Safe Speed Forums

Just noticed in there it says penalties for faillure to identify a driver are going to double from 3 to 6 points! It also mentions a plan to ban radar detectors within a year. GPS based ones are going to be left untouched.

I am wondering if the new freedom of information act could be used to demand to know which cameras are live and which are dead. Or perhaps we could try the tack that all cameras must be 'live' and SCPs are risking lives by not having fully operational cameras 24/7.... Hmm actually would it be possible to prosecute an SCP under health and safety legislation if someone sped passed a camera as it was clearly dead and then harmed someone because of their speed? These blasted SCPS are constantly blowing their own trumpets saying how these stupid things cut accidents so how about we hang them with their own rope?


Time to get a bumper sticker which says ' drive safely, stare at your speedo'

Why doesn't this fresh example of creeping fascism surprise me? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that points were supposed to be applied to a licence in response to some activity deemed potentially dangerous to other road users. How the hell can refusing to identify the driver of a vehicle be deemed, by any stretch of the imagination, to constitute a danger? What if you honestly can't remember who was driving on a particular day? Is forgetfulness a traffic hazard now?

I'm honestly beginning to believe that an openly fascist regime would be preferable to the death by a thousand cuts we're enduring now. At least the trains might run on time (having them run at all would be something).

Under a Police Act of 2002 ... they can ban you from driving for any public order offence ... which was why the pensioner received a ban for simply warning drivers of speed trap ahead

Off topic - but related in a way.... The ID CARD!

£2500 fine for not telling them who you are in the first place ...

£1000 fine for failing to renew, informing of change of address, and heaven help you if you lose it!

Whilst you are waiting for the replacement to arrive... you become a NON-CITIZEN....

Forbidden to see your GP, NHS dentist, pick up a prescription from the chemist, sign on dole, sign for your old age pension ...all in the name of your protection from a terrorist (who will have the legal documents anyway ... it just will not be his/her real name that's all!

Stasis or Nazis? See very little difference here. As per usual .. normal law abiding folk will suffer ....... and before basingmate starts on the "Nothing to hide/nothing to fear" bit.... OK ... but what if the government changes to something similar to Honecker's style of leadership? Or Saddam's or Mugabe's?

Come to think of it though .... Tone is modelling himself on these......

Most feared words in Whitehall are allegedly "Tony Wants!"

Maybe this will be dead on arrival. If the ECHR ruling comes first..

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

It probably won't matter what the ECHR decides. Britain usually reserves the right to opt out of any regulations or ignore any rulings that might mean it has to remove it boot from the face of the people.

Remember the "37.5 hour" working directive that was supposed to save us all from slavery? I don't know about the rest of you, but all it meant for me was that my employment contract now contains a provision whereby I "voluntarily" waive my rights under the directive. So much for my rights.

It's 48 hours, not 37.5 hours, btw, and even that is averaged out over an 18-week period.

You are entirely within your rights to strike out such a clause within an employment contract, and your employer is following extremely poor HR practice to include it within the standard contract rather than as a separate document.

If your employer takes exception to you refusing to opt out of the Working Time Directive, then it seems to me they're the sort of employer you really don't want to work for.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

IIRC, it is illegal (yes - a criminal offence) to attempt to persuade employees to opt out of the working time directive, and that doing so must be a *completely* free-will thing. Including it as a part of a contract of employment - even if it is a strike-through option - I would think would mean the firm is skating on very thin ice.

Seem to remember that certain people were not included in the working time regs. Emergency services and other essential types, presumably military too. "Sorry sarge, we can't fight today, we've done a 49 hour average over the last quarter" I guess this also includes the poor old plods so they can't put the finger up when all leave is cancelled to deal with potential Mayday rioting in London, as well as your stereotypical junior doctor who does so many hours per week that they're running on caffeine by Thursday lunchtime.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Yep, lots of exemptions, fishermen (though most can't take their boats out enough to break the 48hr week) and anyone employed in a "family" business (i.e. employed by a family member).

My employer tried to get me to opt out of the 48hr week, I politely but firmly pointed out there was no need as I had never actually exceeded the limits. Got to protect your rights (the few we have left).

One last thing, if your employment has a seasonal element then you can average over six months.