oH bugger II

[JZS 600]

I got done once (aye right, "once" was it!) doing XXX in the 30 by a radar gun speed trap with the copper hiding in a bush by the side ot the road (thought that they had to stand in plain sight,,,,)

Anyhoo, it was on an industrial estate, I was overtaking 2 cars at the time (you could see half a mile down the road and there were no side turnings at that point) and accelerating. I was hidden from the speed trap by the 2 cars and only saw it form the corner of my eye as I was getting past the second car.

When the notice came through it informed me that I was caught doing a constant 70 for 2 seconds by the radar gun. Bollocks I thought, but what can you do against the "word" of two of Kents finest.

Later on, I was told by a police motorcyclist, lets call him Lester in this case, that if the cops thought they had you speeding bang to rights, but could not get an accurate reading on off the radar gun, if you hit a tuning fork and hold it in front of the gun for a couple of seconds, you get......





Wait for it..........






70Mph register on the gun.

Not that I'm suggesting for a moment................................

[Rusty]

Later on, I was told by a police motorcyclist, lets call him Lester in this case, that if the cops thought they had you speeding bang to rights, but could not get an accurate reading on off the radar gun, if you hit a tuning fork and hold it in front of the gun for a couple of seconds, you get......

Wait for it..........

70Mph register on the gun.

Not that I'm suggesting for a moment................................

Perish the thought indeed. Just as they wouldn't use Tazer's indiscriminately either.  :rolleyes

[pitternator]

yes but you were speeding ...so why do you feel the police are being sneaky , when you were actually speeding? ....miffed at getting caught ?....... We all speed...just some get caught , while others dont.So whats special about them ?
Personally I think there is a big  luck factor , and choosing where and when you do speed is very important .I aint being smug when I say , I do the latter...and ( touch wood) aint had a speeding ticket for over 10 yrs. But nobody would call my riding slow ! I still feel if as a rider you have done further training like the IAM it does just give that bit extra restraint , that little bit of caution , which maybe just means you dont pile it on or speed indiscrimately.I think you can spot roads where its more likely to be policed, and roads which are not ...plus the essential forward obs, the restraint , it really can just make the diffrence.On fast roads / motorways I like to not be the fastest vehicle, just overtake perceptibly , try not to stand out , by actions and road positioning.Covert riding wherever possible !

[MadDogMcQ]

Sounds good to me Pitternator. I am really annoyed at myself for this one because I always prattle on to everyone "30 in a 30, 40 in a 40". I know that those two speed limits are enforced more than any other on normal roads. I pay particular attention in 30 zones. In all other speed zones, I get a lick on and invariably end up going as fast as I (sensibly) can, bearing in mind risks to myself and others.

If I get caught speeding, I fully appreciate that it's my fault alone. Having said that, it does wind me up when Police claim that speeding KILLS, and then they hide in bushes and horseboxes, etc, covertly gathering evidence of speeders but allowing them to continue to drive at a speed that they reckon could kill someone!!

Police speed checks should be visible. They should deter, remind and educate. I know everyone claims it, but it's true (for me at least) that those flashing warning signs which indicate your speed (especially in a built up area) definately work for me. Now that's something that I don't think is wasted tax payers money!

Tom

[Rusty]

The Police claim they only catch you speeding for road safety, but then the Police claim all sorts of things that aren't necessarily true.  Often they even contradict themselves and thus expose the bullshit they are spouting.


For example, it 's generally accepted that prevention is better than a cure.  A visible Police presence deters speeders, a hidden camera doesn't. (But it generates revenue) The other day I passed a camera in a van and on the side it said Police safety Camera or some-such twaddle  If safety is the main aim (and not revenue collection) as stated on the van, and prevention is better than cure I felt it my public duty to flash all oncoming vehicles to make them slow down - thus preventing potential speeders having an accident. 


You'd think the Police would be happy with that wouldn't you? And if we followed the Police's logic and we all did the same then the roads would be much safer place wouldn't they?  Funny how it's an offence to do so then isn't it?  But of course offences - even 'safety' minded ones all generate revenue!

[Grahamm]

I felt it my public duty to flash all oncoming vehicles to make them slow down - thus preventing potential speeders having an accident. 

But if you get caught doing it you could be prosecuted for "Obstructing a Police Officer in the execution of their duty"!

:rolleyes

[Rusty]

But if you get caught doing it you could be prosecuted for "Obstructing a Police Officer in the execution of their duty"! :rolleyes

My point exactly. But didn't it say 'Safety camera'on the side of that van? And by getting motorists to slow down thus making them 'safer' wouldn't you think they would thank me.  :lol  It's all cobblers, I'd have more respect for them if t had said 'raising revenue' on the side of the van at least that would be honest, but instead they cloak it all in safety and speed kills claptrap.

[MadDogMcQ]

Hahahaha.....
:rollin
[color=rgb(40, 40, 40)]Pc Antony Gray, of Lancashire Police’s road policing unit, said: [/color][color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size]“Speeding motorists need to be stopped and spoken to by officers so that they will seriously consider their irresponsible driving behaviour and hopefully drive more appropriately in the future – particularly in residential areas and near schools.”[/color]  [color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size]So why wasn't I stopped and spoken to?[/color]
[color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size][/color]
[color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size]And as far as being done for improper use of headlights (flashing others to warn them of speedtrap), I rarely do it. I give a hand signal.[/color]
[color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size][/color]

[MadDogMcQ]

Hahahaha.....
:rollin
[color=rgb(40, 40, 40)]Pc Antony Gray, of Lancashire Police’s road policing unit, said: [/color][color=rgb(40, 40, 40)]“Speeding motorists need to be stopped and spoken to by officers so that they will seriously consider their irresponsible driving behaviour and hopefully drive more appropriately in the future – particularly in residential areas and near schools.”[/color] [/color][color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size]So why wasn't I stopped and spoken to?[/color][color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/color][color=rgb(40, 40, 40)][/size]And as far as being done for improper use of headlights (flashing others to warn them of speedtrap), I rarely do it. I give a hand signal.[size=78%][/color][color=rgb(40, 40, 40)]

[Rusty]

Again, a case of the Police not quite telling it like it is.


Don't they talk a crock of shit? It's like the offence of not displaying a tax disk. You might have paid for it and have a valid disk, it may have subsequently fallen off or been nicked, and the Police computer can instantly confirm your bike is actually taxed, but the 'offence' still stands as it is for 'Not displaying' it.  :rolleyes


I got pulled for throwing a banana skin out my car window a few years ago. It was Autumn, and the leaves were piled high at each side of the road - all bio-degradeable stuff to which I added a banana skin. The copper didn't half come the high and mighty but I don't take any of that nonsense anymore, their function is as a public servant not master.


He said;  "I've a good mind to make you walk back and pick that up"

I replied: "Well, good luck with that one then.... "

The way I see it I'd rather pay a litter fine than be patronised like a schoolboy.

[Grahamm]

It's like the offence of not displaying a tax disk. You might have paid for it and have a valid disk, it may have subsequently fallen off or been nicked, and the Police computer can instantly confirm your bike is actually taxed, but the 'offence' still stands as it is for 'Not displaying' it.

That's because the law hasn't caught up with modern technology...  top

[Rusty]

They don't do it that way though Grahamm, if only they did.


They don't update the law by repealing the obsolete laws, they just add new statutes to cover recent technological changes. The original offence is left in place. That law is then there for them to fall back on if they want to be awkward. That's why you still hear of people being prosecuted under some obscure 1864 blah blah blah act.


As far as I know it is still an offence to push a perambulator on the pavement, or to not be in possession of a bow and three arrows for home defence, and all kinds of other archaic stuff. They don't repeal it, so theoretically they can still find a law to prosecute you under even if it's an obsolete one that has fallen into abeyance.


I'm still wondering about the TV license. Similarly the License is not paid for receiving TV channels, but for owning a television capable of receiving them. In today's world of streaming via internet direct to computer monitor technically you no longer need a TV license.

[Lawrence]

I'm still wondering about the TV license. Similarly the License is not paid for receiving TV channels, but for owning a television capable of receiving them. In today's world of streaming via internet direct to computer monitor technically you no longer need a TV license.

I got reminder through for the previous tenant of my place when I moved in.  Phoned them up and said that although I have a TV, the only thing connected is a games console so I don't receive any channels and they said it's fine I don't need to pay

[Rusty]

That's a result then!

If you were to watch BBC I player via the internet I'm sure that would be legal too. The crafty licensing of the TV tuner itself has backfired on them as it means it's not actually the content that's licensed. Perhaps we need a test case? I've never understood how one corporation can be allowed to have such an advantage as licence funding over the competition in today's free market mindset anyway. Let alone the ability to have you put in prison for not paying them.  :\

[breadlord]

Regarding the original post: Bad luck mate. Having said that, I'm crazy careful in London. There's a copper, a speed camera or a bus pulling out every hundred metres, always get out of the M25 if I want to tie one on - There's a stretch of road on my commute home with about four cameras on it - a progressive pace going home would lose me my licence in fifteen minutes...

As for the TV licence - We're running standalone home theatre PCs with all the content coming from a fileserver I have upstairs, that does streaming of iPlayer stuff if you want it, but mostly plays things I've downloaded. I've had the TV licence person come over and confirm we're not receiving any broadcasts and don't have to pay.

Bradshaw:1, Government:Several

[pitternator]

with respect to tv licence, the offence was just to be in possession of a tv capable of receiving broadcasts. u didnt even have to have it switched on....

[Rusty]

Yes, as stated the license was for owning a receiver. You say the offence was?


I love it when technology out paces authority. My ISP recently blocked certain websites on the behest of big business interests, within days an alternative mirror site had sprung up and it was business as usual.    The gagging orders paid for by the rich and famous (like Ryan Giggs) recently are also made pointless by the freedom of information found on the internet, and long may it continue.


Going back to the OP I'd also like to see on bike radar deflectors or jammers that - much like the tuning fork trick the Police allegedly use for their own ends, we could use for ours. Historically each new technology has been immediately harnessed by the authorities for their own ends, it's nice that the internet provides a level playing field of sorts.

[JZS 600]

Some kind of radar/laser seeking projectile would do as an alternative  :evil

[maddog04]

was talking to a 70 yr old fella the other day who said he'd been to France recently and also down to the Olympics. at the Olympics, his mrs wanted a drink of water and he had to pay £1:75 for a small bottle, in France he got a 1.5 L bottle for 25 cents or whatever the French use for money!
he said he saw 1 speed camera at the end of a VERY long stretch of road (said the French are bad for tail gating) got back to blighty and saw 2 or 3 scameras within yards of the Port!!
speed alone doesn't kill.............if it was speed alone, F1/motoGp would be banned, Emergency services wouldn't speed to jobs etc
it may add to the outcome and I can understand if you're hit at 30 then you stand more chance than at 70 but put it this way.........if we have an off at 50 or 70 on the motorway (legal speeds) then I reckon we stand a good chance of becoming another fatal due to road furniture/congested traffic

[Grahamm]

They don't update the law by repealing the obsolete laws, they just add new statutes to cover recent technological changes. The original offence is left in place.

Erm, no. Old laws are removed from the statute books every few years, it just usually doesn't make headlines.