Radio 2 now! discusses speed cameras!
Discussion
Unfortunately, many people feel hard done by when caught doing slightly over the limit. It is no wonder that the chance to offload the points onto someone who rarely drives is gaining popularity. It is seen as an opportunity to beat the system. The increasing number of dubiously sited cameras, collecting revenue rather than providing a deterrent, is a sure fire way of encouraging ways around this particular style of law enforcement.
Seems to be that Criminal Law is generally based on two things.
1. Morality
2. Majoritarianism
So, is it immoral to speed? Not really. It is a crime where you don't even have to know you are doing it, you are guilty...
Most people on the road do it. Ergo, most people don't see it as a major problem. This in turn democratically speaking (depending on your ethos) means it should not in fact be a crime at all...............
That means, when caught, most people will feel they have been hard done by. So they will avoid the punishment, especially when for many it may mean a ban. Why not pass the points to someone else to build theirs up?!? If you are talking about between husband and wife, the insurance premiums won't be that badly affected, and better than if one of you is banned.
1. Morality
2. Majoritarianism
So, is it immoral to speed? Not really. It is a crime where you don't even have to know you are doing it, you are guilty...
Most people on the road do it. Ergo, most people don't see it as a major problem. This in turn democratically speaking (depending on your ethos) means it should not in fact be a crime at all...............
That means, when caught, most people will feel they have been hard done by. So they will avoid the punishment, especially when for many it may mean a ban. Why not pass the points to someone else to build theirs up?!? If you are talking about between husband and wife, the insurance premiums won't be that badly affected, and better than if one of you is banned.
vonhosen said:
What about all those who don't drive, but have an interest in speed limits ?
Keep their eyes & ears open for speeding traffic. Stay on the pavement & use pedestrian crossings. If a passenger in a speeding car, tell the driver to comply with the speed limits.
Get another interest to take their minds of speed limits.
vonhosen said:
What about all those who don't drive, but have an interest in speed limits ?
What about them?
What about prisoners having the right to vote on subjects which will affect them upon their release?
What about people who use drugs having an interest in the legalisation of the aforementioned drugs?
What about those who smoke with an interest in smoking in their own private clubs or bars (I exclude the House of Commons here, for obvious, and seriously hypocritical reasons...)
I laughed at the silly women who refered to a lorry crashing into a car on a motorway "that was caused by speed" she said " how dare these cheaters avoid their punishment". Clueless!
Fair play to the copper whose daughter was done for 35, he said he would take her points next time rather than see her banned for such a petty offence.
Mike Rutherford called the scams "an industry raking in millions from motorists", only to be swiftly corrected by Jeremy Vine "surely it's all about safety" he said, worryingly like he actually believed it.
Seems like alot of dead relatives are getting alot of penalty points these days too.
Fair play to the copper whose daughter was done for 35, he said he would take her points next time rather than see her banned for such a petty offence.
Mike Rutherford called the scams "an industry raking in millions from motorists", only to be swiftly corrected by Jeremy Vine "surely it's all about safety" he said, worryingly like he actually believed it.
Seems like alot of dead relatives are getting alot of penalty points these days too.
I can see how people have lost any faith or respect for these 'scams':
I had a dealing with Essex Camera Partnership (the camera partnership represented on radio 2) about three years ago regarding the dangerous siting of a camera van, spoke to the operator who told me:
1. The contractor put the signs out. - Well bloody well call them back and get them to do it properly, not that I belived him with all the kit having 'Essex Camera Partnership' stamped on them.
2. We can suspend traffic regulations. -Maybe but is it really a good idea to be doing something dnagerous in the name of safety - NO, NO, NO. Have yet to read any legislation, codes of practice or technical articles that says to control a hazard you should create another.
I e-mailed the pictures I sent to ECP, they were deleted unread, perhaps I shouldn't have put 'Complaint re camera siting' in the message header.
Mr Ladd of ECP addressed the local IAM branch a few months later, where I spoke to him, he came out with points 1 & 2, he also said that often people don't always take photos showing the whole picture or layout of a site, not that he was suggesting that I would do that (insulting little shit), so when I produced the other 5 photos I'd taken his comment was that it was now academic, when I persisted he asked me what I knew about health & safety, responded that I was a safety consultant and trained accident investigator.
He walked away.
That is what Essex Camera Partnership are about, they are in it for the money and little else.
Hardly surprising that the public feel justified in breaking the law.
supersingle said:Cant stand Vine, on one show he asked a guy a question, as he was answering, he kept butting in, caller said
It's not really worth listening to Vine or Wright on radio 2. They seem to be on a crusade to save the World. Muppets.
Wogan is ok though.
"Jeremy, you asked me a question, now if you will just shut up I will answer the question",
Which he did. Unfortunately I like Radio 2, until he comes on, then I generally switch to another channel. More and more radio channels are becomming like bloody chat shows.
A similar thing is happening on Radio 5 before "up all night"......AAaaaargh! sorry guys! brain fade....the irish chap that has a program before it. Now I know that they think that they're "doing their job" in taking the opposing view an' all that on a phone-in but.....
I have no time for presenters who change their arguement depending on the callers views.... One day, just one day...I'd like to hear a presenter say: "Yes! I damn well agree with you!"...(making their personal position clear)
or is that too much to ask?....
Oh and! not to turn the callers volume down or "go to the traffic news" when they're losing the arguement.....
>> Edited by 8Pack on Friday 26th May 01:42
I have no time for presenters who change their arguement depending on the callers views.... One day, just one day...I'd like to hear a presenter say: "Yes! I damn well agree with you!"...(making their personal position clear)
or is that too much to ask?....
Oh and! not to turn the callers volume down or "go to the traffic news" when they're losing the arguement..... >> Edited by 8Pack on Friday 26th May 01:42
He ist certainly as deep or thorough in his questions as the great Sir Jimmy Young who makes no secret of his opinion on speed cams.
Sir Jimbo would be a worthy PH-er! 
But Vine did come across to me as being a little sarcy in way he said "safety" camera - und his producer or whatever could have given the instruction or order to say this. Ist to be fair - they are sometimes "tied" und I do not think they have the same free rein as Sir Jimmy could command on the "Prog!".
Sir Jimbo would be a worthy PH-er! But Vine did come across to me as being a little sarcy in way he said "safety" camera - und his producer or whatever could have given the instruction or order to say this. Ist to be fair - they are sometimes "tied" und I do not think they have the same free rein as Sir Jimmy could command on the "Prog!".
deeps said:
I laughed at the silly women who refered to a lorry crashing into a car on a motorway "that was caused by speed" she said " how dare these cheaters avoid their punishment". Clueless!
Fair play to the copper whose daughter was done for 35, he said he would take her points next time rather than see her banned for such a petty offence.
Mike Rutherford called the scams "an industry raking in millions from motorists", only to be swiftly corrected by Jeremy Vine "surely it's all about safety" he said, worryingly like he actually believed it.
Seems like alot of dead relatives are getting alot of penalty points these days too.
Und if they have driving licences - it seem to confirm that DVLA record keeping ist not as accurate as they make it. I was surprised this little fact did not get mentioned.
Do bereaved notify DVLA when people die? Und how - even with a photo - would one prove that the licence used for the tot-up purpose belonged to deceased und not the live person in the photo?
Perhaps they would do better to have policemen after all...
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff