Safe Speed Forums

Hi,

I was travelling north on the M6 in Cumbria and 2 months later I got some nice photo's of me at the wheel travelling at apparently 84mph. My question is is it still legal to get your photo taken from the front as I remember that it was against liberal rights.

Appreciate some advice, or have I no comeback.

Thanks
S

ROFLMAO

You are living in a country where they can lock you up indefinately because they think you might be possibly connected with a terrorist.

And you think they would have a problem with taking your photo in a public place?

Just think yourself lucky they sent you photo's, most people have to fight to get any evidence of their alledged crime.

You need to get over to Pepipoo for some sound legal advice.

True, True.

It was just I remember some incident that this boss was caught from the front but it was not his wife in the passenger seat and all hell broke loose when the wife found out.

He won his case as a matter of fact, unfortunatly the divorce is not going well.

Oh dear, this 'police state' thing really does take on a dimension of its own at times doesn't it? What are the real chances of being locked up on suspicion of terrorism or connection thereto? No, forget all about the exaggeration for effect, the chances are practically zero aren't they, they don't just go locking any old soul up do they? And I'm pretty sure we'd be happy to see the powers granted under the terrorism act brought to bear if it later transpired there was due reason to do so. In fact we'd probably then (with 20:20 hindsight in our favour) be more angered if they weren't used. So lets put this hyperbolic specious nonsense to one side shall we?
We actually live in a country where one is free to say and do practically anything one wants, some might argue far too free in fact. Go to Germany and try arguing with a police officer who is issuing you a speeding ticket and see how far that gets you
If we distill any evidence gathering mechanism down to the basics, we could argue most are in some way an infringement of our basic 'human rights'. But we've lost our sense of scale and proportion on this whole issue haven't we? It's now become an excuse for dodging ones responsibilities. After all, what would be our main reason for objecting to a photograph depicting ourselves 'speeding'? We can't argue that it wasn't us can we? So lets look for an avenue of misdirection then

That went down the pan when CCTV cropped up everywhere

saw something that made by blood boil on the news the othere day. It was about banning hooded tops and baseball caps from shopping centres on the basis that people can't be identified on cctv.

Basicaly they were saying if you are law abiding youi won't mind being filmed everywhere you go.....how synister is that..

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

It isn't sinister at all. Without using Orwellian references about what might happen, why should it it be?
If the constant surveilance by CCTV cameras means the chances of identifying thugs causing trouble increases, stick more of em up IMHO. But then again, I appear not to conform to 'it's a police state, big brother is watching' train of thought.

RigPig,

'They' have had CCTV at football grounds for years - yet no one seems to ever get nicked for all the obscene chanting and gesticulation that goes on; that's aside of the violence of course.

No, no, no... far easier to develop a 35mm film with a number plate on it somewhere and just ask for money.

Motorists are an easy nick, football hooligans ain't. It is really quite simple.

_________________
Although I used to consider myself to be a "reasonable man", the law just sees me as a criminal... My uncontrolled anti-social activities solely include the undeniable fact I usually drive my car at or just below the 85th percentile.

But it does not help. I have not seen evidence that it reduces crime. How many offences actialy get solved by cctv....my daughter got her phone nicked the other day in a shopping centre covered by cctv. I don't think the even bothered to check the film. Not important enough...

I do mind being watched all the time. Why should I. We are the most watched society in the world and does it make us any safer......NO

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Actually, such footage is constantly being used to identify the source of trouble in football grounds. The fact that you've never heard of it, doesn't mean its not happening.




I agree, it's useless if evidence collected by such means goes unscrutinised. So lets get it sorted out and used such evidence to begin reaming these scrotes until they squeal.

You know what the score is, Gizmo (or should I say 3 score). Having to pay someone to do a job where there is no financial return (ie just provide a service, plain and simple) is no longer a police target or ambition.

To get policed in this country, you need a wallet. preferably one stuffed with 3 score wraps!

_________________
Although I used to consider myself to be a "reasonable man", the law just sees me as a criminal... My uncontrolled anti-social activities solely include the undeniable fact I usually drive my car at or just below the 85th percentile.

Of course not. Silly me, eh?

Exceed the speed limit on a Monday, get the NIP no later than Thursday morning - and having filled it in, the "conditional offer psst, no questions asked within another week.

Spout the most violent and offensive verbal garbage and effluent throughout one season, get watched the next and the one after, and only then get pulled in....

It's not like the police don't know who's sitting in most of these seats! Part of getting tickets is having to use a credit card of some description! Tracing these people invoilves looking at film and then asking questions. Getting money from the motorist is as easy as sending out a NIP.

The higher echelons of the police service are CASH motivated. They aren't interested in helping people unless there's money in it.

They see us as wallets on wheels. Quick cash. Literally a fast buck, except that quite a few of us aren't really going that fast - slow enough in fact that they have to keep dropping the limits!

_________________
Although I used to consider myself to be a "reasonable man", the law just sees me as a criminal... My uncontrolled anti-social activities solely include the undeniable fact I usually drive my car at or just below the 85th percentile.

You'd be happy to have a surveillance camera routinely checking all the rooms of your house then? I mean, you don't do anything illegal there soi clearly you've nothing to hide.

CCTV is policing on the cheap, but the problem is that you get what you pay for. CCTV doesn't stop thugs mugging people up in town centres because they know they are virtually unidentifiable from the film. Meanwhile we take the Bobbies off the beat and crime goes up.

Similarly, cameras snapping motorists speeding just aren't making the roads safer are they? Again, we get the quality of policing we are prepared to pay for.

So for me it's ultimately about effectiveness, but civil liberties are as good a justification as any for stopping the nonsense and going back to doing things properly, which means real policeman providing a crime-fighting presence on our streets, and real policeman patrolling our roads looking for unsafe drivers.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

There's a massive difference between CCTV in public places, simple surveillance, not a lot different from having a beat copper standing watching and the astounding invasion of privacy that a camera in one's house would entail.

I have no objection to being "on camera" in a public place, but I certainly wouldn't want anyone observing what I get up to in my own home - especially her husband.. (Ooh what a give-away!!)..


On the basis that they're probably going to take them away for the incredibly important duty of filling in loads of paperwork anyway; something, however ineffective, is better than nothing.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

A whole world of difference if you ask me, the main difference is that the beat copper sees things in context, a camera doesn't.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

There is a world of difference...Most CCTV camera are un-manned.

How many times have you seen crimes being comitted on CCTV. Do you think that would happen if a copper was watching there.

I saw on TV News the other day CCTV footage a guy getting beaten up...lasted for ages. and do you know what....nobody came to his aid. Because no body was actialy watching at the time. This is another issue of CCTV, footage is sold to media companies so othere can be "entertained" by others suffering.

If you are getting mugged would you rather be within earshot of a police oficer or be watched by a camera.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

And the copper isn't going to pass a tape of you around his mates or flog it to BskyB.

You know JT, I would have credited you of all people with the perspicity to see the difference between home and shopping mall. It's not about what I may or may not get up to thats important, it's about the criminal activity of others. I don't have yobs walking around my front room, there's only my family. In the shopping mall they are there aplenty; if I get caught walking past as the CCTV is monitoring them I don't care a hoot. Who is likely to be sufficiently interested in my insignificant little existence to want to put the footage to any sinister use? I am neither paranoid nor sufficiently self-important to believe that it would be.



I agree that CCTV footage isn't used or monitored to the degree that it should be. If it was, then just a few police officers could be deployed to cover an area that would take dozens if they only had their eyes and ears to rely upon.




To return to the original point about forward facing speed cameras, it would seem from many of the above comments that the main objection to their use is the perception that other types of video or still footage aren't used to the same extent- a red herring or 'Two Wrongs Make a Right' logical fallacy. What if they were used to their fullest, would we object so strongly then? Supposing we had sufficient police on the streets backed up by properly monitored CCTV. Would we care as much about the civil liberties of the young thug caught full on camera punching some unsuspecting passer-by in the face and nicking their mobile phone?

1) we don't have suffient Police on the streets..and we never will

2) CCTV is not properly monitored...and it never will be

3) Thugs are hardly ever caught because of cameras.

So as usual the fact does not prove the theory, and EVERYONE loses out.

Civil liberties ALWAYS lose out in the name of crime detection (I use that word as opposed to prevention)

If 1, 2 and 3 above were not true then I would not argue with you.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

"Hardly ever" does not = "never", therefore there is some (however slight) advantage to crime control in having cameras v not having cameras.


I agree with (1) and (2), but the opportunity is there to do something about it if there's sufficient will amongst the populace / legislature. (3) is self-contradictory.

What I don't understand is what loss is incurred of my civil liberty by my having been on a CCTV surveillance system? Like Rigpig, I'm not sufficiently paranoid to worry about what "they" might be doing with my image.. OK, if they catch me slipping on ice and falling on my arse then flog the tape to "You've been framed" I might be a tad miffed at missing out on an appearance fee, but that's about it.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

That is not my concern at the moment. But it is a part of an on-going process where we are increasingly being subject surveilence.

The fact that some places are banning head gear for because we cannot be recognised on cctv is a very worrying trend. The effect is very corrosive. So now you cannot wear a hat or a hooded top in a public place, maybe to you that is not a problem but where does it end.

I wonder how long it will be before sunglasses or hats are banned for drivers so front facing cameras can isentify faces....

you can justify ANYTHING in the name of crime prevention....how would you feel about being tracked 24/7 by an RF tag. After all, if you are doing nothing wrong you have no objection do you.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills