Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Joined: Jan 14, 2005 Posts: 19638 Location: Blackpool , Lancs
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:46 pm Post subject:
I see nothing wrong with using a copter for law enforcement, if its airborne and returning to base from one of its many call outs and spots someone driving irresponsibly whats wrong with calling in other units to remove someone from the highway who is endangering other road users.
The Police helicopter around where I live is airborne on a regular basis and covers most of the Fylde coast, the systems fitted to the copter are very sophisticated and easily capable of tracking a car in day or night.
Whats wrong with using a Police asset to remove drivers that shouldn't be on the road?? - OK I have got my tin hat on as I expect to get a battering for this post having read through the other entries, but consider one other thing, what happens when a young kid goes missing, the Police Helicopter can use its "Sky Shout" loud speaker to get residents in a huge area to check gardens/ out houses in a very fast and efficiant mannor. Deploying foot/ car patrols for this is far from effective in comparison, having heard this system in use its yet one more hidden hardware the copter carries - Far from cheap to run but overall its an advantage to have one in the county as far as I am concerned - Mike
Joined: Jan 22, 2009 Posts: 88 Location: Maldon, Essex
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:55 pm Post subject:
It's not only the A127 and A13. Those flying pig signs have been on the B1010 Lower Burnham Road for the last 5-6 mths I would guess. We assumed it was it to catch the sunday morning motorcyclists who have within recent years taken to riding the 'Burnham Bends' as some sort of right of passage to the Burnham Quayside for breakfast. Many of these are often seen pulled up by Police. We assume the increased Police presence is due to complaints by locals on the route, which must now be subject to more motorcycle noise (and perhaps not all with legal silencers) on a Sunday (of all days!) Morning _________________ TomTom Live 1005 world maps
Joined: Nov 28, 2005 Posts: 226 Location: Cheltenham
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:48 pm Post subject:
mikealder wrote:
I see nothing wrong with using a copter for law enforcement, if its airborne and returning to base from one of its many call outs and spots someone driving irresponsibly whats wrong with calling in other units to remove someone from the highway who is endangering other road users.
The Police helicopter around where I live is airborne on a regular basis and covers most of the Fylde coast, the systems fitted to the copter are very sophisticated and easily capable of tracking a car in day or night.
Whats wrong with using a Police asset to remove drivers that shouldn't be on the road?? - OK I have got my tin hat on as I expect to get a battering for this post having read through the other entries, but consider one other thing, what happens when a young kid goes missing, the Police Helicopter can use its "Sky Shout" loud speaker to get residents in a huge area to check gardens/ out houses in a very fast and efficiant mannor. Deploying foot/ car patrols for this is far from effective in comparison, having heard this system in use its yet one more hidden hardware the copter carries - Far from cheap to run but overall its an advantage to have one in the county as far as I am concerned - Mike
Nothing wrong with using police resources to catch and fine irresponsible motorists at all. People driving without MOT's, Tax and Insurance. People under the influence of Drugs and Drink, great. People driving recklessly at high speeds in cars and on motorbikes forcing other people off the road or to brake, swerve etc, definitely. To catch criminals hiding in back gardens, trees and woodland, go for it. But to make revenue from the masses that travel at a few miles above the limit, and we all do, even the goody goodies that write here hypocritically about the rest of us being "Criminals" YES YOU DO & YOU KNOW IT, is totally wrong. Love to spend the day following you guys with a camera unbeknown to you of course and record your driving habits.
Those who monitor us get caught speeding themselves. Didn't one of the guys responsible for installing speed cameras get caught himself? What about the Off-Duty copper who was speeding at 150mph in a built up area? just cause he wanted to give his new car a test drive, wouldn't we all? Even the Law Makers, Judges and Minsters get caught doing it. And the guys who catch us on camera have also been caught the same way.. Lets face it, we are all criminals, the bloody lot of us!
The Law is an Ass if it cannot distinguish between a Real Criminal and a Mis demeanour. Whilst the real criminal often goes unpunished in our modern world because of the rights they are afforded, the Motorist is now literally the "Sitting Target" and the most heinous sort after villain today...
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15134 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:09 pm Post subject: Re: Pigs really do fly!!! At least they do on the A13 in Es
paliz wrote:
Instead of complaining about how much the police are making from speed cameras...here is a thought...don't speed and you won't get caught, and therefore they will not get any of your money! Simple!! :-)
indeed. but even the best drivers can creep over the limit every now and then - you can;t be looking at your speedo all of the time otherwise you'd not see where you were going. police manning the roads is fine as they would be able to 'warn' you that you were a little over the limit and to just watch your speed however a speed camera will either fine or not fine - there's no grey area where benefit of doubt can be used. i think this is the issue most here have with fixed speed cameras...
Joined: Jan 10, 2008 Posts: 56 Location: Telford, West Midlands
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: Police priorities
shricthism wrote:
What is all this about police persecution of motorists? Each year some 3000 people die on UK roads - far more than from terrorism, or any other type of crime.
Your comparison with drivers speeding and offenders carrying out other forms of "crime", such as terrorism, is one I have often heard quoted but a comparison one to the other in my view misses a vital point and that is "intent".
I do not wish to discuss the mentality of a terrorist, even if I had it explained to me I doubt I would understand it, except that by his actions he does demonstrate "intent". On the other hand I have never heard of anyone deliberately setting out in a vehicle with the intention of causing, or being involved in, a road traffic accident. Neither does a pilot with a couple of hundred passengers in his care ever take off with the intention of crashing his plane, perhaps with the loss of his own life, and many others, but nevertheless it happens and this despite a minute forensic examination having taken place into the cause of every previous aircraft accident no matter where in the world.
A death rate of 3,000 a year becomes a scary number only if the millions and millions of accident-free miles and incident-free journeys which take place successfully on our roads every year are ignored. To hope or expect that we can somehow eradicate by roadside cameras or patrolling helicopters the very small percentage of drivers who will contribute to, or be involved in, next year's 3000 death toll is nothing but wishful thinking.
And who are these unfortunate people? They are you and me, of course, or people just like us, who by the turn of an ignition switch are capable of setting in motion some of the carnage we both hope never to be personally involved in. To stop road accidents completely we would have to dis-invent the automobile. No chance, for decades we have been totally hooked.
Joined: Jan 31, 2005 Posts: 87 Location: Staffordshire
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:07 pm Post subject:
What a fascinating debate this is turning into since I questioned the title !
Here's my tuppence worth :
The policing of speeding motorists from the air will NOT have commenced with the intention of raising revenue, but will be intended to enforce the law and promote road safety - I'm all for that
A "Criminal" by popular definiton is someone who has committed or been convicted of a "CRIME", which is often viewed as the more serious types of law contravention that can end up with a prison sentence, whereas the breaking of a lesser law which only attracts a fine, or penalty other than imprisonment, is often referred to as an "OFFENCE".
Speeding, IMHO, is an Offence, not a Crime, and people who break the speed limit are not Criminals, they are Offenders.
As for pilots - they don't have speed limits to break ( They may be instructed by Air Traffic Control to maintain a certain air speed, but I don't think you'll find any prescribed speed limits for the various airways, routes and air traffic zones etc.
However, pilots are governed by just as much - if not more legislation when flying, than they are when driving, and if they cause an accident by breaking the rules, you can bet that they will be prosecuted, and will face losing their licence, ( not to mention the possibility of losing their life ) - just like motoring !
As for valuing a life - ALL human life is precious, and of infinite value, and while I happen to agree that our armed forces are treated pretty abismally in terms of compensation for injury / loss of life etc, isn't this supposed to be a forum about Speed Cameras ? _________________ iPhone SE, TomTom Go 5000, Garmin Zumo XT.
Joined: Dec 12, 2005 Posts: 111 Location: Chipping Sodbury
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:33 pm Post subject:
Actually, I think many people would welcome an increase in the number killed on the roads each year. Just ask anyone who's had a heart or kidney transplant. Road casualties must be a major source of donors.
If the police restrict their activities to catching the really bad examples of driving, then this will be a very positive move, and should be welcomed by us all. Apart from the loss of life and injury and the cost of the damage, we all have to contend with the enormous delays when a serious accident does occur on our motorways.
The accident rate of 3000 deaths a year, has stubbornly refused to budge despite the many improvements in road safety such as seastbelts, ABS, speed limits, road imrovements etc, simply because human beings are prepared to accept a certain level of risk in their lives. Many enjoy risk taking so much they take part in dangerous sports.
The more we are wrapped in cotton wool, the more we will push the boundaries of risk taking. Most of us speed because we genuinely feel it is safe to do so and this behaviour is reinforced in us because we speed regularly and do not have an accident. _________________ Tomtom Go520, App 8.010, Map UK&ROI 810.1870
Joined: Dec 12, 2005 Posts: 111 Location: Chipping Sodbury
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 8:42 pm Post subject:
coconut wrote:
As for pilots - they don't have speed limits to break ( They may be instructed by Air Traffic Control to maintain a certain air speed, but I don't think you'll find any prescribed speed limits for the various airways, routes and air traffic zones etc.
Oh yes they do, 250knots below 10,000ft.
It was quite amusing hearing air traffic control advising pilots of air traffic in the area saying "police helicopter hovering over Barrow Tanks" with the 737 pilots response of "OK I'll watch my speed" _________________ Tomtom Go520, App 8.010, Map UK&ROI 810.1870
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:21 pm Post subject:
In response to the headline and complaints arising. I received a couple of emails whilst checking the backlog from my sick bed this morning and responded that I agreed it was unjustified, fell below our normal editorial standards and would be edited. This was done soon after.
I have spoken with Mike who is in the US and he has explained that he did not mean it to be offensive to Police Officers and wrote it without giving due thought. Because of the time difference he did not see the complaints until early afternoon. Had he seen them earlier he would have acted of his won recourse.
Please continue to debate the issues under discussion here but to those members of law enforcement, please accept our unreserved apology for any offence caused. Unintentional as it was, it should not have happened and we shall ensure it is not repeated. _________________ Darren Griffin
Joined: Jan 31, 2005 Posts: 87 Location: Staffordshire
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:37 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Oh yes they do, 250knots below 10,000ft.
So they do ! - Thanks Navver - Not that it will apply to the Essex Police helicopter, I doubt it can go that fast ( Over 280 MPH approx ) _________________ iPhone SE, TomTom Go 5000, Garmin Zumo XT.
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15134 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:40 pm Post subject: Re: Unsubscribe Me
paliz wrote:
M8TJT wrote:
Exactly. 'For another crime'. The EU think it's wrong to keep DNA of an INOCENT person on the database, but our government know best A database is not just for Christmas, it's for life (or was that a dog )
It is not wrong...if you have nothing to hide, why object? Think of the time being saved for the police if they just checked the DNA database instead of having to use other methods. I would gladly volunteer to have my DNA in the system...
thing is, DNA 'testing' (to keep it simple) is not infallible, unlike the pope allegedly is.
Joined: Aug 22, 2007 Posts: 211 Location: Peterborough
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:11 pm Post subject:
mikealder wrote:
I see nothing wrong with using a copter for law enforcement....
Absolutely Mike - remember the Northumbria police who scrambled their helicopter to get a woman for eating an apple while driving?
We don't want that sort of activity on the road do we?
Read about it HERE
Joined: Dec 12, 2005 Posts: 111 Location: Chipping Sodbury
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:28 pm Post subject:
That's a good one Snudge. Don't the police use hand held radios while driving. I'm sure I've seen it on police camera progs on the telly. do they have full control at all times. _________________ Tomtom Go520, App 8.010, Map UK&ROI 810.1870
Joined: Sep 06, 2006 Posts: 1618 Location: East Hertfordshire
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:36 pm Post subject:
True - DNA testing is not infallible (what is?), especially in practice where errors/sloppy procedures may apply. But DNA analysis itself is proven to be VERY reliable when properly used - more so than fingerprints (and more available at crime scenes).
But I still take great issue with the "if you have nothing to hide ..." argument, which I have expressed a view on in another recent thread (what a life. ). But I do feel strongly about this 'slippery slope' line of argument.
"Nothing to hide" ... from whom? when similar survellance/recording techniques are probably shared between countries like England and (say) Burma (Myanmar I'm told by her indoors)?
It's not necessarily criminal acts where people want a bit of privacy, as you can tell if you meet someone you know in an 'unfamiliar' environment. I'm sure paliz would be more than reluctant to tell ME everything about his life (I hope so, some people aren't ). But actually, I have never encountered anyone who is happy to reveal everything about their personal activities; and why should they? Just think of 'innocent' people who get caught by a major crime surveillance operation in a red light district - have they got anything to hide, from their families, friends? OH YES!! . But not always from the authorities (though they might be a little nervous in this particular example!). And if the information is retained longterm on a central databse ... ?
In short, if you haven't committed any crime, yet still really have NOTHING to hide from ANYONE at all, you are one of the relatively few (and imaginary) people on this planet. I hope you aren't successful in the next General Election _________________ David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360)
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
A database is not just for Christmas, it's for life (or was that a dog 
)
). But I do feel strongly about this 'slippery slope' line of argument.
. But not always from the authorities (though they might be a little nervous in this particular example!). And if the information is retained longterm on a central databse ... ?
