Brave new world!

robroy:
It’s a pity the Berlin wall has gone Franglais mate, you would have loved it living on the East side I reckon, …judging by some of your ideas and principles. :neutral_face:
It was an informant’s nirvanic paradise over there I’m led to believe.
Hey ! : :bulb: …you could have took our old mate Chester with you. :laughing:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

all them cornfields…and ballet in the evening

i wonder how many will remember who said that and when?? :slight_smile:

Rings a bell…Some ex spy wasn’t it ,who lived in East Germany in the Cold war.?
Wasn’t he a journalist who used that as a title to an article.

The-Snowman:

Franglais:

The-Snowman:
Today alone on facebook ive seen the following comments -

  1. When entering a motorway you have right of way. Its the motorway traffic who have to give way

  2. The light was clearly yellow so he did nothing wrong going through it

  3. Its illegal not to use your indicator, even if no one is behind you

Also, 10% of drivers believe the left hand lane is for lorries and the correct normal lane for cars is the middle one.

You want people with that level of knowledge having the “power” to decide if you’ve broken the law and should be reported to the police and prosecuted?

Those people have the right to report to the police.
They do not have the right to decide who does/doesn’t get prosecuted.

I didnt mean they got to decide, I meant they decided in their opinion so sent the video in.
And my point is, these are the people who will be sending in hours and hours of footage which will eat up police resources.
Only those who at least know the law should be policing the roads, not some clown with a camera and no idea of whats right and whats not

Hasn’t that always been so?
Haven’t the police always had loads of silly complaints? Goes with the job.
.
Under-resourced police? Agreed.
.
And a video that is emailed in can be viewed by a trained civvie, and dealt with easily can’t it? If it’s nonsense a polite message saying thanks, if it’s possibly worthwhile, pass it on to a proper cop.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Videos sent in give them something to do when they’re eating their doughnuts and drinking tea

I want to ask this then please…

It’s 10pm, dark and rainy. Some girls are coming back from Brownies, a sports meeting, whatever and some loser belts around a corner, loses the back end and mounts the curb, knocking them all down. All badly shaken, nobody dead

What’s the difference between the police searching all the local CCTV cameras to gain evidence or one guy noticing what he has on his camera and sending the information in? Do you think the driver should get away with it just because there were no police around?

The Police do not decide who or what to prosecute, they collate the evidence and the decision to prosecute is made by the CPS, taking all the evidence into consideration. Evidence takes many forms and comes from a variety of sources all the time. It’s just different here because the head camera wearing fraternity want to show off their manly superness (and abnormally small willy) on social media

I agree with both Franglais and Robroy which is weird as they seem to think they are arguing. I don’t want someone filming my every move but, then again, if I do someone daft then it’s my responsibility to pay for it.

If you can’t do the time then don’t do the crime

good_friend:
Videos sent in give them something to do when they’re eating their doughnuts and drinking tea

I want to ask this then please…

It’s 10pm, dark and rainy. Some girls are coming back from Brownies, a sports meeting, whatever and some loser belts around a corner, loses the back end and mounts the curb, knocking them all down. All badly shaken, nobody dead

What’s the difference between the police searching all the local CCTV cameras to gain evidence or one guy noticing what he has on his camera and sending the information in? Do you think the driver should get away with it just because there were no police around?

The Police do not decide who or what to prosecute, they collate the evidence and the decision to prosecute is made by the CPS, taking all the evidence into consideration. Evidence takes many forms and comes from a variety of sources all the time. It’s just different here because the head camera wearing fraternity want to show off their manly superness (and abnormally small willy) on social media

I agree with both Franglais and Robroy which is weird as they seem to think they are arguing. I don’t want someone filming my every move but, then again, if I do someone daft then it’s my responsibility to pay for it.

If you can’t do the time then don’t do the crime

Look can I just stress I ain’t all for d/heads and the like, getting away with running rampage on the roads and causing dangerous situations.
The difference there is that the Police are actually doing their job, they have gained evidence from a guy on his dashcam who has INADVERTENTLY and UNINTENTIONALLY recorded the incident, or they’ve gained footage from a camera on the side of a building.
I ain’t really got a problem with that, that is what they are supposed to do.

I’ll say it again (and again :unamused: ) my problem is with the traffic vigilantes who go out intentionally thinking in their own tiny minds, that they are responsible for marshalling traffic, in a self perceived official capacity, either dressed in lycra on a ride in the sun, or the likes of Chester who looks upon it as the highlight of his life, with the Old Bill on his Friends and Family contact list. :unamused:

These are the types I hold with total contempt, the more these cretins increase, the less chance we have of the Police realising that they need to increase their numbers to uphold the law.

Christ it’s like deja vu and pulling teeth with me pliers all rolled into one. :unamused:

Then I agree with you completely

Please don’t pull teeth. I don’t have enough left anyway :smiley:

Franglais:
Hasn’t that always been so?
Haven’t the police always had loads of silly complaints? Goes with the job.

Then I hardly think encouraging more is a good idea

Franglais:
And a video that is emailed in can be viewed by a trained civvie, and dealt with easily can’t it? If it’s nonsense a polite message saying thanks, if it’s possibly worthwhile, pass it on to a proper cop.

Personally I’d rather that instead of training and paying civvies to sit through hours of non-events they trained and paid more police to be on the streets catching these people at the time.
Not a lot of good Cyril the cyclist or Doris in her hi viz at the edge of the village getting footage of some ■■■■ in an Audi doing 80mph and weaving about the road and thinking “Hes going to kill someone, he needs to be taken off the road” and sending the footage in so he can be dealt with, what, a month later?
Its more police that are needed, not busy bodies given an inflated sense of power.

How long before this brave new concept is extended to other areas? If you think its beyond impossible to have someone with a camcorder recording through your window because they think you’re doing something illegal and the police are encouraging video footage to be sent in by anyone who thinks laws are being broken then youre being very naive

staffordshire-live.co.uk/ne … ay-2410360

Mr Bosdet said: “One area we are concerned about is the X boxes where a lane has been closed due to an accident or another type of incident. Our concern is that many drivers don’t really appreciate what that means and some may go into that closed-off lane, where there is no traffic, to try and steal a march. All I would say is in that incidence the speed cameras are the least of your concern.

“You are probably most likely to be caught out by other motorists with dash-cams who feed the footage through to the authorities. The police have a new system for amassing dash-cam footage given to them by the public, named Operation Snap, which has proven to be quite successful.

So, would you submit dashcam footage of someone driving along a lane with a red x above it?

Nite Owl:
M1 East Midlands smart motorway drivers 'just as likely' to be caught speeding by other motorists - Staffordshire Live

Mr Bosdet said: “One area we are concerned about is the X boxes where a lane has been closed due to an accident or another type of incident. Our concern is that many drivers don’t really appreciate what that means and some may go into that closed-off lane, where there is no traffic, to try and steal a march. All I would say is in that incidence the speed cameras are the least of your concern.

“You are probably most likely to be caught out by other motorists with dash-cams who feed the footage through to the authorities. The police have a new system for amassing dash-cam footage given to them by the public, named Operation Snap, which has proven to be quite successful.

So, would you submit dashcam footage of someone driving along a lane with a red x above it?

Doubt that I would do that.
.
But if someone is worried that they would be seen, and reported, for running in a closed lane, and so decided not to do so? Good: Job done.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

First of all I’m impressed with the calculations that have gone in to getting the speed. That no mean feat.

Am I bothered that it was “caught” by a cyclist. No.
At the end of the day, it was 90mph in a 30mph. If he’d hit someone at that speed there wouldn’t be any survival. It would be death.

And I’m pretty sure if the footage had been submitted via a car or truck dash cam, He would also would of been prosecuted anyway. And probably with a more accurate speed reading.

I think it does made to be clear that it was it was exceptional circumstances that came to this result and the likely hood of the police chasing a prosecution for say a 35 in a 30 isn’t gonna happen.

robroy:
@Franglais.

So what about you Franglais, are you perfect?
I’m sure you’ve been susceptible to the odd unwise move on the roads like the rest of us, so if you had been Mr Trafficmarshall’s latest example, …
What would it be?

Would it be…
‘‘Fair cop guvnor/banged to rights’’ by your ‘gained evidence’’

Or would it be.

‘‘Who tf was that little 2hat with the camera, I want to ram it up his arse’’.

Just asking. :neutral_face:

Franglais, I just cannot understand why they are in your case or see the logic in their argument on this one thus I couldn’t be asred to get involved.

However to be absolutely clear I’m tramping this week so if you see anyone breaking into my trailer, robbing my diesel or burgling my house, ignore these posters and report it to the police immediately!

Now if it’s their truck or house being robbed it would appear they prefer you to remain stum and if plod ain’t passing by, more luck to the robbers.

I’m just not that altruistic I’m afraid even when drunk.

Hurryup&wait:

robroy:
@Franglais.

So what about you Franglais, are you perfect?
I’m sure you’ve been susceptible to the odd unwise move on the roads like the rest of us, so if you had been Mr Trafficmarshall’s latest example, …
What would it be?

Would it be…
‘‘Fair cop guvnor/banged to rights’’ by your ‘gained evidence’’

Or would it be.

‘‘Who tf was that little 2hat with the camera, I want to ram it up his arse’’.

Just asking. :neutral_face:

Franglais, I just cannot understand why they are in your case or see the logic in their argument on this one thus I couldn’t be asre d to get involved.

However to be absolutely clear I’m tramping this week so if you see anyone breaking into my trailer, robbing my diesel or burgling my house, ignore these posters and report it to the police immediately!

Now if it’s their truck or house being robbed it would appear they prefer you to remain stum and if plod ain’t passing by, more luck to the robbers.

I’m just not that altruistic I’m afraid even when drunk.

:open_mouth: Wow !!
After numerous posts from me on this, some still.have not got which direction I am coming from on this. :open_mouth: :unamused:

I thought I’d made it absolutely crystal that this was all in the context of some unofficial ‘Hobby Bobby’ prat on a bike purely there to get people nicked for MOTORING offences. :bulb:
Actual ‘‘crime’’ is a whole new ball game, as well as helping your neighbour, and empathising with a fellow trucker.

Like you mate I too can not be arsed, can’t be arsed to keep arguing the SAME point over and over, and can’t be arsed to keep attempting to clarify my point of view… :unamused:

So I’ve screen shotted a previous post, that if you had bothered to read it, you could have saved yourself the bother of trying to see the logic in my (or as you say ‘‘their’’) argument.
Cheers.

robroy:
He needs a good brief to get this thrown out of court, otherwise this will set a precedent and every [zb] self appointed policeman type of prick will be out like Robocop on a Raleigh.
We’ll no doubt get the ‘‘He was obviously speeding’’ comments off the usual suspects :unamused: , but it does not matter a [zb] if he was speeding or not, it’s up to the Police to catch offenders, not some fanny armed with a head cam. :smiling_imp:

Rob, I wasn’t referring to just you but I have read them all though you have repeated your point of view about 14 times with a few challenges thrown in as well.

I am no 100% model of good behaviour on the road particularly as I enjoy a burnout in my car and the old bike occasionally but the incident reported is outrageously dangerous to innocent motorists and pedestrians and it is absolutely indefensible by any standard (catching a ferry excepted DD :slight_smile: ).

I saw a similar post not long ago of some company owner doing something similar in his Porsche and resulted in fatalities. I’m pretty sure this wasn’t the first time either of these two tried this stunt but too late to stop Mr Porsche killing people.

I too agree with the sentiment on the unsuitability of various nosey bodies, cyclists and other super prat’s from the general public to be given the power to have motorists convicted for minor infringements but that is not what happens is it?

If Mr De Priq sends in his footage it is reviewed by Police to see if there is indeed a proper breach and if it is of evidential value.

It is then sent to the CPS who decide to prosecute or not.

Then it goes to the Magistrates to decide to convict or not.

At least that’s my understanding of the whole process as described by others here already.

The reason you are banging your head off a wall is your repeated opinion that this multi-step process with all its reasonable checks and balances should never commence against the offender because Plod didn’t see it happening and your insistence that no matter how bad the offence, No Plod…no worries for the offender.

Many of us have a different viewpoint of varying degrees…

As I said already I completely agree with much of the sentiment in your point though and if minor infringements end up being convicted in this way then things will have to be reconsidered but until that ever happens I’m ok with the current situation.

And I hear ya…getting that genie back into the bottle might be challenging if it does all go to crap later.

Generally you seem like a guy I would enjoy a few pints and a decent conversation with however if you get ancy at alternative viewpoints then I think it will be early back to the lay-by for me :open_mouth:

In the meanwhile, Cheers Bud :wink:

Ok mate, you make your point well…and resisted the slagging which I usually get on here (maybe deserved sometimes :smiley: )
I think basically we both agree, I fully understand the offence in question was fairly and potentially serious, and if it had been a bit different where an incident or even an accident occurred, it could be argued that matey on his bike was ‘doing his bit’…I get that.

Still say (again :blush:) that in this case,.and many others like it, it was not his job.
It could be argued ‘what if’ this that or the other happened, but nothing did. :bulb:

Maybe even a camera van in this case would be better in that town, instead of them all sat on roads where it is RELATIVELY safer to travel at higher speeds, where they can…(you know what’s coming) …make more money from it.
Maybe nick the odd one or two in a town, but a straight wide d/carriageway the sky’s the limit…kerching. :sunglasses:

Hope nobody else puts another argument up on this, as I’m even starting to bore myself on it… :blush: :laughing:

I don’t slag the adults in the room Rob especially the real drivers and real contributors, but perhaps a bit of banter occasionally is no harm.

I agree that further empowering the public against us, especially the cycling law breakers is the last thing in the world we want to do. On the other hand if this lunatic caused a fatality he might serve 4 years, half that if he put your daughter in a wheelchair for life.

We can’t really let him walk can we so he can put it up on you tube or whatever and his mates try to best him next week?

No easy answer here my friend and thus the discussion rolls on but I’d say we are more or less on the same page.

Clever Night Owl though with his title “Brave New World”…Indeed whether for better or worse!

Have a good weekend.