Kent & Medway Safety Cameras coming to my IAM...
Discussion
...group meeting next Tuesday (they give a talk basically).
What questions shall I ask them?!
Now, I'm after SENSIBLE suggestions for GENUINE questions please, no "how do you feel about ripping the country off" or "do you break the speed limit" type questions.
So....I open up the floor....
What questions shall I ask them?!
Now, I'm after SENSIBLE suggestions for GENUINE questions please, no "how do you feel about ripping the country off" or "do you break the speed limit" type questions.
So....I open up the floor....
Honestly - ask them how much they cherry pick their statistics and if they understand what 'regression to the mean' means...
Alternatively find out how many road deaths there have been recently, and if they have risen. If they have risen, base a question around this.
At all costs avoid a KSI discussion, these are cherry-picked and massaged figures...
Alternatively find out how many road deaths there have been recently, and if they have risen. If they have risen, base a question around this.
At all costs avoid a KSI discussion, these are cherry-picked and massaged figures...
Part 1
1. Point out that their revenue is derived entirely from fixed penalty offers.
2. Point out that the acceptance of a fixed penalty is, in effect, a waiver of the right of the person accused to require that he should be proved guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" according to law (the burden of "due process"
.
4. Point out that the camera detected speed enforcement system is underpinned by the implied threat of court proceedings and the expectation that most persons accused will waive their right to due process (the actual percentage in 2003 was 93% out of ~1.8 million camera detected speeding offences).
5. Ask if it is morally right to establish and maintain a system of law enforcement that relies for its existence on the propensity of persons accused to waive their right to due process?
6. Ask if there is any other system of law enforcement that has a similar aim or effect?
Part 2
7. Point our that the threat of enforcement cannot realistically be carried out unless the accused person signs a statement confirming that he/she was the driver.
8. Point out that a person accused or suspected of a speeding offence is compelled by law, on threat of a substantial fine/loss of driving licence, to provide the said statement.
9. Point out that the compulsion to provide said statement is a breach of the privilege against self-incrimination, that has existed in English and Scottish law for centuries and is enshrined in statute by the incorporation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms into the Human Rights Act 1998.
10. Point out that the Privy Council (the highest judicial tribunal in the UK) has agreed that the compulsion to identify oneself as the driver IS a breach of the privilege against self-incrimination.
11. Ask if it is morally right to establish and maintain a system of law enforcement that relies on a systematic breach, or threatened breach, of the privilege aginst self-incrimination?
>> Edited by OBSERVER on Friday 17th June 15:36
>> Edited by OBSERVER on Friday 17th June 15:37
1. Point out that their revenue is derived entirely from fixed penalty offers.
2. Point out that the acceptance of a fixed penalty is, in effect, a waiver of the right of the person accused to require that he should be proved guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" according to law (the burden of "due process"
. 4. Point out that the camera detected speed enforcement system is underpinned by the implied threat of court proceedings and the expectation that most persons accused will waive their right to due process (the actual percentage in 2003 was 93% out of ~1.8 million camera detected speeding offences).
5. Ask if it is morally right to establish and maintain a system of law enforcement that relies for its existence on the propensity of persons accused to waive their right to due process?
6. Ask if there is any other system of law enforcement that has a similar aim or effect?
Part 2
7. Point our that the threat of enforcement cannot realistically be carried out unless the accused person signs a statement confirming that he/she was the driver.
8. Point out that a person accused or suspected of a speeding offence is compelled by law, on threat of a substantial fine/loss of driving licence, to provide the said statement.
9. Point out that the compulsion to provide said statement is a breach of the privilege against self-incrimination, that has existed in English and Scottish law for centuries and is enshrined in statute by the incorporation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms into the Human Rights Act 1998.
10. Point out that the Privy Council (the highest judicial tribunal in the UK) has agreed that the compulsion to identify oneself as the driver IS a breach of the privilege against self-incrimination.
11. Ask if it is morally right to establish and maintain a system of law enforcement that relies on a systematic breach, or threatened breach, of the privilege aginst self-incrimination?
>> Edited by OBSERVER on Friday 17th June 15:36
>> Edited by OBSERVER on Friday 17th June 15:37
Why are the cameras still on Detling hill?
They went up before Jades bridge was built,but now the bridge has been built there is no reason for them to remain.
The website states that all van operators are civies, therefore how can they satisfy the requirement "that an "OFFICER" shall use the speed device to get a second speed reding.The first being his own estimation. Badly worded but i hope you get my drift
They went up before Jades bridge was built,but now the bridge has been built there is no reason for them to remain.
The website states that all van operators are civies, therefore how can they satisfy the requirement "that an "OFFICER" shall use the speed device to get a second speed reding.The first being his own estimation. Badly worded but i hope you get my drift
havoc said:
nonegreen said:
Would it not be better just to show up with bats and adjust their attitude?
No, just bring the Spanish Inquisition...they certainly won't be expecting that!
and put them in a comfy chair, No one expects the COMFY chair.
I take it you'll be getting Rachel "Harvey" Moon.
Ask her to explain why the partnership is composed as it is. eg magistrates court service are members and how do they deal with their potential conflict of interest.
I don't know if you have any red light cameras, but ask what is their policy regarding RLC triggers and amber light duration vs limit in force at the site.
Just me being different.
Finally, ask her if she wants to be a tax collector why doesn't she feck off and work for the revenue? Or if she fancies a bit of enforcement Customs and Excise muppets will have a few vacancies for someone with her CV.
Sorry if I've offended anyone. Back in the corner.
FiF
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Friday 17th June 20:24
kent scammers said:
Fiction
It's unfair to prosecute people for speeding at night when it is quiet and there is no traffic.
Fact
The crash rate doubles at night due to higher vehicle speed, more alcohol consumption, tiredness and reduced visibility. Complying with speed limits is important at all times
How do cameras catch the drunk or tired driver?
Say, "I'd just like to thank you for your sterling work, thanks to your replacing traffic police with cameras I can now drive like a complete balloon, get pished, intimidate drivers, hell I can even do handbrake turns in the high street now, as long as I keep to the limits of course"
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff