Discussion
Please state concerns about Government's idea of having Local Authority "Traffic Officers"....
1. Will they have the power to stop vehicles.
2. Will they have power of arrest.
3. Will they end up patrolling in cars.
4. Will they be as highly trained as "proper" TrafPol
Please add your comments. I am going to write a detailed letter to Mr. Darling.
1. Will they have the power to stop vehicles.
2. Will they have power of arrest.
3. Will they end up patrolling in cars.
4. Will they be as highly trained as "proper" TrafPol
Please add your comments. I am going to write a detailed letter to Mr. Darling.
rospa said:
Please state concerns about Government's idea of having Local Authority "Traffic Officers"....
1. Will they have the power to stop vehicles. Or will they just send NIPs in the post. And if they can stop cars, who will stop them getting lampedby irate MOPs cos they're just jumped up parking nazis
2. Will they have power of arrest.
3. Will they end up patrolling in cars.
4. Will they be as highly trained as "proper" TrafPol
Please add your comments. I am going to write a detailed letter to Mr. Darling.
Will they have performance targets? And if so what will stop overenthusiastic law enforcement?
This is a thinly disguised cop-out (no pun intended). they reckon it'll free up 550 Police officers to tackle "proper" crime, whilst allowing Councils to "provide free flowing traffic".
That meanss that all of these things that chould be handled by properly trained and experienced TrafPols will now be carried out by un-trained JobsWorths, with targets, and a revenue stream to protect. I, for one, will NOT pay any fine that the courts hand down in this manner, as it will be a civilian offence, and they can send as many bailifs round as they like, cos nothing in my house is owned my me, so they can't have it.
It will do nothing for law-enforcement, and nothing to improve the relationship between the public and the police (who will get tarred with the brush) and the ony people who will get hit will be the generally law-abiding home-owners (AGAIN!). The un-insured, un-taxed, un-MOT'd, un-licensed scrotes will just larf and chuck the fine in the bin.
Its a crap idea and is another step closer to provoking anarchy on the streets of Britain. I have no respect for twats in uniforms unless we are at war.
FECK OFF!
That meanss that all of these things that chould be handled by properly trained and experienced TrafPols will now be carried out by un-trained JobsWorths, with targets, and a revenue stream to protect. I, for one, will NOT pay any fine that the courts hand down in this manner, as it will be a civilian offence, and they can send as many bailifs round as they like, cos nothing in my house is owned my me, so they can't have it.
It will do nothing for law-enforcement, and nothing to improve the relationship between the public and the police (who will get tarred with the brush) and the ony people who will get hit will be the generally law-abiding home-owners (AGAIN!). The un-insured, un-taxed, un-MOT'd, un-licensed scrotes will just larf and chuck the fine in the bin.
Its a crap idea and is another step closer to provoking anarchy on the streets of Britain. I have no respect for twats in uniforms unless we are at war.
FECK OFF!
Rospa
If you have a spare week or two have a read of
Traffic Management Bill 2003 and all will be revealed.
www.tinyurl.com/3yswg
It's Mr Darlings baby.
DVD
If you have a spare week or two have a read of
Traffic Management Bill 2003 and all will be revealed.
www.tinyurl.com/3yswg
It's Mr Darlings baby.
DVD
Dwight VanDriver said:
Rospa
If you have a spare week or two have a read of
Traffic Management Bill 2003 and all will be revealed.
www.tinyurl.com/3yswg
Link doesn't work.
But the bill won't cover the day to day impracticalities of the proposal and how it might be the thin end of the wedge.
I'm looking for feedback on where people see this heading.
It's Mr Darlings baby.
DVD
5 - What evidence will be required for a fine to be given.
6 - What right of appeal will be allowed
7 - If photographic evidence if required, what calibration will be done on said equiptment.
8 - Will a single photograph be required to show infringement and if so, what proof does that give that the car was stationary or that the infringement was not carried out of nececity for avoidance action or as directed by a police officer.
This do for starters ?
6 - What right of appeal will be allowed
7 - If photographic evidence if required, what calibration will be done on said equiptment.
8 - Will a single photograph be required to show infringement and if so, what proof does that give that the car was stationary or that the infringement was not carried out of nececity for avoidance action or as directed by a police officer.
This do for starters ?
Rospa
Looks as if Tinyurl has a fault - FiF elswhere has had the same problem. It worked yesterday.
Full:
www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmbills/013/2004013.htm
DVD
Looks as if Tinyurl has a fault - FiF elswhere has had the same problem. It worked yesterday.
Full:
www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmbills/013/2004013.htm
DVD
Not sure how I feel about most of the ideas, but I'm a BIG fan of the concept of them policing yellow hash boxes. We need something like the way that it works on Manhattan in New York were they take blocking the junctions very seriously indeed: signs at every junction which read "Don't block the box - $100 fine + 3 points".
Police officers write out tickets on the roadside and hand them straight to drivers.
It cleared up the problem almost completely in about six months.
(I know many people won't agree with this idea, but if you live in London you might have more sympathy than in other areas of the country!)
Police officers write out tickets on the roadside and hand them straight to drivers.
It cleared up the problem almost completely in about six months.
(I know many people won't agree with this idea, but if you live in London you might have more sympathy than in other areas of the country!)
Dwight VanDriver said:
Rospa
Looks as if Tinyurl has a fault - FiF elswhere has had the same problem. It worked yesterday.
Full:
<a href="http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmbills/013/2004013.htm">www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmbills/013/2004013.htm</a>
DVD
Hi DVD,
It seems as if you post the tinyurl link in a new browser window it works, so at a complete guess the fault might be something to do with forwarding software rather than tinyurl itself.
I've got the full file downloaded to my laptop as *.pdf and the House of Commons explanatory notes as *.html document.
If anyone does still have difficulty downloading them drop me a mail and I can forward, all part of the service.
You did indeed warn it took some time to download. I'll come back to this thread when considered the detail.
In the meantime my heart will bleed for the likes of tonyrec, silverback mike et al.
Cheers, yer owd mate
FiF
PS Makes a change from reading about Insp. Rebus!
PPS One thing I would like to add to the list of questions which may be in the detail such as it is.
Question n+1, what will be maximum possible fine that can be issued on the say so of these deputy sheriffs? Some of the offences can command up to £1000, I've spotted that one already!
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Tuesday 6th January 16:27
It would be simpler to take this to its logical conclusion. rather than systematically banning things which will create misery for eons we could just say Ok 10 more hours, no more legislation then we just build a bloody big cobalt and iodine dirty bomb and take out everything. That way we could at least have one last:-
noisy party
Blast in the porker / tiv / whatever
really good shag
long walk with the dog in the park, and let it crap
road protest
other bit of pointless green negativity
I am
sick of this shitty government and the crappy press and the spin and lies and aw bollox
noisy party
Blast in the porker / tiv / whatever
really good shag
long walk with the dog in the park, and let it crap
road protest
other bit of pointless green negativity
I am
sick of this shitty government and the crappy press and the spin and lies and aw bollox 9. Will they be run by private companies (as some traffic wardens are now) or will they be public servants.
10. Where will the money raised be invested? (I doubt it will be driver training and a copout answer of "roadsafety" gets us nowhere).
11. Will they really know the rules? (eg you can enter a box if your exit is clear - for turning right etc - but there is oncoming traffic or other vehicles waiting to turn).
12. What will be done to stop personal vendettas?
10. Where will the money raised be invested? (I doubt it will be driver training and a copout answer of "roadsafety" gets us nowhere).
11. Will they really know the rules? (eg you can enter a box if your exit is clear - for turning right etc - but there is oncoming traffic or other vehicles waiting to turn).
12. What will be done to stop personal vendettas?
My concerns lie with the fact that most of the yellow peril are barely able to speak english and lack either the intelligence to do much beyond print (often incorrect) parking tickets. I'd also argue that most no-right turn junctions are completely arbitary. We could get rid of right turn offenders in a heart beat by removing the signs.
BUT
In principle I see no reaons why traffic wardens shouldn't be made use of to take care of these minor traffic offences. What is a traffic warden there to do after all except to maintain the flow of traffic. To cite an example. I saw 8 police officers giving up their morning in Islington / City Rd today. They were pulling over traffic performing illegal right turns. They pulled me a few months ago and I was bang to rights.
I'd far rather the police did like we've been telling them for years and went out and caught criminals.
I'm all for it if:
1: Councils don't get to trouser the proceeds of the fines
2: These offences are decriminalised (like parking)
3: Hiring and training practices mean that wardens are of a commensurate standard to be able to do the job
I think a lot of you are being a bit reactionary. Which is not surpising - as wardens normally provoke a knee-jerk response.
Let's see how the finer details shape up and consider the idea on it's merits.
BUT
In principle I see no reaons why traffic wardens shouldn't be made use of to take care of these minor traffic offences. What is a traffic warden there to do after all except to maintain the flow of traffic. To cite an example. I saw 8 police officers giving up their morning in Islington / City Rd today. They were pulling over traffic performing illegal right turns. They pulled me a few months ago and I was bang to rights.
I'd far rather the police did like we've been telling them for years and went out and caught criminals.
I'm all for it if:
1: Councils don't get to trouser the proceeds of the fines
2: These offences are decriminalised (like parking)
3: Hiring and training practices mean that wardens are of a commensurate standard to be able to do the job
I think a lot of you are being a bit reactionary. Which is not surpising - as wardens normally provoke a knee-jerk response.
Let's see how the finer details shape up and consider the idea on it's merits.
misternomer said:
My concerns lie with the fact that most of the yellow peril are barely able to speak english and lack either the intelligence to do much beyond print (often incorrect) parking tickets. I'd also argue that most no-right turn junctions are completely arbitary. We could get rid of right turn offenders in a heart beat by removing the signs.
BUT
In principle I see no reaons why traffic wardens shouldn't be made use of to take care of these minor traffic offences. What is a traffic warden there to do after all except to maintain the flow of traffic. To cite an example. I saw 8 police officers giving up their morning in Islington / City Rd today. They were pulling over traffic performing illegal right turns. They pulled me a few months ago and I was bang to rights.
I'd far rather the police did like we've been telling them for years and went out and caught criminals.
I'm all for it if:
1: Councils don't get to trouser the proceeds of the fines
2: These offences are decriminalised (like parking)
3: Hiring and training practices mean that wardens are of a commensurate standard to be able to do the job
I think a lot of you are being a bit reactionary. Which is not surpising - as wardens normally provoke a knee-jerk response.
Let's see how the finer details shape up and consider the idea on it's merits.
Good points and in conclusion for those of us who are not
witted we will be able to plead not guilty and win cos the dimwits will get tongue tied.nonegreen said:But the temperature of your bath-water will be regulated! (If the 'nannies' have their way - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3371197.stm)
It would be simpler to take this to its logical conclusion. rather than systematically banning things which will create misery for eons we could just say Ok 10 more hours, no more legislation then we just build a bloody big cobalt and iodine dirty bomb and take out everything. That way we could at least have one last:-
noisy party
Blast in the porker / tiv / whatever
really good shag
long walk with the dog in the park, and let it crap
road protest
other bit of pointless green negativity
I am
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff