Magistrate insanity

On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 08:36:53 GMT, CT wrote:

frag wrote:

In article ,
says...

frag wrote:

Also cars very rarely jump red lights round here.

Blimey! I see several cars jump red lights several times a day.

Move to a more roundabouty area.

Most of the roundabouts I use on my daily commute are traffic-light
controlled, and it's where I see most of the RLJs!

*ding*

Sometimes at one particular local roundybout, the plod come along to catch
such a person. They generally don't get a chance to get the donuts out
before someone jumps the lights.

On 1 Feb, 13:13, David Hansen wrote:


IIRC a light was only considered to be red for motorists after it
had been red for a few seconds (3 or 5 seconds ring a bell). Had
they actually recorded the true figures they would be higher.


Sheer fantasy on your part. What do you think the *amber* light is for?

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 10:16:13 -0000, "Beav"
wrote:


"Ian Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Jan, Tim Downie wrote:

If a penalty can be only be applied to someone with a driving
licence, how can it be fair or reaonable?

Ypou get points even if you don't have a licence - there's a mechanism
by which the points accumulate even if you don't have a licence. When
you get a licence, it will have the points on. It's the way under-age
joyriders (for example) get points. It's set out in Section 45 of the
Road Traffic Offenders Act, which has such phrasing as "whether he is
at the time the holder of a licence or not" and so on.

No use if the criminal has no intention of ever getting a licence though.

Apparently if you have 'banked' points in Germany they don't vanish
after a set period of time, you have to actually get a German licence
and then the four years (or whatever it is over there) start and
eventually you either get banned for having too many points or you
have a clean licence.

The obvious worry for certain people is that eventually they'll have
too many points in the bank and the next time they get stopped by
German plod they'll be sitting in a cell until they can appear in
court and they'll not be driving home.

Andy Bonwick wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 10:16:13 -0000, "Beav"
wrote:


"Ian Smith" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 30 Jan, Tim Downie
wrote:

If a penalty can be only be applied to someone with a driving
licence, how can it be fair or reaonable?

Ypou get points even if you don't have a licence - there's a
mechanism by which the points accumulate even if you don't have a
licence. When you get a licence, it will have the points on. It's
the way under-age joyriders (for example) get points. It's set out
in Section 45 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act, which has such
phrasing as "whether he is at the time the holder of a licence or
not" and so on.

No use if the criminal has no intention of ever getting a licence
though.

Apparently if you have 'banked' points in Germany they don't vanish
after a set period of time, you have to actually get a German licence
and then the four years (or whatever it is over there) start and
eventually you either get banned for having too many points or you
have a clean licence.

The obvious worry for certain people is that eventually they'll have
too many points in the bank and the next time they get stopped by
German plod they'll be sitting in a cell until they can appear in
court and they'll not be driving home.

Hmm multiple licences could be a good plan

--
Hog

On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:52:58 +0000, steve auvache
wrote:

In article , David Hansen
writes

IIRC a light was only considered to be red for motorists after it
had been red for a few seconds (3 or 5 seconds ring a bell). Had
they actually recorded the true figures they would be higher.

No, I am afraid that is complete and utter ****ing bollox. A red light
is a red light from the moment it turns red, the very instant, not some
arbitrary value placed on it by you or some other idiot.

Surely what matters is when the red light reaches the observer? So
you have to factor C into your equations.
--
Champ
We declare that the splendour of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed.
ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo
neal at champ dot org dot uk

In article , Champ
writes
On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:52:58 +0000, steve auvache
wrote:

In article , David Hansen
writes

IIRC a light was only considered to be red for motorists after it
had been red for a few seconds (3 or 5 seconds ring a bell). Had
they actually recorded the true figures they would be higher.

No, I am afraid that is complete and utter ****ing bollox. A red light
is a red light from the moment it turns red, the very instant, not some
arbitrary value placed on it by you or some other idiot.

Surely what matters is when the red light reaches the observer? So
you have to factor C into your equations.

Ignorance of the laws of the universe are no excuse.


--
steve auvache

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 10:16:13 -0000, Beav wrote:

"Ian Smith" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 30 Jan, Tim Downie wrote:

If a penalty can be only be applied to someone with a driving
licence, how can it be fair or reaonable?

Ypou get points even if you don't have a licence - there's a mechanism
by which the points accumulate even if you don't have a licence. When
you get a licence, it will have the points on. It's the way under-age
joyriders (for example) get points. It's set out in Section 45 of the
Road Traffic Offenders Act, which has such phrasing as "whether he is
at the time the holder of a licence or not" and so on.

No use if the criminal has no intention of ever getting a licence though.

But you can equally argue that a ban is no use if the criminal has no
intention of complying with it, or even that fines are no use if the
criminal is rich.

The penalty is applied in the defined manner. The objection that you
can't apply the penalty to someone without a licence is simply not
true. Whether the criminal in question finds the penalty to be a
hardship of greater or lesser degree is a different question.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

On 02/02/2010 12:59, Andy Bonwick wrote:
On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 10:16:13 -0000, "Beav"
wrote:


"Ian wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 30 Jan, Tim wrote:

If a penalty can be only be applied to someone with a driving
licence, how can it be fair or reaonable?

Ypou get points even if you don't have a licence - there's a mechanism
by which the points accumulate even if you don't have a licence. When
you get a licence, it will have the points on. It's the way under-age
joyriders (for example) get points. It's set out in Section 45 of the
Road Traffic Offenders Act, which has such phrasing as "whether he is
at the time the holder of a licence or not" and so on.

No use if the criminal has no intention of ever getting a licence though.

Apparently if you have 'banked' points in Germany they don't vanish
after a set period of time, you have to actually get a German licence
and then the four years (or whatever it is over there) start and
eventually you either get banned for having too many points or you
have a clean licence.

The obvious worry for certain people is that eventually they'll have
too many points in the bank and the next time they get stopped by
German plod they'll be sitting in a cell until they can appear in
court and they'll not be driving home.

****ing Nazis.

Nige wrote:

****ing Nazis.

Apposite:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6fVf...eature=related

--
Pip: B12

In article , (Nige)
wrote:

****ing Nazis.

How do you know - were you watching?

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981