Legal advice/bullying police?
Discussion
james280779 said:
...I was identified within the top five percent intelligence within Australia...
No offence to you, or to the majority of Australians, but that is hardly a spectacular boast is it?At least 14 species of indigenous wildlife (as well as several imported ones) could claim this too.
james280779 said:
I myself have a law degree 1st with an 85% average, 3 A levels and 11 GCSES (9 A-C and two I considered irrelevant) on top of that I was identified for accelerated promotion and scored off the chart. upon arrival in Australia I had to do numerous tests one of which was a physc test. I was identified within the top five percent intelligence within Australia. I now hold a senior government position despite being only 32.
james280779 said:
I had to do numerous tests one of which was a physc test. I was identified within the top five percent intelligence within Australia.
Well with sentence construction and grammar like that it doesn't say much for Oz intelligence.Top 5% of foreign migrants perhaps.
f
k me.
SV8Predator said:
james280779 said:
I had to do numerous tests one of which was a physc test. I was identified within the top five percent intelligence within Australia.
Well with sentence construction and grammar like that it doesn't say much for Oz intelligence.Top 5% of foreign migrants perhaps.
f
k me.
It started with some young 'un bigging him/her/itself up in the usual "I've done this, that and the other and I'm a great success even though I'm young" fashion; someone replied that it was an eloquent waffle; someone else replied with a pic of a waffle with speech bubble containing the original 'statement' and the title "eloquent waffle". Happy Days!
streaky said:
GC8 said:
paulrussell said:
If she was holding the mobile, then the police are right.
Solicitors who specialise in motoring work would all disagree.Streaky
Emma Patterson said:
Its not an offence to hold a phone whilst driving
daz3210 said:
But the law states use FOR INTERACTIVE COMMUNICATION. That suggests to me that you have to be communicating with a person, not a set of satellites.
And has anyone questioned whether the fella at the Police Station was actually a copper as opposed to a civvy? Our local desk is staffed by civvy's, coppers are in short supply these days.
Following instructions from a satnav is interactive communication : it tells you where to go , you then drive as directed and it comes up with new instructions based on your new position .And has anyone questioned whether the fella at the Police Station was actually a copper as opposed to a civvy? Our local desk is staffed by civvy's, coppers are in short supply these days.
The device does not even need to be a phone - use of handheld PDAs and 'similar devices' is also prohibited . So called 'smartphones' which clearly encompass the functions of a PDA therefore fall within the legislation .
If the woman in question was compromising her driving by allowing herself to become distracted by a handheld device ( or for any other reason ) then she deserved to be stopped . That she was late for the funeral was also her own fault due to leaving insufficient time for the journey - especially when she didn't know where she was going or what traffic conditions she would encounter .
No sympathy from me either .
marshalla said:
Actually, applying the letter of the law strictly, it does apply to SatNav functions on phones if they phones are handheld and the application uses online data (e.g. for downloading maps or traffic info.): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2695/regul...
However, if the mapping data is entirely on the phone and can function without a live Internet connection, it's not prohibited.
Actually , it can be argued that the driver is communicating interactively with the device , by receiving and acting on information which then influences further information generated by the device .However, if the mapping data is entirely on the phone and can function without a live Internet connection, it's not prohibited.
Even if maps are stored locally on the device , all GPS navigation devices still receive signals from the geostationary satellites they rely on to work , with some ( such as the iPhone used by the OP's GF ) having enhanced GPS which picks up data from the cellular telephone network and wi-fi hotspots to augment GPS data .
The most significant thing is that she was using a handheld device and being distracted from her driving because of it , therefore the stop was correct .
daz3210 said:
Interactive to me means that some alteration to response is required by the recipient at each end of the communication loop.
A perfect definition of a driver using a satnav INTERACTIVELY .The satnav gives directions , based upon which the driver follows a certain route ( which may or may not be the one given by the satnav ) , then the satnav gives further directions based on the new position it is now in .
Pontoneer said:
legislation said:
(c)
“interactive communication function” includes the following:
The word 'includes' is not the same as 'is limited to' other types of communication are therefore allowed for .“interactive communication function” includes the following:
legislation also says said:
(4) A device referred to in paragraphs (1)(b), (2)(b) and (3)(b) is a device, other than a two-way radio, which performs an interactive communication function by transmitting and receiving data.
I'm sure you'll now suggest that GPS devices transmit data using photons in the visible spectrum and audible energy waves, in exactly the same way that those thoroughly illegal in-car entertainment devices do.Edited by marshalla on Monday 18th June 07:23
Pontoneer said:
JustinP1 said:
Unfortunately the 'man on the street' does not define what the law is, and the 'man on the street' is usually a crap lawyer...
However , the most important legal cases are normally tried in front of a jury of lay people , or 'men/women off the street' 
As regards "lay people", judges, lawyers, vicars, bishops and doctors have been able to sit on juries since 2004.
Streaky
GC8 said:
streaky said:
GC8 said:
paulrussell said:
If she was holding the mobile, then the police are right.
Solicitors who specialise in motoring work would all disagree.Streaky
Emma Patterson said:
Its not an offence to hold a phone whilst driving
marshalla said:
I'm sure you'll now suggest that GPS devices transmit data using photons in the visible spectrum and audible energy waves, in exactly the same way that those thoroughly illegal in-car entertainment devices do.
No need to suggest anything , it is beyond dispute that they do transmit data in this way , and receive it via inputs from the operator .Edited by marshalla on Monday 18th June 07:23
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff