Car Cruising

Author
Discussion

RyanOPlastry

Original Poster:

750 posts

207 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
It is illegal in certain parts of Cannock, as is made clear by numerous signs.

The Court Order said:
car cruising is a 'congregation of drivers, of two or more vehicles, between the hours of 7.00pm and 7.00am on a public highway.'
Seems pretty vague to me.

Edited by RyanOPlastry on Thursday 28th May 22:23

anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
RyanOPlastry said:
Seems pretty vauge to me.
I don't understand what "vauge" means. Can you be more specific? wink

RyanOPlastry

Original Poster:

750 posts

207 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
d'oh vague

If driving along the road being followed by a colleague does that constitute a congergation of two vehicles. Or do we hjave to belong to the same church in order to be committing an offence?

ging84

8,825 posts

145 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
where is the full text?
that has no mention of the vehicles even needing to be present

also i thought it applied to public places not just public highway

jonwm

2,504 posts

113 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
Quite a few of these signs around the Midlands, they all say the same, high court order or something

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
It's been around a while...
http://www.cannockchasedc.gov.uk/news/article/1515...

...and it's much more than just "certain parts of Cannock".
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/new...

But I rather suspect there's a simple answer. Don't be a dick, and don't attract the attention of the law. If you don't, then it doesn't matter if you know the people in the next car along or not.

Jagmanv12

1,573 posts

163 months

Thursday 28th May 2015
quotequote all
However in nearby Coventry the local authority are planning a convoy of 1000 cars. Presumably some jobsworth in Wolverhampton, etc doesn't like cars.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
Funny me. I thought laws had to be passed by parliament, not by a mixture of local vigilantes and the local magistrate. And reading the link, seems to me as if the behaviour leading to this injunction was perfectly controllable by existing laws.

vxr8mate

1,654 posts

188 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
Thought it was aimed at the idiots who persist in doing 'burnouts' and the like on the public highway.

Sensible law if you ask me.

Mutley

3,178 posts

258 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Funny me. I thought laws had to be passed by parliament, not by a mixture of local vigilantes and the local magistrate. And reading the link, seems to me as if the behaviour leading to this injunction was perfectly controllable by existing laws.
True, but a Bye-Law doesn't

FunkyNige

8,859 posts

274 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
But I rather suspect there's a simple answer. Don't be a dick, and don't attract the attention of the law. If you don't, then it doesn't matter if you know the people in the next car along or not.
That's exactly why I hate this type of law - practically everyone is guilty of it but as long as you're a good little citizen and don't annoy the nice policeman you won't go to prison.

covboy

2,573 posts

173 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
FunkyNige said:
TooMany2cvs said:
But I rather suspect there's a simple answer. Don't be a dick, and don't attract the attention of the law. If you don't, then it doesn't matter if you know the people in the next car along or not.
That's exactly why I hate this type of law - practically everyone is guilty of it but as long as you're a good little citizen and don't annoy the nice policeman you won't go to prison.
What about annoying the people who have to live on some of these roads ?

Johnnytheboy

24,498 posts

185 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
vxr8mate said:
Thought it was aimed at the idiots who persist in doing 'burnouts' and the like on the public highway.

Sensible law if you ask me.
Yes, but like other laws it will be used to target the wrong people.

Going to a PH show in convoy? Illegal.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
vxr8mate said:
Thought it was aimed at the idiots who persist in doing 'burnouts' and the like on the public highway.

Sensible law if you ask me.
Existing laws can deal with this.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
Mutley said:
robinessex said:
Funny me. I thought laws had to be passed by parliament, not by a mixture of local vigilantes and the local magistrate. And reading the link, seems to me as if the behaviour leading to this injunction was perfectly controllable by existing laws.
True, but a Bye-Law doesn't
It's not a Bye-Law, it's a court injunction.

Red Devil

13,055 posts

207 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
It's been around a while...
http://www.cannockchasedc.gov.uk/news/article/1515...

...and it's much more than just "certain parts of Cannock".
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/new...

But I rather suspect there's a simple answer. Don't be a dick, and don't attract the attention of the law. If you don't, then it doesn't matter if you know the people in the next car along or not.
Exactly.

It pays to read the specifics, namely the Schedule to the injunction (see the second link above). To fall foul of it you have to undertaking an activity prohibited by paragraph 3 which causes, or is capable of causing, any of the prohibited consequences in paragraph 4.

http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/docs/latest-new...

Also
WMP news article said:
Councillor Mattu added: “It should be stressed that we are not seeking to prevent legitimate car enthusiasts from enjoying their hobby. If they meet to lawfully admire and display their cars for others’ benefits and, in doing so, aren’t causing any of activities prohibited by the injunction - in short, if they are not causing a public nuisance - they are not car cruising and the injunction will not apply to them.
Johnnytheboy said:
Yes, but like other laws it will be used to target the wrong people.

Going to a PH show in convoy? Illegal.
No (see above). It pays to look beyond the sensationalist headlines. Behave sensibly and you shouldn't get any hassle.

Mutley

3,178 posts

258 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Mutley said:
robinessex said:
Funny me. I thought laws had to be passed by parliament, not by a mixture of local vigilantes and the local magistrate. And reading the link, seems to me as if the behaviour leading to this injunction was perfectly controllable by existing laws.
True, but a Bye-Law doesn't
It's not a Bye-Law, it's a court injunction.
True, but I was just replying to yours about laws/parliament.

As you said above, there are existing laws to deal with this kind of thing, nothing else was needed

Johnnytheboy

24,498 posts

185 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
Red Devil said:
No (see above). It pays to look beyond the sensationalist headlines. Behave sensibly and you shouldn't get any hassle.
...and if you believe that, you'll believe anything.

FreeLitres

6,039 posts

176 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
If you are in a congregation of two or more cars, you are not driving fast enough! driving

agtlaw

6,680 posts

205 months

Friday 29th May 2015
quotequote all
Red Devil said:
No (see above). It pays to look beyond the sensationalist headlines. Behave sensibly and you shouldn't get any hassle.
Two or more drivers travelling together through the 'Black country' after 3pm would all be liable to arrest and imprisonment if one of them was speeding and had a noisy exhaust. E.g. a small 'convoy' of GT3s. Also, no actual knowledge of the injunction is required. It's unconstitutional, probably unlawful and should be appealed at the earliest opportunity. Someone please get this before the Supreme Court.