Driver Jailed for using Jammer

[anonymous-user]

stuart313 said:

I do find things like this confusing though. Someone who hasn't caused any harm or violence to anyone goes to jail....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2950467/Pi...

Could someone explain it to us simple peasants.

The image is irrelevant and emotive.

A guilty plea to an ABH vs guilty pleas (I assume) to two life sentence offences on the back of not changing their behaviour after a caution.

I don't agree with him going to prison, I'm just having a go at explaining it.

[Red Devil]

Dave Hedgehog said:

Red Devil said:

Dave Hedgehog said:

since speed detectors are legal how can a judge ordered it destroyed, or are judges allowed to destroy anything that's legal but they take a dislike to?

Because, whereas a speed detector is perfectly legal, a jammer isn't. I trust you understand the difference.
It was the jammer function which caused the judge to issue the confiscation and destruction of the device.

please learn to read

the judge destroyed the jammer (dubious since they are not illegal and bending a cover all law in the same way they used to do to detectors) and also a detector

ordered the destruction of the device and also of a snooper device fitted to the dashboard

Fair enough. Unfortunately there are no vacant places on the Adult Education courses at my local college.

[stuart313]

As if by magic another not jailed story has just appeared.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2968534/Un...

I'm still confused.

[agtlaw]

stuart313 said:

As if by magic another not jailed story has just appeared.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2968534/Un...

I'm still confused.

'Unlicensed' - impossible to be imprisoned
Drink driving - guideline (1st time offender convicted after trial) is a community sentence if breath reading under 120. Accident doesn't help, of course

Edited by agtlaw on Wednesday 25th February 17:07

[Dave Hedgehog]

stuart313 said:

As if by magic another not jailed story has just appeared.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2968534/Un...

I'm still confused.

why, he's a nice guy, only 9 previous convictions

[anonymous-user]

stuart313 said:

As if by magic another not jailed story has just appeared.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2968534/Un...

I'm still confused.

Most sentences aren't custodial. It's not hard to find stories about them.

[Funkycoldribena]

It's because most judges are geriatric idiots who live in ivory towers and have no clue about the real world.The quicker some sort of fast track system is put into place to get more younger judges through the better.

[Dr Jekyll]

Funkycoldribena said:

It's because most judges are geriatric idiots who live in ivory towers and have no clue about the real world.

From my limited experience of judges they aren't like that at all, all the ones I've met have been very sharp indeed. The problem with a fast track is that they would actually have less experience of courts and crooks before getting on the bench.

[johnao]

mph1977 said:

99. 9 % of complaints about ES driving are dunning kruger syndrome writ large

' why were they claiming exemptions without using warning devices '

' why did an ES vehicle only use warning devices to negotiate a particular hazard or when claiming a particular exemption '

' ES drivers are crap becasue they use their indicators in line with the law and best practice rather than haphazardly '

' I saw a basic driver do something that loads of ordinary drivers do every day , therefore all ES drivers are crap'


dunning - kruger

99.9%? No, I don't think so. Traffic cops are pretty good drivers but, police response drivers, give me strength!

This week's latest incident... I was driving towards a pedestrian controlled crossing in town; 30mph speed limit; the lights were on red; pedestrians had just crossed from left to right; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary at the red light in front of me; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary on the opposite carriageway on the approach to the red lights; the lights were still on red; and then... a police response car with siren and blue lights on came towards me through the red lights at approx 30/35 mph on the offside, overtaking the stationary vehicles, through the red lights before regaining his side of the road once he was through the pedestrian crossing.

Now, notwithstanding the fact that police drivers do not have exception from overtaking the lead vehicle within the zig-zag markings of a pedestrian crossing, [we'll have to leave that to the CPS and their get out of jail free card of "not in the public interest to prosecute"], I have no problem with manoeuvre. The problem was the vehicle's speed which was wholly inappropriate. A traffic officer, or properly trained response driver for that matter, would have reduced his speed as he trickled through the pedestrian lights on red - treating the whole of the hazard as though it was a give way line. Instead of which, this particular driver bludgeoned his way through, "It's ok sir, I had my siren and blue lights on", seemingly oblivious to the potential danger of pedestrians, particularly children [the crossing is situated opposite a playground], crossing from his left where his vision was obscured by the lead vehicle waiting at the red light. At 30/35 mph he would have been unable to stop in the distance seen to be clear if a child had run across the crossing from the police driver's nearside. As he sped past me going in the other direction his eyes were just staring ahead like someone possessed.

I'd be interested to hear whether you think this example falls into the 99.9%% that can be dismissed as Dunning-Kruger effect or, does it fall into the .01% that can't?

[mph1977]

johnao said:

mph1977 said:

99. 9 % of complaints about ES driving are dunning kruger syndrome writ large

' why were they claiming exemptions without using warning devices '

' why did an ES vehicle only use warning devices to negotiate a particular hazard or when claiming a particular exemption '

' ES drivers are crap becasue they use their indicators in line with the law and best practice rather than haphazardly '

' I saw a basic driver do something that loads of ordinary drivers do every day , therefore all ES drivers are crap'


dunning - kruger

99.9%? No, I don't think so. Traffic cops are pretty good drivers but, police response drivers, give me strength!

This week's latest incident... I was driving towards a pedestrian controlled crossing in town; 30mph speed limit; the lights were on red; pedestrians had just crossed from left to right; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary at the red light in front of me; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary on the opposite carriageway on the approach to the red lights; the lights were still on red; and then... a police response car with siren and blue lights on came towards me through the red lights at approx 30/35 mph on the offside, overtaking the stationary vehicles, through the red lights before regaining his side of the road once he was through the pedestrian crossing.

Now, notwithstanding the fact that police drivers do not have exception from overtaking the lead vehicle within the zig-zag markings of a pedestrian crossing, [we'll have to leave that to the CPS and their get out of jail free card of "not in the public interest to prosecute"], I have no problem with manoeuvre. The problem was the vehicle's speed which was wholly inappropriate. A traffic officer, or properly trained response driver for that matter, would have reduced his speed as he trickled through the pedestrian lights on red - treating the whole of the hazard as though it was a give way line. Instead of which, this particular driver bludgeoned his way through, "It's ok sir, I had my siren and blue lights on", seemingly oblivious to the potential danger of pedestrians, particularly children [the crossing is situated opposite a playground], crossing from his left where his vision was obscured by the lead vehicle waiting at the red light. At 30/35 mph he would have been unable to stop in the distance seen to be clear if a child had run across the crossing from the police driver's nearside. As he sped past me going in the other direction his eyes were just staring ahead like someone possessed.

I'd be interested to hear whether you think this example falls into the 99.9%% that can be dismissed as Dunning-Kruger effect or, does it fall into the .01% that can't?

you obviously don;t understand what Dunning- Kruger effect is ...

[johnao]

mph1977 said:

johnao said:

mph1977 said:

99. 9 % of complaints about ES driving are dunning kruger syndrome writ large

' why were they claiming exemptions without using warning devices '

' why did an ES vehicle only use warning devices to negotiate a particular hazard or when claiming a particular exemption '

' ES drivers are crap becasue they use their indicators in line with the law and best practice rather than haphazardly '

' I saw a basic driver do something that loads of ordinary drivers do every day , therefore all ES drivers are crap'


dunning - kruger

99.9%? No, I don't think so. Traffic cops are pretty good drivers but, police response drivers, give me strength!

This week's latest incident... I was driving towards a pedestrian controlled crossing in town; 30mph speed limit; the lights were on red; pedestrians had just crossed from left to right; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary at the red light in front of me; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary on the opposite carriageway on the approach to the red lights; the lights were still on red; and then... a police response car with siren and blue lights on came towards me through the red lights at approx 30/35 mph on the offside, overtaking the stationary vehicles, through the red lights before regaining his side of the road once he was through the pedestrian crossing.

Now, notwithstanding the fact that police drivers do not have exception from overtaking the lead vehicle within the zig-zag markings of a pedestrian crossing, [we'll have to leave that to the CPS and their get out of jail free card of "not in the public interest to prosecute"], I have no problem with manoeuvre. The problem was the vehicle's speed which was wholly inappropriate. A traffic officer, or properly trained response driver for that matter, would have reduced his speed as he trickled through the pedestrian lights on red - treating the whole of the hazard as though it was a give way line. Instead of which, this particular driver bludgeoned his way through, "It's ok sir, I had my siren and blue lights on", seemingly oblivious to the potential danger of pedestrians, particularly children [the crossing is situated opposite a playground], crossing from his left where his vision was obscured by the lead vehicle waiting at the red light. At 30/35 mph he would have been unable to stop in the distance seen to be clear if a child had run across the crossing from the police driver's nearside. As he sped past me going in the other direction his eyes were just staring ahead like someone possessed.

I'd be interested to hear whether you think this example falls into the 99.9%% that can be dismissed as Dunning-Kruger effect or, does it fall into the .01% that can't?

you obviously don;t understand what Dunning- Kruger effect is ...

You wrote... "99. 9 % of complaints about ES driving are dunning kruger syndrome writ large"

I wrote a complaint about ES driving.

My question is simple... do you classify my complaint as falling within the 99.9% that you classify as Dunning-Kruger Effect or not? There's no need for an ad hominem attack. Plain and simple... what's the answer... yes or no?

And if the answer is yes you do... then you can explain to me what you understand by Dunning-Kruger Effect.

It's a genuine question, I'm interested in your answer.

[anonymous-user]

Funkycoldribena said:

It's because most judges are geriatric idiots who live in ivory towers and have no clue about the real world.The quicker some sort of fast track system is put into place to get more younger judges through the better.

I wasn't sure if this was satirical. I'll assume not.

Do younger judges have the power to magic up more prison spaces, too?

[johnfm]

mph1977 said:

johnao said:

mph1977 said:

99. 9 % of complaints about ES driving are dunning kruger syndrome writ large

' why were they claiming exemptions without using warning devices '

' why did an ES vehicle only use warning devices to negotiate a particular hazard or when claiming a particular exemption '

' ES drivers are crap becasue they use their indicators in line with the law and best practice rather than haphazardly '

' I saw a basic driver do something that loads of ordinary drivers do every day , therefore all ES drivers are crap'


dunning - kruger

99.9%? No, I don't think so. Traffic cops are pretty good drivers but, police response drivers, give me strength!

This week's latest incident... I was driving towards a pedestrian controlled crossing in town; 30mph speed limit; the lights were on red; pedestrians had just crossed from left to right; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary at the red light in front of me; there were 3 or 4 cars stationary on the opposite carriageway on the approach to the red lights; the lights were still on red; and then... a police response car with siren and blue lights on came towards me through the red lights at approx 30/35 mph on the offside, overtaking the stationary vehicles, through the red lights before regaining his side of the road once he was through the pedestrian crossing.

Now, notwithstanding the fact that police drivers do not have exception from overtaking the lead vehicle within the zig-zag markings of a pedestrian crossing, [we'll have to leave that to the CPS and their get out of jail free card of "not in the public interest to prosecute"], I have no problem with manoeuvre. The problem was the vehicle's speed which was wholly inappropriate. A traffic officer, or properly trained response driver for that matter, would have reduced his speed as he trickled through the pedestrian lights on red - treating the whole of the hazard as though it was a give way line. Instead of which, this particular driver bludgeoned his way through, "It's ok sir, I had my siren and blue lights on", seemingly oblivious to the potential danger of pedestrians, particularly children [the crossing is situated opposite a playground], crossing from his left where his vision was obscured by the lead vehicle waiting at the red light. At 30/35 mph he would have been unable to stop in the distance seen to be clear if a child had run across the crossing from the police driver's nearside. As he sped past me going in the other direction his eyes were just staring ahead like someone possessed.

I'd be interested to hear whether you think this example falls into the 99.9%% that can be dismissed as Dunning-Kruger effect or, does it fall into the .01% that can't?

you obviously don;t understand what Dunning- Kruger effect is ...

Judging by your poorly chosen examples, either do you.

None of your clumsily drafted examples has the 'unskilled observer' making a statement about the elevated status their own abilities relative to a skilled driver.

Honestly, if you are going to ridicule somebody at least ensure you don't do it from a glass house.

[Mr2Mike]

mph1977 said:

you obviously don;t understand what Dunning- Kruger effect is ...

FFS, is "Dunning-Kruger" the new PH 'phrase of the year'? It seems to be brought up as often as MX5's and frozen sausages.

[Funkycoldribena]

Mr2Mike said:

FFS, is "Dunning-Kruger" the new PH 'phrase of the year'? It seems to be brought up as often as MX5's and frozen sausages.

But she was good in Inglorious Basterds.

[mph1977]

Mr2Mike said:

mph1977 said:

you obviously don;t understand what Dunning- Kruger effect is ...

FFS, is "Dunning-Kruger" the new PH 'phrase of the year'? It seems to be brought up as often as MX5's and frozen sausages.

well it sums up the attitude of the of illusory superiority / unconscious incompetence , so for many opf the 'powerfully built' it;s a default state, plus it;s the default state of the steering wheel operative when esxpressing a view about driving e.g. not understanding IPSGA , signalling automatically or not at all instead of properly where all they dfo is show up how little they know on the topic.

[Devil2575]

mph1977 said:

well it sums up the attitude of the of illusory superiority / unconscious incompetence , so for many opf the 'powerfully built' it;s a default state, plus it;s the default state of the steering wheel operative when esxpressing a view about driving e.g. not understanding IPSGA , signalling automatically or not at all instead of properly where all they dfo is show up how little they know on the topic.

I think it actually sums up the attitude of a lot of people in all walks of life.

[johnao]

mph1977 said:

well it sums up the attitude of the of illusory superiority / unconscious incompetence , so for many opf the 'powerfully built' it;s a default state, plus it;s the default state of the steering wheel operative when esxpressing a view about driving e.g. not understanding IPSGA , signalling automatically or not at all instead of properly where all they dfo is show up how little they know on the topic.

Now answer my question, please.

[EU_Foreigner]

He was unlucky that an officer operated the camera in the van. I thought the majority was civilians from the partnership and you can not PCOJ them?

[photosnob]

EU_Foreigner said:

He was unlucky that an officer operated the camera in the van. I thought the majority was civilians from the partnership and you can not PCOJ them?

PCOJ is not specific to fooling a police man. The offence is for trying to get out of being caught in this case. It doesn't matter if it's a policeman or a civilian.

I have no idea what police driving has to do with this though. It's all just getting confusing.