that extra 1mph, the punishment of the 3 points or the sac is up to the criminals choice.There's less than f
k-all difference between 34 and 35mph anywayCat said:
Rovinghawk said:
I thought all police are civilians.
Plenty of dictionaries define the word civilian similarly to "a person not in the armed services or a member of the police force".Cat
Sir Robert Peel's Principles of Law Enforcement 1829 Number 7 said:
The police at all times should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police are the only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the intent of the community welfare.
It is still as true today as it was then.Elsewhere it's less clear cut. For example the French Gendarmerie, the Italian Carabinieri, and the Spanish Guardia Civil are all branches of their respective countries Armed Forces which have jurisdiction in civil law enforcement.
drf765 said:
Let's say he kept quiet about his speeding conviction/penalty. He is entitled to.
Now let's say someone blew the whistle on him. So what?
At the very worst he would be slightly embarrassed, no more than that.
Now because of his completely daft actions he has someone like you posting up on the Internet that he has done something heinous when he hasn't.
Actually, if you read my first post, I was questioning if he needed to report himself for something so trivial, and suggesting that media hype could be to blame.Now let's say someone blew the whistle on him. So what?
At the very worst he would be slightly embarrassed, no more than that.
Now because of his completely daft actions he has someone like you posting up on the Internet that he has done something heinous when he hasn't.
As to my posting it on the internet, I suspect that the cat was out of the bag when it was published in the printed and online versions of the local paper, so why do you feel unusually critical of my starting a discussion here Steve?
Pete317 said:
What's all the fuss about anyway?
There's less than fk-all difference between 34 and 35mph anyway
In one second at 34mph you will travel 0.0151 kmThere's less than f
k-all difference between 34 and 35mph anywayIn one second at 35mph you will travel 0.0156 km
In half a second, about 10 inches further.
Ask your wife if she thinks 10 inches is f**k all, even for half a second!
JNW1 said:
You may well be right and it's entirely possible there's an element of Chinese Whisper with the 31mph and a 30 which was relayed to me! However, I still suspect the alleged change in approach (i.e. moving away from using the ACPO guidelines) is probably reality and if true that's likely to mean more prosecutions, SAC's, points and fines....
What is your basis for thinking it is "probably reality"?I'd say it is probably not.
Mill Wheel said:
Pete317 said:
What's all the fuss about anyway?
There's less than fk-all difference between 34 and 35mph anyway
In one second at 34mph you will travel 0.0151 kmThere's less than f
k-all difference between 34 and 35mph anywayIn one second at 35mph you will travel 0.0156 km
In half a second, about 10 inches further.
Ask your wife if she thinks 10 inches is f**k all, even for half a second!
Rovinghawk said:
Mill Wheel said:
Ask your wife if she thinks 10 inches is f**k all, even for half a second!
Mine's used to it, and for much longer than half a second. 
But if it came to a secondary check of a GATSO reading, half a second is all you get, and the Home office Guidance says that the photographs should clearly show the point of contact between the tyres and the road in relation to the lines painted on the road for that reason - 10 inches could be the difference between guilty or not guilty!
Devil2575 said:
JNW1 said:
You may well be right and it's entirely possible there's an element of Chinese Whisper with the 31mph and a 30 which was relayed to me! However, I still suspect the alleged change in approach (i.e. moving away from using the ACPO guidelines) is probably reality and if true that's likely to mean more prosecutions, SAC's, points and fines....
What is your basis for thinking it is "probably reality"?I'd say it is probably not.
JNW1 said:
I think it's probably reality because several people claim to have been prosecuted for travelling at speeds which wouldn't have generated a Notice of Intended Prosecution were the ACPO guidelines being used. Now I admit haven't seen the physical NIP's - and these people could be inventing the speeds for which they've been prosecuted - but I don't really see why they would? What's your basis for thinking there's probably been no change in approach?
People make all sorts of claims for a variety of reasons. Maybe they're trying to make the ticket they recieved as unjustified as possible? Have you never found yourself exaggerating slightly when recounting an event or caught someone else doing the same? On another thread someone claimed to have been done for 33 in a 30 but when pushed said it could have been 36 not 33.
Devil2575 said:
JNW1 said:
I think it's probably reality because several people claim to have been prosecuted for travelling at speeds which wouldn't have generated a Notice of Intended Prosecution were the ACPO guidelines being used. Now I admit haven't seen the physical NIP's - and these people could be inventing the speeds for which they've been prosecuted - but I don't really see why they would? What's your basis for thinking there's probably been no change in approach?
People make all sorts of claims for a variety of reasons. Maybe they're trying to make the ticket they recieved as unjustified as possible? Have you never found yourself exaggerating slightly when recounting an event or caught someone else doing the same? On another thread someone claimed to have been done for 33 in a 30 but when pushed said it could have been 36 not 33.
I suppose another reason why I find a change of approach believable is that over the last 5 years or so North Yorkshire have increased their level of vigilance when it comes to speeding quite significantly. The county used to be largely camera free (and as far as I'm aware still has no fixed cameras) but the number of mobile camera vans and bikes has increased massively in recent years; therefore, starting to apply the letter of the law - and removing any leeway - would seem entirely consistent with a policy of targeting speeding.
At the end of the day you and others can obviously choose to believe what you like but when I'm driving in areas where I know camera vans or bikes are likely to be operating my speed will reflect an assumption that ACPO guidelines no longer apply. If after a couple of months there's no evidence of prosecutions increasing (the information is published on North Yorkshire Police's website) I may change my view but personally I can do without either a SAC or points on my licence so for the time being at least I'll take the cautious approach.....
JNW1 said:
You may be correct but it seems strange that several people are all claiming the same thing (and as far as I'm aware they don't know each other so I don't think it's a conspiracy!).
It could be due to several people repeating information they have read from the same corrupted source.This has become prevalent with the increase of "churnalism" - so called journalists who merely cut and paste whatever comes across their desks, without checking the validity of the source or information.
Mill Wheel said:
JNW1 said:
You may be correct but it seems strange that several people are all claiming the same thing (and as far as I'm aware they don't know each other so I don't think it's a conspiracy!).
It could be due to several people repeating information they have read from the same corrupted source.This has become prevalent with the increase of "churnalism" - so called journalists who merely cut and paste whatever comes across their desks, without checking the validity of the source or information.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff