Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
PocketGPS
Web
SatNav,GPS,Navigation
Pocket GPS World - SatNavs | GPS | Speed Cameras: Forums

Pocket GPS World :: View topic - Publicity Stunt Gift Wraps Speed Cameras
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in for private messagesLog in for private messages   Log inLog in 

Publicity Stunt Gift Wraps Speed Cameras
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> Non-Technical Speed Camera Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:21 am    Post subject: Publicity Stunt Gift Wraps Speed Cameras Reply with quote

pocketgpsworld.comIt's an old story but one I've only just heard of and it made me smile so much I thought you should all hear of it!

Early one morning with the aid of company employees, 200 speed cameras across the Netherlands were gift wrapped and thus prevented from operating and issuing tickets!

This was part of a publicity stunt to advertise an energy drink. Quite what Dutch Police thought of the stunt is unknown but once the stunt was discovered the wraps were quickly removed os the cameras could resume their fine issuing.

The story started me wondering what the response would be if a company did the same thing in the UK. I can't imagine our authorities taking this lightly at all and no doubt those responsible would be facing some charge or other but it would be a great idea for one of the many anti-speedcam groups to copy.

Rather than destroying the cameras, I can see the anti-speedcam groups receiving a great deal more support if they were to gift wrap them, or perhaps wrap them in a duvet to keep them warm during this cold snap? You could even fit them with very dark sunglasses for the summer!


_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mostdom
Pocket GPS Moderator
Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jul 10, 2006
Posts: 1964
Location: Surrey, UK.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cool Inciting a rebellion again I see, mr Griffin.
_________________
Dom

HERE LIES PND May it rest in peace.
Navigon 7310/iPhone Navigon&Copilot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
G1LIW
Lifetime Member


Joined: Jun 19, 2006
Posts: 212
Location: Sahrf Lunnon ;)

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't even know what offence they could charge someone with - it's not criminal damage, as you're not destroying the camera, or damaging it: You're just putting a cover on it to keep the frost off Wink

Link to the UK Statute Law Online Database: Criminal Damage Act 1971 (c.48)
_________________
Roger, G1LIW
Google Pixel 3a XL Android Smartphone | SatNav Sygic for Android | Waze for Android | CamerAlert for Android | Blog http://rogersblant.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is bound to be some offence of 'interfering with' or 'obstruction' that would fit the bill nicely Confused
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Pocket GPS Staff


Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15125
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

if cameras are there for safety then you could be done under some random health & safety act for putting the public in danger Very Happy

MaFt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
s3dbw
Regular Visitor


Joined: May 07, 2004
Posts: 203

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite mild by Dutch standards, the usually use chain saws, expanding foam or just set fire to them
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Tired Old Man


Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14888
Location: Keynsham

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Conspiracy to pervert the course of Justice.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
G1LIW
Lifetime Member


Joined: Jun 19, 2006
Posts: 212
Location: Sahrf Lunnon ;)

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm... yeah, that'd do it, alright. Evil or Very Mad
_________________
Roger, G1LIW
Google Pixel 3a XL Android Smartphone | SatNav Sygic for Android | Waze for Android | CamerAlert for Android | Blog http://rogersblant.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JimmyTheHand
Frequent Visitor


Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Posts: 386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

G1LIW wrote:
I don't even know what offence they could charge someone with


they'll probably find something under the anti-terrorist laws this government has brought in Evil or Very Mad

but most likely "Obstructing a Police Officer" - which I believe is what they have prosecuted people under for warning of speed traps
_________________
J.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JimmyTheHand wrote:
but most likely "Obstructing a Police Officer" - which I believe is what they have prosecuted people under for warning of speed traps

That would require the presence of a Police Officer though. A Gatso doesn't need one Wink
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
JimmyTheHand
Frequent Visitor


Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Posts: 386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren wrote:
That would require the presence of a Police Officer though. A Gatso doesn't need one Wink

A gatso may be able to run unattended - but there is likely to be some police involvement in the process, so interfering with a Gatso is liable to regarded as obstructing a Police Officer.
_________________
J.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can assure you that it could not be used in this case but it's not that important Smile
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
JimmyTheHand
Frequent Visitor


Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Posts: 386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren wrote:
but it's not that important Smile


You are right it is not important - they will find something to prosecute if they catch someone .

Darren wrote:
I can assure you that it could not be used in this case


Sorry not trying to be rude - but why is your assurance worth anything? It was used against Charles Glendinning (though rejected on appeal and Lords through lack of proof it did anything). Since the law predates such technology I suspect it would need a case to interpret whether the duty aspects can cover such equipment.
_________________
J.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JimmyTheHand wrote:
Sorry not trying to be rude - but why is your assurance worth anything?

Well as even the case you refer to describes, for the offence to be complete, the presence of a police constable is required.

No Police officer, no offence of obstruction possible, simple as that.
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
JimmyTheHand
Frequent Visitor


Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Posts: 386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren wrote:
No Police officer, no offence of obstruction possible, simple as that.

I am not so sure - If a Police Officer (or a department run by them) has a duty of dealing speeding motorist recorded by a Gatso - then disabling the Gatso might come under -
Quote:
Wilful obstruction of a police officer means doing any act which makes it more difficult for the officer to carry out his/her lawful duty


being one of those regarded as the police as an prime target to use anti-terrorist laws on - i.e. an amateur photographer, I have no doubt they will twist legalisation beyond what was intended as they require
_________________
J.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message







Posted: Today    Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> Non-Technical Speed Camera Discussions All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
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

Make a Donation



CamerAlert Database

Click here for the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database

Download Speed Camera Database
22.034 (27 Mar 24)



WORLDWIDE SPEED CAMERA SPOTTERS WANTED!

Click here to submit camera positions to the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database


12mth Subscriber memberships awarded every week for verified new camera reports!

Submit Speed Camera Locations Now


CamerAlert Apps



iOS QR Code






Android QR Code







© Terms & Privacy


GPS Shopping