Discussion
We are all now nearing saturation point with the principles behind this prosecution, or that enforcement technique, or what tip is preferable to avoid paying a Fixed Penalty, or who is or is not responsible for the death of a child.
The anger and outrage is palpable on many of your threads; outrage borne on a tide of frustration at your personal impotence in the face of a totally intransigent, unethical Government.
The motivation for these emotions I believe is growing more powerful every day in proportion to the almost exponential increase in enforcement techniques, vastly increasing legislation and the realisation that the whole system does nothing to enhance road safety nor even protect any of us.
The manifestation of this emotion stems from the Government's wholly mistaken belief that they have the right to do anything they wish simply because they are the elected Government and therefore hold a mandate from the people. The very subtle but none the less deeply significant line between the "right" and the "power" has been eroded almost completely.
The power is what gives them authority to implement law to protect and nourish society; the right is what should guide this authority by utilising and respecting the collective conscience of the people.
There IS no respect, there IS no voice of collective conscience, nor wisdom, nor intellectual thought; it has all but disappeared from our Government.
It is now time to restore it.
I will attempt this week to have a web site set up that will be the voice of a new Society. This society will examine and seek out the true intellectual will of the people and, as I already expressed in another post, will act as a conduit between the people and Government.
We will utilise two main elements to achieve our objective at the start; the first is the power of the Internet, the very thing that has you reading this and brought you to this site in the first place; the second is the Law.
There is an enormous amount of planning to achieve this but for the moment just consider the following.
There is no legal obligation whatever to accept a Fixed Penalty notice.
Just imagine every traffic policeman in the country going back to the station at the end of a shift with a brand new book of fixed penalties, unopened, unused because every driver has refused to accept the so-called Conditional Offer.
Then having to sit down with a list of every individual stopped that day and write out reports to the CPS. Then imagine the CPS receiving tens of thousands of these reports in one day and trying to process these cases.
If in the unlikely event that they managed to get the summonses out, imagine the utter ensuing chaos when every single one comes back with a not guilty plea.
And all you would be doing is what every self respecting little villain does, only they milk the legal aid system to do it, exercising your rights to a trial.
Add to that all the NIPs coming back with a request for a court hearing, and then at those hearings, a verdict of not guilty being recorded; you have a system at a standstill.
Of course an organised Society representing all these "accused" people would have an enormous amount of bargaining power, particularly an informed one with alternative, viable policies.
This would be a start indeed.
The anger and outrage is palpable on many of your threads; outrage borne on a tide of frustration at your personal impotence in the face of a totally intransigent, unethical Government.
The motivation for these emotions I believe is growing more powerful every day in proportion to the almost exponential increase in enforcement techniques, vastly increasing legislation and the realisation that the whole system does nothing to enhance road safety nor even protect any of us.
The manifestation of this emotion stems from the Government's wholly mistaken belief that they have the right to do anything they wish simply because they are the elected Government and therefore hold a mandate from the people. The very subtle but none the less deeply significant line between the "right" and the "power" has been eroded almost completely.
The power is what gives them authority to implement law to protect and nourish society; the right is what should guide this authority by utilising and respecting the collective conscience of the people.
There IS no respect, there IS no voice of collective conscience, nor wisdom, nor intellectual thought; it has all but disappeared from our Government.
It is now time to restore it.
I will attempt this week to have a web site set up that will be the voice of a new Society. This society will examine and seek out the true intellectual will of the people and, as I already expressed in another post, will act as a conduit between the people and Government.
We will utilise two main elements to achieve our objective at the start; the first is the power of the Internet, the very thing that has you reading this and brought you to this site in the first place; the second is the Law.
There is an enormous amount of planning to achieve this but for the moment just consider the following.
There is no legal obligation whatever to accept a Fixed Penalty notice.
Just imagine every traffic policeman in the country going back to the station at the end of a shift with a brand new book of fixed penalties, unopened, unused because every driver has refused to accept the so-called Conditional Offer.
Then having to sit down with a list of every individual stopped that day and write out reports to the CPS. Then imagine the CPS receiving tens of thousands of these reports in one day and trying to process these cases.
If in the unlikely event that they managed to get the summonses out, imagine the utter ensuing chaos when every single one comes back with a not guilty plea.
And all you would be doing is what every self respecting little villain does, only they milk the legal aid system to do it, exercising your rights to a trial.
Add to that all the NIPs coming back with a request for a court hearing, and then at those hearings, a verdict of not guilty being recorded; you have a system at a standstill.
Of course an organised Society representing all these "accused" people would have an enormous amount of bargaining power, particularly an informed one with alternative, viable policies.
This would be a start indeed.
Did not someone once ask of you:
"Perchance you have a relative called bogush?"
And did not someone once say of me:
"You are clearly intelligent and well-informed in your subject, but I have to say that you do come across as slightly too full of yourself, and with a tendency to think that everybody else is a moron just because they don't necessarily scan........"
If the cap fits.
You will find that the average motorist is quite happy to jump out of the frying pan into the simmering cauldron.
And hurl abuse at anyone trying to point out that that is a recipe for disaster.
"Perchance you have a relative called bogush?"
And did not someone once say of me:
"You are clearly intelligent and well-informed in your subject, but I have to say that you do come across as slightly too full of yourself, and with a tendency to think that everybody else is a moron just because they don't necessarily scan........"
If the cap fits.
You will find that the average motorist is quite happy to jump out of the frying pan into the simmering cauldron.
And hurl abuse at anyone trying to point out that that is a recipe for disaster.
bogush said:
Did not someone once ask of you:
"Perchance you have a relative called bogush?"
And did not someone once say of me:
"You are clearly intelligent and well-informed in your subject, but I have to say that you do come across as slightly too full of yourself, and with a tendency to think that everybody else is a moron just because they don't necessarily scan........"
If the cap fits.
You will find that the average motorist is quite happy to jump out of the frying pan into the simmering cauldron.
And hurl abuse at anyone trying to point out that that is a recipe for disaster.
I never wear a cap,at any time.
If you mean that hurling abuse is a recipe for disaster, I would agree; the simmering cauldron can be avoided by persuading everyone to jump the other way.
What other people think of me, or indeed you, is largely immaterial; I didn't come on here to win a popularity contest, all I care about is getting them to join up and change things.
IOLAIRE said:
There is no legal obligation whatever to accept a Fixed Penalty notice.
Just imagine every traffic policeman in the country going back to the station at the end of a shift with a brand new book of fixed penalties, unopened, unused because every driver has refused to accept the so-called Conditional Offer.
This idea is a strong one, but it isn't a new one. A former Policeman called for it over a year ago. See:
www.safespeed.org.uk/unite.html
To some extent it IS already happening. I note that the proportion of speeding cases that went to magistrates courts DOUBLED in 2002. We don't have 2003 figures, but I'd expect another doubling.
But don't kid yourself that the public will suddenly decide to co-operate. Most folk have clean licences and accepting the fixed penalty (easy option) is going to be the norm for a long time. We're a nation of busy people and folk will continue to choose the easy (and low risk) option because they have more important things to worry about.
Your plan can work. We need that annual doubling to continue - but there's no way that we'll cause an annual quadruple, let alone bring the system down in a few months.
safespeed said:
There is no legal obligation whatever to accept a Fixed Penalty notice.
Just imagine every traffic policeman in the country going back to the station at the end of a shift with a brand new book of fixed penalties, unopened, unused because every driver has refused to accept the so-called Conditional Offer.
This idea is a strong one, but it isn't a new one. A former Policeman called for it over a year ago. See:
www.safespeed.org.uk/unite.html
To some extent it IS already happening. I note that the proportion of speeding cases that went to magistrates courts DOUBLED in 2002. We don't have 2003 figures, but I'd expect another doubling.
But don't kid yourself that the public will suddenly decide to co-operate. Most folk have clean licences and accepting the fixed penalty (easy option) is going to be the norm for a long time. We're a nation of busy people and folk will continue to choose the easy (and low risk) option because they have more important things to worry about.
Your plan can work. We need that annual doubling to continue - but there's no way that we'll cause an annual quadruple, let alone bring the system down in a few months.
Hello Paul,
I have noticed this increase in court actions myself, and it is very heartening.
You're right about the apathetic aspect of things, but I really didn't imply that we could change things overnight or even in a relatively short time span.
The threat of achieving this in a controlled, powerful but ordered manner could be the catalyst to effect change from within the Government.
I don't want anyone to assume that what I have stated here is the plan, the whole plan, and nothing but the plan; there is much more to it that would help relieve the apathy and give protection to every member who decided to exercise their right to trial.
Just as a taster I was going to post details about a case against myself involving two motorcycle cops who came very close to causing a serious high speed accident near my home and ended up with me being charged because my tax disc was a few days out of date.
That was in November 2002, and is still ongoing, and not because I have used delaying tactics, but due partly to SEVEN procedural errors in the police and prosecution services. I merely sat back and left them to it.
This kind of inefficiency and incompetence is widespread and, if utilised, can be a very effective tool to change things.
Oh, and by the way Paul, you are right about the idea not being new; I've been doing it for over fifteen years!
My son had an interesting experience. He received an NIP for 49 in a 40. He ignored it. A follow-up NIP arrived. He ignored that one as well. He moved house and, apparently, some more documents arrived at his old address, but we don't know what they said as they were thrown away (not returned to sender). Then, nothing more. That was over 2 years ago. He still has the same car, registered to my company, but no-one ever re-contacted us.
The county in which the speeding occurred was different from that in which he lived.
It seems to have gone away.
Has anyone else had this experience?
The county in which the speeding occurred was different from that in which he lived.
It seems to have gone away.
Has anyone else had this experience?
Cooperman said:
My son had an interesting experience. He received an NIP for 49 in a 40. He ignored it. A follow-up NIP arrived. He ignored that one as well. He moved house and, apparently, some more documents arrived at his old address, but we don't know what they said as they were thrown away (not returned to sender). Then, nothing more. That was over 2 years ago. He still has the same car, registered to my company, but no-one ever re-contacted us.
The county in which the speeding occurred was different from that in which he lived.
It seems to have gone away.
Has anyone else had this experience?
This is so frustrating, but I could give you quite a bit of info on this in relation to my ongoing case if it wasn't for the fact that it is ongoing!
E-mail me though and I'll let you in to a wee secret.
Iolaire, have read all your recent posts with interest, but for pity's sake, please just publish what you have in mind rather than throwing out feelers to guage opinion. You will either make a good case or not, but at the moment you are doing a very good job of alienating me with these continual written equivalents to the theatric drumroll.
The curtain has risen, the spotlights on.....either get on stage and sing or go home.............
The curtain has risen, the spotlights on.....either get on stage and sing or go home.............
Cooperman said:
My son had an interesting experience. He received an NIP for 49 in a 40. He ignored it. A follow-up NIP arrived. He ignored that one as well. He moved house and, apparently, some more documents arrived at his old address, but we don't know what they said as they were thrown away (not returned to sender). Then, nothing more. That was over 2 years ago. He still has the same car, registered to my company, but no-one ever re-contacted us.
The county in which the speeding occurred was different from that in which he lived.
It seems to have gone away.
Has anyone else had this experience?
Had two NIPs and ignored them both. Heard nothing for over two years. Pal of mine ignored his and got a knock on the door from BiBs.
I suspect that the common thread here is that in the cases which were succesfully ignored, the driver was not the RO.
Anyone else had similar?
Steve
Bit slow to respond to this one Iolaire.
As SS says been suggested before.
Other things to be considered.
What % of the population has never been on the receiving end of a FPN offer? Probably the majority at a guess.
What would their attitude to the remainder (ie non FPN virgins) be?
Obviously you are suggesting that any FPN should be refused, even when the party knows the truth of the situation is that it's a "Hands up, fair cop guvnor"
Now if my guess as to % of population who are FPN virgins is correct, to be honest I can't see many of them being minded to support this attitude of refusal to accept in a "hands up" situation.
Another complete guess is that today there are a lot who accept the FPN, even when they are not sure that they are guilty, simply because it's an easy option and they don't have to take time off work and sit in a court building with all those nasty scrotes.
Of course one way, is to make the public aware somehow that the acceptance of an offered FPN is not mandatory, and readily available resources to fight their corner.
But...... there is always a but.....
What will happen is exactly as happens in the NoIP for speeding scenario. You have drivers who genuinely feel aggrieved and there is genuine doubt in their case, having their stories disbelieved as a result of the repeated efforts of the "Trying it on" brigade.
You know what I mean the sort of question which pops up along the lines of "Just gotta NoIP, if I get my brother's auntie's cousin twice removed to fill it in unsigned do you think I'll get away with 57 in a 30?" Further questioning reveals it was past a school at kicking out time. (Yes I know the unsigned bit doesn't work anymore, just a silly example of the sort of tosh which has gone on.)
In my view the numbers of abusers of the system in any such insurrection will totally outweigh the genuine borderline / innocent cases to the detriment of the latter.
I'm all for if someone has genuine doubt or belief that they are not guilty then they should fight tooth and nail, and have the resources available.
The latter point is another issue. For most of us on this forum I guess none of us would qualify for legal aid in cases where legal aid is allowed. Therefore it's easier and cheaper to bend over and take the wallop on the pants seat. Just that doing so one gives up 25% of one's licence.
Sorry for a rambling disjointed inconclusive answer. If it were that easy someone would have .....
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 1st October 12:34
As SS says been suggested before.
Other things to be considered.
What % of the population has never been on the receiving end of a FPN offer? Probably the majority at a guess.
What would their attitude to the remainder (ie non FPN virgins) be?
Obviously you are suggesting that any FPN should be refused, even when the party knows the truth of the situation is that it's a "Hands up, fair cop guvnor"
Now if my guess as to % of population who are FPN virgins is correct, to be honest I can't see many of them being minded to support this attitude of refusal to accept in a "hands up" situation.
Another complete guess is that today there are a lot who accept the FPN, even when they are not sure that they are guilty, simply because it's an easy option and they don't have to take time off work and sit in a court building with all those nasty scrotes.
Of course one way, is to make the public aware somehow that the acceptance of an offered FPN is not mandatory, and readily available resources to fight their corner.
But...... there is always a but.....
What will happen is exactly as happens in the NoIP for speeding scenario. You have drivers who genuinely feel aggrieved and there is genuine doubt in their case, having their stories disbelieved as a result of the repeated efforts of the "Trying it on" brigade.
You know what I mean the sort of question which pops up along the lines of "Just gotta NoIP, if I get my brother's auntie's cousin twice removed to fill it in unsigned do you think I'll get away with 57 in a 30?" Further questioning reveals it was past a school at kicking out time. (Yes I know the unsigned bit doesn't work anymore, just a silly example of the sort of tosh which has gone on.)
In my view the numbers of abusers of the system in any such insurrection will totally outweigh the genuine borderline / innocent cases to the detriment of the latter.
I'm all for if someone has genuine doubt or belief that they are not guilty then they should fight tooth and nail, and have the resources available.
The latter point is another issue. For most of us on this forum I guess none of us would qualify for legal aid in cases where legal aid is allowed. Therefore it's easier and cheaper to bend over and take the wallop on the pants seat. Just that doing so one gives up 25% of one's licence.
Sorry for a rambling disjointed inconclusive answer. If it were that easy someone would have .....
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 1st October 12:34
swilly said:
Lots of stuff up to this point......I will attempt this week to have a web site set up that will be the voice of a new Society
.....and then I gave up reading.
Did you nick that from a George Lucas 'Star Wars' script?
I am going to answer FiF later on, but the glaringly obvious difference between his response and SWILLY'S is the degree of intellectual mentality. Someone like FiF recognises the morality and principles of honour and philosophy behind the Star Wars stories, whereas Swilly, doubtless between mouthfulls of popcorn, just sees a lot of guys in strange clothes running around zapping each other.
What we need here are a few Jedi Knights, people of real honour and integrity; when my back is up against the wall I get really creative and dangerous and this kind of negativity just makes me all the more determined to succeed.
Remember this Swilly? "If you strike me down now Darth, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine"
May the Force be with you.
IOLAIRE said:
I am going to answer FiF later on, but the glaringly obvious difference between his response and SWILLY'S is the degree of intellectual mentality.
Someone like FiF recognises the morality and principles of honour and philosophy behind the Star Wars stories, whereas Swilly, doubtless between mouthfulls of popcorn, just sees a lot of guys in strange clothes running around zapping each other.
What we need here are a few Jedi Knights, people of real honour and integrity; when my back is up against the wall I get really creative and dangerous and this kind of negativity just makes me all the more determined to succeed.
Ohmybloodygod you are certifiable.
You carry on searching for Jedi Knights to fight your cause.
IOLAIRE said:
Remember this Swilly? "If you strike me down now Darth, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine"
May the Force be with you.
Yeah you should try that. Walk into the road in your black cape and plastic battery operated light sabre and use the Force to command the traffic to stop. If it strikes you down you will only become more powerful than I can possibly imagine.
Talking of the Force, can we have some assistance here, there is a madman who claims he is Darth Vader.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff