Eight months for using a laser jammer ?!! Wtf
Discussion
The Selfish Gene said:
Greendubber said:
So who's the victim of me carrying an offensive weapon on me in public?
on a simple black and white level, as you are inferring there is no difference.On a reasonable level - when people take their cars out, it isn't designed to be a weapon. When someone takes an offensive weapon out it has one purpose. It's also being taken out to be used in that way as the sort of person that carries one is the sort of person that has an intention to use it as a weapon.
Clearly that same person could take a car out with the sole intention of being an offensive weapon. As we have all sadly seen in the UK, Germany, France and Canada to name but a few.
I think it's unreasonable to put a car and a machete in the same category when it comes to offensive weapons.
Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
JNW1 said:
La Liga said:
he cause is going to be a complex mix, which is why I use 'overall road safety strategy' when talking about it.
The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
Indeed and yet despite all those things fatalities on the roads of North Yorkshire haven't changed since the introduction of our fleet of mobile camera vans; on the face of it they appear to be achieving very little in terms of improving safety...The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
It's the cameras job to encourage compliance with it & provide evidence to prosecute those that don't.
vonhosen said:
They are all relatively easy to avoid prosecution with.
In the M6 miles of 50 limit I can average 50 doing 50.
On the 70 limit I can't average 70 doing 70.
If I travel 200 miles & set my satnav, it tells me what time I'm going to get there & guess what to within a minute or two that's the time I get there. There isn't time to be made up, I arrived when expected.
The only time that doesn't happen is when circumstances beyond control occur, such as a fatality collision causing the motorway to close & me being stuck in it. But then the speeder was stuck in that too & the speeding didn't stop them being delayed either.
The motorway gantry is an inanimate object, just like the Police car parked at the side of the road. They aren't dangerous, it's how idiots react that's dangerous. That's down the idiot, much like a person who complains someone should warn him boiling water is hot.
It isn't a factor for us all speeding. It's a factor for the smaller number who speed & get caught, not those who manage a bit of speeding & not getting caught.
that's odd - when I set my satnav for 200 miles, and it gives me a target, I can reduce it massively by increasing the average speed. Not sure what laws of physics I'm using........but I somehow managed to save myself hours on what the Satnav says. Unless there is a genuine stationary for ages problem like a crash you mention(probably due to a gantry tax camera) Otherwise I can literally take massive time off what the Satnav predicts. Over a 300 mile trip to my parents, it hours.In the M6 miles of 50 limit I can average 50 doing 50.
On the 70 limit I can't average 70 doing 70.
If I travel 200 miles & set my satnav, it tells me what time I'm going to get there & guess what to within a minute or two that's the time I get there. There isn't time to be made up, I arrived when expected.
The only time that doesn't happen is when circumstances beyond control occur, such as a fatality collision causing the motorway to close & me being stuck in it. But then the speeder was stuck in that too & the speeding didn't stop them being delayed either.
The motorway gantry is an inanimate object, just like the Police car parked at the side of the road. They aren't dangerous, it's how idiots react that's dangerous. That's down the idiot, much like a person who complains someone should warn him boiling water is hot.
It isn't a factor for us all speeding. It's a factor for the smaller number who speed & get caught, not those who manage a bit of speeding & not getting caught.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 27th April 10:48
ah yes- the inanimate motor Gantry argument.. As long as we comply no problem. THe thing is , nobody is complying! So the 'idiot' you mention is causing incidents behind him/her because the cameras are there (and appear to set random limits). If they weren't there he wouldn't be reacting to something that is unnecessary . So therefore it's dangerous in the real world use.
The comedy element is when people tell us the tax cameras are for our own good!
I used to work in a kitchen 30 years ago, and I did get burned sometimes.......and sometimes cut myself with sharp things. I don't work there anymore so it doesn't happen. What I didn't do was walk around with boiling water on a busy street all the time changing my walking speed randomly, and when someone bumps into me throw the boiling water over my shoulder.
The Selfish Gene said:
vonhosen said:
They are all relatively easy to avoid prosecution with.
In the M6 miles of 50 limit I can average 50 doing 50.
On the 70 limit I can't average 70 doing 70.
If I travel 200 miles & set my satnav, it tells me what time I'm going to get there & guess what to within a minute or two that's the time I get there. There isn't time to be made up, I arrived when expected.
The only time that doesn't happen is when circumstances beyond control occur, such as a fatality collision causing the motorway to close & me being stuck in it. But then the speeder was stuck in that too & the speeding didn't stop them being delayed either.
The motorway gantry is an inanimate object, just like the Police car parked at the side of the road. They aren't dangerous, it's how idiots react that's dangerous. That's down the idiot, much like a person who complains someone should warn him boiling water is hot.
It isn't a factor for us all speeding. It's a factor for the smaller number who speed & get caught, not those who manage a bit of speeding & not getting caught.
that's odd - when I set my satnav for 200 miles, and it gives me a target, I can reduce it massively by increasing the average speed. Not sure what laws of physics I'm using........but I somehow managed to save myself hours on what the Satnav says. Unless there is a genuine stationary for ages problem like a crash you mention(probably due to a gantry tax camera) Otherwise I can literally take massive time off what the Satnav predicts. Over a 300 mile trip to my parents, it hours.In the M6 miles of 50 limit I can average 50 doing 50.
On the 70 limit I can't average 70 doing 70.
If I travel 200 miles & set my satnav, it tells me what time I'm going to get there & guess what to within a minute or two that's the time I get there. There isn't time to be made up, I arrived when expected.
The only time that doesn't happen is when circumstances beyond control occur, such as a fatality collision causing the motorway to close & me being stuck in it. But then the speeder was stuck in that too & the speeding didn't stop them being delayed either.
The motorway gantry is an inanimate object, just like the Police car parked at the side of the road. They aren't dangerous, it's how idiots react that's dangerous. That's down the idiot, much like a person who complains someone should warn him boiling water is hot.
It isn't a factor for us all speeding. It's a factor for the smaller number who speed & get caught, not those who manage a bit of speeding & not getting caught.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 27th April 10:48
Bulls
t. vonhosen said:
JNW1 said:
La Liga said:
he cause is going to be a complex mix, which is why I use 'overall road safety strategy' when talking about it.
The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
Indeed and yet despite all those things fatalities on the roads of North Yorkshire haven't changed since the introduction of our fleet of mobile camera vans; on the face of it they appear to be achieving very little in terms of improving safety...The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
It's the cameras job to encourage compliance with it & provide evidence to prosecute those that don't.
Greendubber said:
No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'
Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
vonhosen said:
bad company said:
andy_s said:
Steviesam said:
I could be wrong (probably am), but I would guess that the majority of the public would prefer that the teenager in the link above who brutally attacked a 52 year old woman requiring plastic surgery went to prison, rather than a middle finger waving speeder who tried to get away with it.
One doesn't preclude the other Steve.John Worboys was a motorist, but the serious offences he committed in his taxi were not motoring offences.
It just so happens that it was in vehicles that these offences were committed.
bad company said:
vonhosen said:
bad company said:
andy_s said:
Steviesam said:
I could be wrong (probably am), but I would guess that the majority of the public would prefer that the teenager in the link above who brutally attacked a 52 year old woman requiring plastic surgery went to prison, rather than a middle finger waving speeder who tried to get away with it.
One doesn't preclude the other Steve.John Worboys was a motorist, but the serious offences he committed in his taxi were not motoring offences.
It just so happens that it was in vehicles that these offences were committed.
He used a laser jammer, denied driving & disposed of evidence.
JNW1 said:
vonhosen said:
JNW1 said:
La Liga said:
he cause is going to be a complex mix, which is why I use 'overall road safety strategy' when talking about it.
The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
Indeed and yet despite all those things fatalities on the roads of North Yorkshire haven't changed since the introduction of our fleet of mobile camera vans; on the face of it they appear to be achieving very little in terms of improving safety...The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
It's the cameras job to encourage compliance with it & provide evidence to prosecute those that don't.
Speed is not only a safety issue.
The Selfish Gene said:
why? Sat Nav starts at 6.5 hours - I do it in 4..........that's hours
I said if you are willing to exceed by massive margins you can make up time. I said 80 (what people keep calling for as a motorway limit) v 70 isn't going to make a great difference.If I drive to Glasgow from London right now, that's about 390 miles & it's going to take me around 6.5hours according to the satnav (mostly but not exclusively motorway) at an average of 60mph on the journey.
You are going to have to average 97.5mph to do it in 4hours in the traffic right now.
Good luck with that average.
vonhosen said:
JNW1 said:
vonhosen said:
JNW1 said:
La Liga said:
he cause is going to be a complex mix, which is why I use 'overall road safety strategy' when talking about it.
The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
Indeed and yet despite all those things fatalities on the roads of North Yorkshire haven't changed since the introduction of our fleet of mobile camera vans; on the face of it they appear to be achieving very little in terms of improving safety...The encompasses everything including aspects there are indisputable such as greatly improved vehicle safety and design, as well as faster, better trauma care etc.
It's the cameras job to encourage compliance with it & provide evidence to prosecute those that don't.
Speed is not only a safety issue.
It was your comment that the limits are to provide safety and I'd agree that was certainly the justification for their introduction. I suppose you could make a case for them having an environmental benefit as well but that's not been the justification used for the introduction and expansion of the camera fleet in North Yorkshire...
cmaguire said:
Greendubber said:
No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'
Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
Greendubber said:
cmaguire said:
Greendubber said:
No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'
Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
He was perverting justice and I can't see how that fits the definition of a victimless crime. Maybe those who are saying it is don't know what one is.
ghe13rte said:
Greendubber said:
cmaguire said:
Greendubber said:
No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'
Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
He was perverting justice and I can't see how that fits the definition of a victimless crime. Maybe those who are saying it is don't know what one is.
cmaguire said:
ghe13rte said:
Greendubber said:
cmaguire said:
Greendubber said:
No ones putting cars in the catagory of offensive weapons. The point being made is that lot of offences are 'victimless' as far as no one person is a victim but technically the victim is 'Regina'
Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
Or it may not have been anybody, as my recollection has speeding cited as the victimless crime.Much the same as PCOJ, which people referred to as a victimless crime (it may or may not have been you though)
He was perverting justice and I can't see how that fits the definition of a victimless crime. Maybe those who are saying it is don't know what one is.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff