Speed Cameras: what offence would this be?

atrixblue.-MFR-.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W61jk4-t5A0


I think this a perfectly tangible question:
Why is a civilian operating a police marked vehicle, it has south wales police livery and stickers on it is supplied by the south wales police force for the GoSafe safety partnership.


He was perfectly entitled to FILM the civilian, but yet when police turn up at the door she refuses to ID wearing NO collar number refuses remove her foot and insults him about his mental health and makes threats to take things further. take things further how? by what charge and why didn't she mention such charge to him or arrest him there and then.

Spicy_McHaggis

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W61jk4-t5A0


I think this a perfectly tangible question:
Why is a civilian operating a police marked vehicle, it has south wales police livery and stickers on it is supplied by the south wales police force for the GoSafe safety partnership.


He was perfectly entitled to FILM the civilian, but yet when police turn up at the door she refuses to ID wearing NO collar number refuses remove her foot and insults him about his mental health and makes threats to take things further. take things further how? by what charge and why didn't she mention such charge to him or arrest him there and then.

I'll put the question straight back to you to think about.

Why can't they?

After all it's being used for police purposes, they are employed by the partnership and are authorised to operated the equipment. What have they done wrong?

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

I'll put the question straight back to you to think about.

Why can't they?

After all it's being used for police purposes, they are employed by the partnership and are authorised to operated the equipment. What have they done wrong?

I ask you this to think about, There is NO REQUIREMENT to use a police vehicle or a vehicle that is not a police supplied vehicle to be livered in police markings for the use of speed enforcement.




So why the use of such livery? why give the WRONG impression they are manned by police when they are not?



I was not allowed to use a Welsh Water van when i working in contract with welsh water, because it gave people the wrong impression of who i was working for eventhough i did the same job in the same building as welshwater, i was employed by another company on the welsh water contract.


What gives them GOSAFE and others the explicit right to drive a police vehicle if it not a requirement to do so?

Spicy_McHaggis

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

I ask you this to think about, There is NO REQUIREMENT to use a police vehicle or a vehicle that is not a police supplied vehicle to be livered in police markings for the use of speed enforcement.




So why the use of such livery? why give the WRONG impression they are manned by police when they are not?



I was not allowed to use a Welsh Water van when i working in contract with welsh water, because it gave people the wrong impression of who i was working for eventhough i did the same job in the same building as welshwater, i was employed by another company on the welsh water contract.


What gives them GOSAFE and others the explicit right to drive a police vehicle if it not a requirement to do so?

Since you've not given a lawful reason why they can't. I'll give to the simple answer.

Because they can.

brat

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

No need now, Mr Cameron's stopped his little money earner and is now robbing brat in the pension and crp dept so at little payback has crept in.

If you only knew... but then your form is to shoot your mouth off despite your lack of knowledge.

The policy changes of the last 10 years has allowed me to work to 60 (perhaps beyond) and get my full pension, which I wouldn't otherwise have managed. That has been a huge bonus for my family. It has also provided me with an incentive to maintain an excellent level of fitness into middle age, because I need to pass 9.4 at any time on a beep test to maintain my specialism.

The cutbacks of the last few years has meant that our understaffed department has had to rely on overtime to function. I generally refuse more overtime than I accept, there are plenty others who could make better use of it than me. I prefer family time and bike riding time.:)

Combining that with shift enhancement, FLO, firearms and CIU on call allowances, I've never been so handsomely rewarded.

But why do you choose to be so vitriolic and vindictive? Why do you always feel the need to get one over on people, or to try to hurt in other ways when you can't lord it over them on points of law?
Life is too short for that kind of unhappiness. :grouphug:

Spicy_McHaggis

brat wrote: »

If you only knew... but then your form is to shoot your mouth off despite your lack of knowledge.

The policy changes of the last 10 years has allowed me to work to 60 (perhaps beyond) and get my full pension, which I wouldn't otherwise have managed. That has been a huge bonus for my family. It has also provided me with an incentive to maintain an excellent level of fitness into middle age, because I need to pass 9.4 at any time on a beep test to maintain my specialism.

The cutbacks of the last few years has meant that our understaffed department has had to rely on overtime to function. I generally refuse more overtime than I accept, there are plenty others who could make better use of it than me. I prefer family time and bike riding time.:)

Combining that with shift enhancement, FLO, firearms and CIU on call allowances, I've never been so handsomely rewarded.

But why do you choose to be so vitriolic and vindictive? Why do you always feel the need to get one over on people, or to try to hurt in other ways when you can't lord it over them on points of law?
Life is too short for that kind of unhappiness. :grouphug:

SPP taken away.
CRP now halved, soon to go.
Pension from 11 to 14%.
Shift allowance £1.76 an hours after 8pm is hardly a bonus.
If you lose the 87 pension scheme in April and want to go before 55 the new scheme is deferred until state pension age.
Rest day overtime at double time gone.

Go on tell me I know nothing about it.:rotfl:

brat

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

SPP taken away.
CRP now halved, soon to go.
Pension from 11 to 14%.
Shift allowance £1.76 an hours after 8pm is hardly a bonus.
If you lose the 87 pension scheme in April and want to go before 55 the new scheme is deferred until state pension age.
Rest day overtime at double time gone.

Go on tell me I know nothing about it.:rotfl:

I know you know that! Anyone can Google, although I'm sure you have a more intimate knowledge than that. You're welcome to share it, although I don't think you have the bottle.

However, you don't know my circumstance.

Yes, I lost £2650 per annum in Special Priority Payments, yes, we're losing over £1000 per annum in Competency Related Threshold Payment. Yes, my pension payments are increasing by about £1200 per annum. Yes, we have lost about £5000 per annum to inflation over the past five years...

...and despite all that, my annual income is more than it ever has been

But I know that others in the private sector have taken greater risks and greater salary hits than me over the last five years. I'm grateful that the pension I'm paying a fortune towards will provide me with a comfortable retirement, which is reassuring. Others don't have that luxury or security, and I feel for them...

...which is why I find it a little unpleasant that you should seek to take pleasure from believing that others are suffering under the recent recession.

Shame on you Pepper.

Spicy_McHaggis

brat wrote: »

I know you know that! Anyone can Google, although I'm sure you have a more intimate knowledge than that. You're welcome to share it, although I don't think you have the bottle.

However, you don't know my circumstance.

Yes, I lost £2650 per annum in Special Priority Payments, yes, we're losing over £1000 per annum in Competency Related Threshold Payment. Yes, my pension payments are increasing by about £1200 per annum. Yes, we have lost about £5000 per annum to inflation over the past five years...

...and despite all that, my annual income is more than it ever has been

But I know that others in the private sector have taken greater risks and greater salary hits than me over the last five years. I'm grateful that the pension I'm paying a fortune towards will provide me with a comfortable retirement, which is reassuring. Others don't have that luxury or security, and I feel for them...

...which is why I find it a little unpleasant that you should seek to take pleasure from believing that others are suffering under the recent recession.

Shame on you Pepper.

If you joined post September 1994 and were more than 10 from retirement in April 2012. Shafted on two accounts.

brat

Spicy_McHaggis wrote: »

If you joined post September 1994 and were more than 10 from retirement in April 2012. Shafted on two accounts.

Correct, but neither apply in my case.

What are you trying to say?

matttye

Car_54 wrote: »

I'd suggest that if you put a bag over the camera the intention is clearly to prevent its use for some (undefined) time to come.

So if the bag is put on at midnight, and the officers spot this at 0800 the next morning and see cars speeding past , the conclusion must be that the bringing of those 0800 offenders to justice has been hampered by the miscreant's action eight hours earlier.

I agree. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying but perhaps im not explaining it well.

It would be difficult if not impossible to prove that people have sped past the camera if officers only arrive AFTER the speeding has taken place.

Eg: bag is put on the camera at midnight, speeders go past at 04:00 and officers arrive at 08:00. How would they know about the 04:00 speeders? Would have to be another witness, or another camera that filmed the event.