Its not just people in the motor trade(as mentioned above)that have been targeted...
And as for Ashok playing down the seriousness of it, well when you see someone blow there fingers off you might just change your views
|
|
8< {more snipping - DD}
|
This is bizarre.
One of the greatest myths today is that of the persecuted motorist.
Overall , in real terms, all the enormous benefits of car ownership cost less than 20 years ago.
My everyday experience is that dozens, possibly hundreds, of motorists blatantly break sensible laws about speed and general driving behaviour . They do not seem to feel oppressed.
Evryone wants congestion reduced, but in some magical way that won't impinge on what they think is their God-given right to go where they want, when they want. When someone hs the courage to do something, they are vilified.
Policing motorists is NOT as an alternative to pursuing drug-dealers, muggers, or the rest. Due to gross stupidity motorists fund the policing effort for the roads directly .If you didnt bust the limit all the safety camera partnerships would have to shut down.
|
Terrific polemic greenhey. You understand an important aspect of private automobile ownership. But you don't seem to think there's any fun in motoring.
Actually a total legal-behaviour strike for a year or so might put some of those oink fluffy dice out of business. But then what? When we revert they will go back into business. Damn, you can't win.
|
|
|
.If you didnt bust the limitall the safety camera partnerships would have to shut down.
do you think that ALL the limits are reasonable, that every local authority gets it right..........
or is it possibly the case that some hand wringing bearded sandal wearer has got his way on some occasions and had an excessively low limit imposed..........which means that a number of drivers, to a degree, choose to ignore it........which means yes, they break the law........but we're talking about wive's, fathers, mothers, grannies and police, judges, politicians.........not just your low life........that must say there's something amiss here
speed limits are important to get 'right'...........and that means at both end of the speed spectrum i.e it needs to be low enough AND high enough for that stretch of road..........NOT continually automatically reduced as some are
|
> ...do you think that ALL the limits are reasonable, that every local authority gets it right..........
No I don't. For example, there's a stretch of road near me (A452 from Balsall Common to the A45 junction near Hampton-in-Arden) that used to be unrestricted. Being an old two-lane road that was widened to dual carriageway but is still lined with small junctions, garden centres and the like, and having a poor surface with camber changes and poor sight lines wasn't enough to stop some people hammering along it at 80+, which could have been, and possibly was, lethal. Rather than enforce the 70mph limit strictly, or reduce it to 60 - which, coincidentally, would match the limit on that stretch of A45 - whoever decides these things has lowered the limit to 50, with a camera each way to enforce it. This means that the dual carriageway has a lower limit than the single carriageway to the south of Balsall Common.
I disagree with this decision, but I still adhere to the new limit - and not just in the vicinity of the cameras. For one thing, being only a short section, it doesn't add significantly to my journey time. But for another, although I may find it a little inconvenient, frustrating even, to feel that I could comfortably and safely be travelling 10mph faster, the limit is the law and that's important. I certainly don't feel persecuted and I don't see why anyone else should. The cameras are bright yellow (presumably the people who insisted on this would like to see detectives swap their plain clothes for yellow vests marked POLICE!) If you (and I mean anyone) regard speed cameras as taxation by stealth, that's up to you. But it's a VOLUNTARY tax, and if you have even the minimum level of driving ability, awareness and common sense, you don't have to pay it.
|
|
|
|
Police not hounding motorists? Try New Zealand ! Here, the police issuance of speeding tickets NOT in areas where a few km over the limit was a danger eventually gave the police as a whole such a bad name that the Government was forced to admit that the Police Commissioner's contract included that he would ensure that x-thousand speeding rickets were issued each year. Like all left-wing Governments, they need the money. However, such was the outcry that there is now a replacement Commissioner and Minister of Police. Said replacement Minister claims that first priority is to regain public confidence in the Police.
|
Police not hounding motorists? Try New Zealand ! Here, the police issuance of speeding tickets NOT in areas where a few km over the limit was a danger eventually gave the police as a whole such a bad name that the Government was forced to admit that the Police Commissioner's contract included that he would ensure that x-thousand speeding rickets were issued each year. Like all left-wing Governments, they need the money. However, such was the outcry that there is now a replacement Commissioner and Minister of Police. Said replacement Minister claims that first priority is to regain public confidence in the Police. there needs to be a public outcry over here then doesn't there.......we're too polite about all this.........the French wouldn't stand for blatant taxation in the form of a speed camera
no one would really mind a few more traffic officers, who could target those at the worst end of the spectrum
however what we don't need is some cretin blowing people up
|
|
|
|
|
|
8< {more snipping - DD}
|
Perhaps its just luck that no one has been seriously hurt.
I hate this govt's policy on car users but this person does not speak for me and his / her actions are not on my behalf!
|
Ex-military bomb-disposal operator's views on 'bomber', and advice on how to deal with suspect packages:
www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/07/letter_bombs/
|
Some very close to the mark discussion on this thread, particularly in relation to the discussion of people and personalities who are not here to defend themselves.
Also a lot of conclusions being jumped to, not least in the name of the thread. As far as I'm aware the incidents of the last seven days and seven letter devices haven't been linked to any group or person.
|
>..particularly in relation to the discussion of people and personalities who are not here to defend themselves.
Agreed, ripe for delection I think.
>As far as I'm aware the incidents of the last seven days and seven letter devices haven't
>been linked to any group or person.
A police spokesman in a televised statement tonight mentioned that they were considering the links with "motorists or transport users". Definitely motoring related.
Kevin...
|
|
Just read that article, most interesting and something tells me that this guy (the disposal guy) and Lud would get on quite well.
As for the bomber - a fringe wacko (to quote the disposal expert) who needs to get out a lot less.
|
Police forces are, broady speaking, managed not led. They have to meet 'targets, now known as 'performance indicators' so as to meet the PC speak of modern government. It is way, way easier to get an 80% clear up rate, with minimal adminstrative costs, against motorists than it is to get anything approaching a 20% rate on drug dealers, anti-social behaviour, muggings and so on. The biggest proponent of speed cameras, Mr Brunstrom, head of Gwynedd's force has a 6% clear up rate on burglaries. I bet the council tax payers there are over the moon at such dedication and skill!
|
Police forces are, broady speaking, managed not led. They have to meet 'targets, now known as 'performance indicators' so as to meet the PC speak of modern government. It is way, way easier to get an 80% clear up rate, with minimal adminstrative costs, against motorists than it is to get anything approaching a 20% rate on drug dealers, anti-social behaviour, muggings and so on. The biggest proponent of speed cameras, Mr Brunstrom, head of Gwynedd's force has a 6% clear up rate on burglaries. I bet the council tax payers there are over the moon at such dedication and skill!
AS.......fairly accurate........but......where did this suddenly come from
you're not going to suddenly confess all are you?
|
Westpig - it is the sort of trivial info I have stored in my brain - now that I don't work much! I am really really useful in pub quizzes and such like. Is this the answer you were looking for?
|
|
|
I'd be interested to see your data for this assertion, AS. According to the Home Office's Police website, North Wales was graded Excellent on burglary detection in 2004-5 (the most recent burglary-specific data I can find quickly), whereas the famously camera-free Durham force was graded only Fair.
|
graded Excellent on burglary detection
Why do I get the image of a policeman going up to a broken window, looking through and seeing TV and DVD player missing from entertainment unit and saying - "yep, that's 1 more burglary detected for our targets" stuck in my head?
|
AS if you're going to quote stats.get them right.
Dec 2006 Stats on detecting House Burglaries for North Wales Police are
Year to Date 2006 42.5%
2005 36.7%
All are available on Brunstrom's Web site. They are aduited stats based on National Crime Recording Stds. Not all that high but well within their targets. All their other stats are on their website.
www.north-wales.police.uk.
The red-tops wouldn't report this as it isn't as interesting as a stick to beat Brunstrom with.
|
|
Police forces are, broady speaking, managed not led. They have to meet 'targets, now known as 'performance indicators' so as to meet the PC speak of modern government. It is way, way easier to get an 80% clear up rate, with minimal adminstrative costs, against motorists than it is to get anything approaching a 20% rate on drug dealers, anti-social behaviour, muggings and so on. The biggest proponent of speed cameras, Mr Brunstrom, head of Gwynedd's force has a 6% clear up rate on burglaries. I bet the council tax payers there are over the moon at such dedication and skill!
I've heard the same thing. One person rang Jonathan Dimbleby's R4 programme, claiming to be in the police force. She stated that the police prioritise crimes that are easy to solve on the grounds that they can better achieve gov. targets. She cited a case where a serious crime was ignored, in favour of a trivial one, on the grounds of achieving targets. It's the same in the NHS. There was a case of a young boy dying because doctors attended to a less serious injury in order to achive gov. targets. (Assuming the report was correct. But NHS employees on JD's programme confirm the general idea.)
|
|
|
|
They would wouldn't they? : )
I have never been to a bomb disposal bar, but I want to now!!
|
|
The above was supposed to post under Nsar's comments about Lud and the bomb disposal fellow getting on!
|
The above was supposed to post under Nsar's comments about Lud and the bomb disposal fellow getting on!
Sigh!
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=48941&...t shows that it has.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
