CPS appealing in 159mph Pc case
Discussion
well said...
I think if you actually worked on the assumption that if 90% of dribers are doing something every day, then this carries more wieght that some abitory 'rule' if you get what I mean...
Back to Gones point. I should say that I am probably somewhat older than you think, I have held a licence for more than 20 years, I also hold several other catagories of licence other than just plain car, including an Int C race licence.
now, I am not about to tell you I am the best driver since sliced bread, there are plenty of pro-drivers better than I am, however, this is not about me, it's about you and your view that it's right that you can drive in a fashon that would lead to an instant ban for us mere mortals.
PS. I have a clean licence and have never been 'flashed' or other such speed trap.
I think if you actually worked on the assumption that if 90% of dribers are doing something every day, then this carries more wieght that some abitory 'rule' if you get what I mean...
Back to Gones point. I should say that I am probably somewhat older than you think, I have held a licence for more than 20 years, I also hold several other catagories of licence other than just plain car, including an Int C race licence.
now, I am not about to tell you I am the best driver since sliced bread, there are plenty of pro-drivers better than I am, however, this is not about me, it's about you and your view that it's right that you can drive in a fashon that would lead to an instant ban for us mere mortals.
PS. I have a clean licence and have never been 'flashed' or other such speed trap.
I am not sure that residents do place as much priority on breaking the speed limit , as opposed to speeding. In most peoples mind there is a difference even if they can not define it.Dorset Police had a survey two years ago where you were asked to rate the items of greatest concern. Speeding came 9th in the tabulated results way behind burgalry, yobbish behaviour etc.
In any event if the local paper is anything to go by the people caught by the traps are mainly local and mainly exceding the speed limit by relatively small amounts (37 in 30 etc) on roads where a higher limit would be appropriate taking into account the time of day etc. This is likely to erode the support of residents as more and more get prosecuted.
In any event if the local paper is anything to go by the people caught by the traps are mainly local and mainly exceding the speed limit by relatively small amounts (37 in 30 etc) on roads where a higher limit would be appropriate taking into account the time of day etc. This is likely to erode the support of residents as more and more get prosecuted.
rewc said:
I am not sure that residents do place as much priority on breaking the speed limit, as opposed to speeding.
You are absolutely correct!
They are only concerned about everyone else speeding when you ask them. They are not concerned about themselves speeding and are only concerned about being caught! In other words NIMBY's!!!
rewc said:
In most peoples mind there is a difference even if they can not define it.
of course they can define it! It is all about self protection. "Leave me alone and deal with everyone else. I want a safe environment to live in and I also want a safe environment so my bank account is not affected!"
In other words, I want to have my cake and to eat it!
For the benefit of Streaky, if you happen to read this post
rewc said:
Dorset Police had a survey two years ago where you were asked to rate the items of greatest concern. Speeding came 9th in the tabulated results way behind burgalry, yobbish behaviour etc.
Speeding came on the list then
Did dog sh1t on the pavement appear as well? That is ususally fairly high on the list too
rewc said:
In any event if the local paper is anything to go by the people caught by the traps are mainly local and mainly exceding the speed limit by relatively small amounts (37 in 30 etc) on roads where a higher limit would be appropriate taking into account the time of day etc. This is likely to erode the support of residents as more and more get prosecuted.
They don't like it because individually they want to be left alone. They shudder at the thought of being called a NIMBY as well but that is exactly what they are.
If Dorset local papers are anything to go by they will be the same as every other local paper. Articles in the letters page condemning police activity to slow them down whilst ignoring major concerns like "Dog sh1t on the pavement" and on the other pages, articles about residents groups campaigning for speed regulation, humps and cameras outside there houses! Many of them state "If something is not done soon, how long will it be before someone is killed here?"
>> Edited by gone on Friday 17th June 12:32
gone said:
[They don't like it because individually they want to be left alone. They shudder at the thought of being called a NIMBY as well but that is exactly what they are.
If Dorset local papers are anything to go by they will be the same as every other local paper. Articles in the letters page condemning police activity to slow them down whilst ignoring major concerns like "Dog sh1t on the pavement" and on the other pages, articles about residents groups campaigning for speed regulation, humps and cameras outside there houses! Many of them state "If something is not done soon, how long will it be before someone is killed here?"
>> Edited by gone on Friday 17th June 12:32
I dont doubt that there are NIMBYs, however I think you are falling into the trap of overweighting the comments from small numbers of single issue types.
The silent majority have a very sensible attitude to 'speeding', that is if the road is good, conditions clear etc. etc. they drive to the conditions perfectly safely. That they break an arbitary limit in the process is the problem when it is enforced unintelligently. And it is that which gets peoples backs up.
s2art said:
[They don't like it because individually they want to be left alone. They shudder at the thought of being called a NIMBY as well but that is exactly what they are.
If Dorset local papers are anything to go by they will be the same as every other local paper. Articles in the letters page condemning police activity to slow them down whilst ignoring major concerns like "Dog sh1t on the pavement" and on the other pages, articles about residents groups campaigning for speed regulation, humps and cameras outside there houses! Many of them state "If something is not done soon, how long will it be before someone is killed here?"
>> Edited by gone on Friday 17th June 12:32
I dont doubt that there are NIMBYs, however I think you are falling into the trap of overweighting the comments from small numbers of single issue types.
The silent majority have a very sensible attitude to 'speeding', that is if the road is good, conditions clear etc. etc. they drive to the conditions perfectly safely. That they break an arbitary limit in the process is the problem when it is enforced unintelligently. And it is that which gets peoples backs up.
No, gone has expressed the situation perfectly imho.
Just like some cyclists want to be a road user one second and considered a pedestrian the next, so it is in my experience with a very large proportion of the public.
A motorist when it suits them even outside their own front door, but a NIMBY when they are out of their car.
Proved time and time again.
Flat in Fifth said:
gone said:
[They don't like it because individually they want to be left alone. They shudder at the thought of being called a NIMBY as well but that is exactly what they are.
If Dorset local papers are anything to go by they will be the same as every other local paper. Articles in the letters page condemning police activity to slow them down whilst ignoring major concerns like "Dog sh1t on the pavement" and on the other pages, articles about residents groups campaigning for speed regulation, humps and cameras outside there houses! Many of them state "If something is not done soon, how long will it be before someone is killed here?"
>> Edited by gone on Friday 17th June 12:32
I dont doubt that there are NIMBYs, however I think you are falling into the trap of overweighting the comments from small numbers of single issue types.
The silent majority have a very sensible attitude to 'speeding', that is if the road is good, conditions clear etc. etc. they drive to the conditions perfectly safely. That they break an arbitary limit in the process is the problem when it is enforced unintelligently. And it is that which gets peoples backs up.
No, gone has expressed the situation perfectly imho.
Just like some cyclists want to be a road user one second and considered a pedestrian the next, so it is in my experience with a very large proportion of the public.
A motorist when it suits them even outside their own front door, but a NIMBY when they are out of their car.
Proved time and time again.
Sorry, I dont buy it. I mix with a fair selection of 'normal' middle class/working class types, very few of them being petrolheads. They all drive, whinge about stupid speed limits being imposed, and are not NIMBYs (at least where speed limits are concerned, it just doesnt come up in conversation).
They do complain about scrotes a lot however.
I think its mainly empty barrels making the most noise.
And I would be very interested to see this proof. A few examples is not a statistically signifigant sample.
s2art said:
Sorry, I dont buy it. I mix with a fair selection of 'normal' middle class/working class types, very few of them being petrolheads. They all drive, whinge about stupid speed limits being imposed,
Never heard any of them talk about the loony that shot past their drive the other day?
If you haven't you have slective hearing
s2art said:
and are not NIMBYs (at least where speed limits are concerned, it just doesnt come up in conversation).
Well it wouldn't would it because they would not want to be labled NIMBY!
s2art said:
They do complain about scrotes a lot however.
I think its mainly empty barrels making the most noise.
Scrotes is a very wide term indeed. I deal with scrotes every weekend who live in expensive houses and come from 'decent' backgrounds. When these people imbibe the serum of truth, they change into the very devils spawn you and society despise!
Eton scholars being raced around in Tesco trolleys is not unusual!
Who do these scrotes belong to?
NIMBYS. They are the product of NIMBYS who have not properly enforced moral values and decent behaviour or the ability of thought on impact that their offspring have on others as long as they are having a 'loverly time'. Moreover they belong to the very people who complain about speed limits and who unfortunately for those who breed these weekend morons get affected by their own produce. They then show this as a 'community concern'
When little Jeremy gets picked up by the old bill for a public order offence, they race to the aid of said sibling with company lawyer squarly on their shoulder to make sure he is dealt with fairly!!! OR if they can throw any inuendo around, make a complaint and cloud the issue so that little Jeremy can once again become the 'community concern' next weekend without fear of penalty when he chucks the contents of his excesses up in front of woolworths front door because he has been taught his rights by 'NIMBYS'!!!!
s2art said:
And I would be very interested to see this proof. A few examples is not a statistically signifigant sample.
Would you like me to go to our traffic division and publish the last months letters of complaint about vehicle speeds and requests for enforcement? It would cover many pages of this site!!!
If Data protection did not stop me, I would do so just to prove a point!
gone said:
And I would be very interested to see this proof. A few examples is not a statistically signifigant sample.
Would you like me to go to our traffic division and publish the last months letters of complaint about vehicle speeds and requests for enforcement? It would cover many pages of this site!!!
If Data protection did not stop me, I would do so just to prove a point!
Gone, I believe you. What I dont believe, because I dont have any data, is that a few hundred letters from NIMBYs is statistically signifigant when referring to the opinions of the population.
For those few hundred letters how many people have not complained? What is the ratio?
Without any more information, which you can supply without breaking the data protection act, I guess that the ratio of complainants to non-complainants is hundreds to one. If so then my statement holds; empty barrels make the most noise, if not then I will admit I am wrong.
s2art said:
And I would be very interested to see this proof. A few examples is not a statistically signifigant sample.
Would you like me to go to our traffic division and publish the last months letters of complaint about vehicle speeds and requests for enforcement? It would cover many pages of this site!!!
If Data protection did not stop me, I would do so just to prove a point!
Gone, I believe you. What I dont believe, because I dont have any data, is that a few hundred letters from NIMBYs is statistically signifigant when referring to the opinions of the population.
For those few hundred letters how many people have not complained? What is the ratio?
Without any more information, which you can supply without breaking the data protection act, I guess that the ratio of complainants to non-complainants is hundreds to one. If so then my statement holds; empty barrels make the most noise, if not then I will admit I am wrong.
I don't doubt gone has a stack of whingy letters ; however the letter writing campaigns tend to be done by the same small group of nutters ; they are sometimes orchestrated.
autismuk said:
gone said:
s2art said:
And I would be very interested to see this proof. A few examples is not a statistically signifigant sample.
Would you like me to go to our traffic division and publish the last months letters of complaint about vehicle speeds and requests for enforcement? It would cover many pages of this site!!!
If Data protection did not stop me, I would do so just to prove a point!
Gone, I believe you. What I dont believe, because I dont have any data, is that a few hundred letters from NIMBYs is statistically signifigant when referring to the opinions of the population.
For those few hundred letters how many people have not complained? What is the ratio?
Without any more information, which you can supply without breaking the data protection act, I guess that the ratio of complainants to non-complainants is hundreds to one. If so then my statement holds; empty barrels make the most noise, if not then I will admit I am wrong.
I don't doubt gone has a stack of whingy letters ; however the letter writing campaigns tend to be done by the same small group of nutters ; they are sometimes orchestrated.
Precisely my point. It now occurs to me that perhaps the reason so many non-scrotes get impolite/poor treatment from plod is that plods opinion of the population is formed by interaction with a non-representative sample; maybe 5% of the population.
I don't like it. Not that I have any time for this cretinous copper, who is lying through his teeth IMO.
I don't like the idea that the state can repeatedly try people because they don't like the result. It opens the judiciary up to even worse abuse than there is now.
Which is saying something !
I don't like the idea that the state can repeatedly try people because they don't like the result. It opens the judiciary up to even worse abuse than there is now.
Which is saying something !
Flat in Fifth said:
Too many people when commenting on the 30 issue imagine a road familiar to them with all the various daytime hazards in comment as if a "constant and sustained 84" had been driven alomg the road in their imagination. Do you know that is the case here? No thought not.
(snip)
Therefore to get back to you have to test and train on public roads. Yes it would be nice to think that there is resource to train people away from the unsuspecting public; and to train on every vehicle model; and to keep that training continuous and under controlled supervised conditions, but all those of you asking for this are YOU prepared to pay the taxes necessary to achieve this for all EV drivers? No? Thought not.
Whilst I sympathise, two things. Your first point is valid (even though it would suggest even his lower speed is way over the limit), but again it is not applicable to anyone else, and that really is the problem. You *cannot* have seperate rules for Policemen "citizens in uniform" and the rest of us.
Also, I agree they need to train, and for that reason are given license to speed.
However, part of that should be the responsibility not to abuse that as this numpty has done. Do you really think he was "training" or is that just a very convenient excuse to get himself out of a mess ?
gone said:
BUT can you be sure until the vehicle is stopped that it is all a game or something more serious?
I have some sympathy with this but the Police seem to require of people like me knowledge that can only be gained retrospectively, so I fail to see why they should be treated differently.
gone said:
Sorry, I dont buy it. I mix with a fair selection of 'normal' middle class/working class types, very few of them being petrolheads. They all drive, whinge about stupid speed limits being imposed,
Never heard any of them talk about the loony that shot past their drive the other day?
If you haven't you have slective hearing
Oh, plenty of times. However, those people are those doing 50 in a 30, 60 in a 40, 90+ on the Mway. Not those doing 35,45,79 mph.
gone said:
They do complain about scrotes a lot however.
I think its mainly empty barrels making the most noise.
Scrotes is a very wide term indeed. I deal with scrotes every weekend who live in expensive houses and come from 'decent' backgrounds. When these people imbibe the serum of truth, they change into the very devils spawn you and society despise!
Eton scholars being raced around in Tesco trolleys is not unusual!
Who do these scrotes belong to?
NIMBYS. They are the product of NIMBYS who have not properly enforced moral values and decent behaviour or the ability of thought on impact that their offspring have on others as long as they are having a 'loverly time'. Moreover they belong to the very people who complain about speed limits and who unfortunately for those who breed these weekend morons get affected by their own produce. They then show this as a 'community concern'
While there is some truth in this it is IMO a reverse implication error. Yes, there are people who walk around with bags over their head and fail to see any flaws in their own behaviour while nailing everyone else's, and yes, they do object to limits as currently enforced by scameras.
However, many people who object to the behaviour of the Scamera partnerships are not wanting to do insane speeds , they simply do not want to be persecuted for money.
THis is made much worse by the Police "Service" demanding insane amounts of money for a non-existent service. You yourself once listed what your constables did one night. Whilst they "worked hard" doubtless, from our POV they actually did nothing at all. (even though this is not their fault or yours)
What we get from the "service" is reams of dishonest rigged statistics and demands that we do the prevention half ourselves. Though when people take the logical conclusion of this (and employ their own quasi-coppers) that cretin Blair (Ian) complains about it.
This is simply because the mushrooming of this says more about the "Police Service" than the force's endless meaningless PR. If people are prepared to shell out that amount of money there's got to be more to it than a pub whinge.
gone said:
When little Jeremy gets picked up by the old bill for a public order offence, they race to the aid of said sibling with company lawyer squarly on their shoulder to make sure he is dealt with fairly!!! OR if they can throw any inuendo around, make a complaint and cloud the issue so that little Jeremy can once again become the 'community concern' next weekend without fear of penalty when he chucks the contents of his excesses up in front of woolworths front door because he has been taught his rights by 'NIMBYS'!!!!
There is some truth in this. There is also some truth in the claim that the Police tend to ignore the chav mob but will crucify the law abiding if they cross the line ; a la Walker. The Police may believe their tale but no-one else does.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff