Eight months for using a laser jammer ?!! Wtf

[surveyor_101]

The vans and mobile traps in general are about cash collection. Hence why Avon and Somerset have been caught in a legal unenforceable li it they are refusing to refund the taxes collected.

If you see the places they park this vans, some of the most crazy places all in effort to hide. Surely the end game is to slow people down and not have them swerving onto the wrong side of road? No one else could park in the places these vans seem to pitch up.

[anonymous-user]

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

Obstruction is still a criminal offence. That fact he was even taken to court for flashing his lights beggars belief. I am astounded there are people on here who attempt to defend it. We are in a police state. Obstruction, PCoJ, SP30 whatever they attempt to call it, all are merely thumbscrews with two objectives, raising revenue and discouraging driving by any means necessary to make it as unpleasant as possible.

It is out of control and they are walking a fine line in my view, at some point, even the notoriously passive UK public will start to take notice. We need to fight back.

He was taken to court because he committed the offence. If it wasn't an offence he wouldn't have been taken to court.
People get taken to court for all different kinds of obstruction of Police officers in the execution of their duty. Why should they ignore this one?

If you read the article it appears he was taken to court rather than given a caution due to arguing with the officer who allegedly threatened him with PCoJ.

That such things can possibly even be offences beggars belief. Out of control. Police state.

[vonhosen]

surveyor_101 said:

The vans and mobile traps in general are about cash collection. Hence why Avon and Somerset have been caught in a legal unenforceable li it they are refusing to refund the taxes collected.

If you see the places they park this vans, some of the most crazy places all in effort to hide. Surely the end game is to slow people down and not have them swerving onto the wrong side of road? No one else could park in the places these vans seem to pitch up.

There will be a mixture of covert & overt speed enforcement.
All overt or all covert is not as sensible as a mixture of both.

[vonhosen]

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

Obstruction is still a criminal offence. That fact he was even taken to court for flashing his lights beggars belief. I am astounded there are people on here who attempt to defend it. We are in a police state. Obstruction, PCoJ, SP30 whatever they attempt to call it, all are merely thumbscrews with two objectives, raising revenue and discouraging driving by any means necessary to make it as unpleasant as possible.

It is out of control and they are walking a fine line in my view, at some point, even the notoriously passive UK public will start to take notice. We need to fight back.

He was taken to court because he committed the offence. If it wasn't an offence he wouldn't have been taken to court.
People get taken to court for all different kinds of obstruction of Police officers in the execution of their duty. Why should they ignore this one?

If you read the article it appears he was taken to court rather than given a caution due to arguing with the officer who allegedly threatened him with PCoJ.

That such things can possibly even be offences beggars belief. Out of control. Police state.

That you think PtCoJ or Obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty shouldn't be offences is what beggars belief.

[silvermills997]

TheBear said:

I don't know why I'm surprised at what I read on here. Every time I poke my head in it's just bewildering!

The fact is the guy is a ass, grade a ass, no one is disputing that,

However if he had disposed of the jammer and said nothing to the bib he would not be in jail now, He even knew they were coming as i believe they turned up at his office first as that was where the car was registered to, So he even knew they were coming so he did have time to remove the device and call his lawyer.

Like i said, Ass.

[Boosted LS1]

cmaguire said:

Are there any more routine instances of laser jammer use resulting in prosecution where the user isn't behaving like they have a cloak of invincibility?

I was intrigued by something earlier. What if the jammers switched off or partially removed? I don't think possession's an offence but I bet there are plenty out there still, under the radar. Often being used as parking, distance, pedestrian sensors which modern cars also have. How do they get away with this? It's a public frequency after all.

[anonymous-user]

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

Obstruction is still a criminal offence. That fact he was even taken to court for flashing his lights beggars belief. I am astounded there are people on here who attempt to defend it. We are in a police state. Obstruction, PCoJ, SP30 whatever they attempt to call it, all are merely thumbscrews with two objectives, raising revenue and discouraging driving by any means necessary to make it as unpleasant as possible.

It is out of control and they are walking a fine line in my view, at some point, even the notoriously passive UK public will start to take notice. We need to fight back.

He was taken to court because he committed the offence. If it wasn't an offence he wouldn't have been taken to court.
People get taken to court for all different kinds of obstruction of Police officers in the execution of their duty. Why should they ignore this one?

If you read the article it appears he was taken to court rather than given a caution due to arguing with the officer who allegedly threatened him with PCoJ.

That such things can possibly even be offences beggars belief. Out of control. Police state.

That you think PtCoJ or Obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty shouldn't be offences is what beggars belief.

Both are completely out of proportion when used for minor motoring offences, that is what really beggars belief.

[vonhosen]

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

Obstruction is still a criminal offence. That fact he was even taken to court for flashing his lights beggars belief. I am astounded there are people on here who attempt to defend it. We are in a police state. Obstruction, PCoJ, SP30 whatever they attempt to call it, all are merely thumbscrews with two objectives, raising revenue and discouraging driving by any means necessary to make it as unpleasant as possible.

It is out of control and they are walking a fine line in my view, at some point, even the notoriously passive UK public will start to take notice. We need to fight back.

He was taken to court because he committed the offence. If it wasn't an offence he wouldn't have been taken to court.
People get taken to court for all different kinds of obstruction of Police officers in the execution of their duty. Why should they ignore this one?

If you read the article it appears he was taken to court rather than given a caution due to arguing with the officer who allegedly threatened him with PCoJ.

That such things can possibly even be offences beggars belief. Out of control. Police state.

That you think PtCoJ or Obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty shouldn't be offences is what beggars belief.

Both are completely out of proportion when used for minor motoring offences, that is what really beggars belief.

The actions amount to the offence or not.
It's either a PtCoJ or not.
It's either an Obstruction or not.
If you have the offence & you have the evidence required to deal with somebody for that offence, you'd deal with it.
Especially if it's a serious offence (irrespective of what led to the serious offence being committed).

[Greendubber]

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

Schmed said:

Obstruction is still a criminal offence. That fact he was even taken to court for flashing his lights beggars belief. I am astounded there are people on here who attempt to defend it. We are in a police state. Obstruction, PCoJ, SP30 whatever they attempt to call it, all are merely thumbscrews with two objectives, raising revenue and discouraging driving by any means necessary to make it as unpleasant as possible.

It is out of control and they are walking a fine line in my view, at some point, even the notoriously passive UK public will start to take notice. We need to fight back.

He was taken to court because he committed the offence. If it wasn't an offence he wouldn't have been taken to court.
People get taken to court for all different kinds of obstruction of Police officers in the execution of their duty. Why should they ignore this one?

If you read the article it appears he was taken to court rather than given a caution due to arguing with the officer who allegedly threatened him with PCoJ.

That such things can possibly even be offences beggars belief. Out of control. Police state.

That you think PtCoJ or Obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty shouldn't be offences is what beggars belief.

Both are completely out of proportion when used for minor motoring offences, that is what really beggars belief.

They're seperate to the original offence though.

Genuine question if you may, if the police didn't bother with it for what you think are minor offences, where should the line be drawn when they should start dealing with PCOJ and obstruct?

[anonymous-user]

vonhosen said:

There will be a mixture of covert & overt speed enforcement.
All overt or all covert is not as sensible as a mixture of both.

So both covert and overt enforcement are OK when they do it, yet for us passive detection is OK but active is not ? Talk about loading the dice !

Jammers have been around for years, definitely a lot out there. When can we expect the house to house early morning raids and car seizures ? PtCoJ is, after all, a serious offence.

[jmorgan]

What do we drop next cos no one was really harmed?

[vonhosen]

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

There will be a mixture of covert & overt speed enforcement.
All overt or all covert is not as sensible as a mixture of both.

So both covert and overt enforcement are OK when they do it, yet for us passive detection is OK but active is not ? Talk about loading the dice !

It's not a game of cards or dice, it's about breaking the laws of the land.

Schmed said:

Jammers have been around for years, definitely a lot out there. When can we expect the house to house early morning raids and car seizures ? PtCoJ is, after all, a serious offence.

No time soon.
They'll just grab the lemmings that offer themselves up, they haven't got the resources for much more.

[Greendubber]

jmorgan said:

What do we drop next cos no one was really harmed?

Minor criminal damage OK?

I'm sure plenty of people on here would be fine if I drew a spunking cock on the side of their car, after all there are more serious things for the police to be getting on with.

Saying that we apparently live in a police state so I doubt I'd have the freedom to do it anyway.

[anonymous-user]

vonhosen said:

The actions amount to the offence or not.
It's either a PtCoJ or not.
It's either an Obstruction or not.
If you have the offence & you have the evidence required to deal with somebody for that offence, you'd deal with it.
Especially if it's a serious offence (irrespective of what led to the serious offence being committed).

It is certainly out of control, is what it is. I very much doubt the particular cases mentioned here are what these offences were originally intended for, it is overzealous persecution of a particular group very much for political reasons, so lets look at the bigger picture here. Let these guys get away with it and the entire middle class will start playing the system far more than they do now, and speeding revenue will fall dramatically... These are great cases for sending a message that is for sure. For how much longer we will tolerate these abuses remains to be seen.

[cmaguire]

Greendubber said:

jmorgan said:

What do we drop next cos no one was really harmed?

Minor criminal damage OK?

I'm sure plenty of people on here would be fine if I drew a spunking cock on the side of their car, after all there are more serious things for the police to be getting on with.

Saying that we apparently live in a police state so I doubt I'd have the freedom to do it anyway.

There would be a victim there though.

[jmorgan]

cmaguire said:

Greendubber said:

jmorgan said:

What do we drop next cos no one was really harmed?

Minor criminal damage OK?

I'm sure plenty of people on here would be fine if I drew a spunking cock on the side of their car, after all there are more serious things for the police to be getting on with.

Saying that we apparently live in a police state so I doubt I'd have the freedom to do it anyway.

There would be a victim there though.

Spray tin of paint, no harm done to anyone.

[bitchstewie]

13 pages in and I can't help but think the officer in the article summed it up perfectly.

Officer said:

If you want to attract our attention, repeatedly gesturing at police camera vans with your middle finger while you’re driving a distinctive car fitted with a laser jammer is an excellent way to do it.

[vonhosen]

Schmed said:

vonhosen said:

The actions amount to the offence or not.
It's either a PtCoJ or not.
It's either an Obstruction or not.
If you have the offence & you have the evidence required to deal with somebody for that offence, you'd deal with it.
Especially if it's a serious offence (irrespective of what led to the serious offence being committed).

It is certainly out of control, is what it is. I very much doubt the particular cases mentioned here are what these offences were originally intended for, it is overzealous persecution of a particular group very much for political reasons, so lets look at the bigger picture here. Let these guys get away with it and the entire middle class will start playing the system far more than they do now, and speeding revenue will fall dramatically... These are great cases for sending a message that is for sure. For how much longer we will tolerate these abuses remains to be seen.

The offences were meant for any obstruction & any perverting the course of justice. If they weren't meant for examples resulting from traffic offences they'd be worded as such. And if it was seen as an abuse successive governments could have drafted changes or even set out guidelines to that effect. Guess what though? They haven't.

I'm one of the group you are talking about & I don't feel victimised by these supposed overzealous prosecutions. I see them for what they are. A drop in the ocean. And they aren't a threat to me either because I'm not going to be buying/using a laser jammer or flashing my headlights at you to warn you about a camera.
There are 47 million of us in the UK & I don't see many marching to your drum beat call for action.
How's it going? How many have you got signed up to your call for action & what action are you going to take?

[cmaguire]

jmorgan said:

cmaguire said:

Greendubber said:

jmorgan said:

What do we drop next cos no one was really harmed?

Minor criminal damage OK?

I'm sure plenty of people on here would be fine if I drew a spunking cock on the side of their car, after all there are more serious things for the police to be getting on with.

Saying that we apparently live in a police state so I doubt I'd have the freedom to do it anyway.

There would be a victim there though.

Spray tin of paint, no harm done to anyone.

You are talking nonsense.

Why don't you paint a spunking cock on the side of your car and see how long you get to drive around in that before Plod have you up for it. And then it'll be you cleaning it off because you've been creating victims all over the place traumatised by your obscenity.

The thread on here about the guy and his Christmas decorations is a prime example.

[Greendubber]

cmaguire said:

Greendubber said:

jmorgan said:

What do we drop next cos no one was really harmed?

Minor criminal damage OK?

I'm sure plenty of people on here would be fine if I drew a spunking cock on the side of their car, after all there are more serious things for the police to be getting on with.

Saying that we apparently live in a police state so I doubt I'd have the freedom to do it anyway.

There would be a victim there though.

Criminal damage is a lesser offence than PCOJ and people are happy for that to be ignored, so why should the police investigate your car being vandalised?