From: Dave Reay, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Oh, and by the way, Dave, a little piece of education
>for you. The revenue from all your beloved speed
>cameras goes to the treasury. The Police don't
>get any of it! Strange but true. Another thing......
>you must have got a speeding ticket when you were a
>child, this might explain your fixation.
I beg to differ, but the police in the North East ARE being allowed to
keep a large percentage of speeding fines to plough back into the
purchase of more cameras. I do not know if this a local arrangement in
the form of a "trial" or whether it is a countrywide practice. Yes I did
get a ticket for speeding, but that was in 1982, and considering that I
am a field service engineer covering about 30,000 miles a year that is
not a bad record. Half a million miles without a speeding ticket! are
you not impressed? cos I bloody well am. The reason I am fixated with
speed cameras is due to the methodology adopted by the police in the
Northumbria region, which seems to be that if you are not capturing
enough speeders, then lower the speed limit and then stick a camera
right where you know they will be speeding. I.E. just after the brow of
a hill, when the engine has the load released and naturally speeds up,
you have to be quick to prevent the car exceeding the speed limit, or
the transition point from a 70 limit to a 50 limit. These people are not
criminals, they are just a bit slow to react to arbitrary changes in
speed limits, most people take their foot off the throttle and allow a
natural slowing of the vehicle. During the finite time taken for wind
resistance to slow them to the legal limit they are breaking the law,
but Northumbria police seem to be very adept at placing their speed
cameras to capture such events, this is not "good police work" but is
bordering on entrapment. There is also the "Big Brother Is Watching You"
syndrome, but that is a whole new bag of shite!
Taken together with other aspects of police work that do not sit right,
then the police are setting themselves against the general public and
are reaping a backwash that may or may not be justified. Shit Happens!
This is not a personal attack and I hope you do not see it as such, but
you are trying to defend the indefensible, the handgun ban, the
persecution of the motorist, the abysmal clean up rate of crimes (you
have to admit that 17% is abysmal) coupled to the feeling that the
police have become far too politicised and have sided with the
government against the people, then you have a recipe for discontent
which is being displayed within this N.G. We all know that there is a
side to police work that we could not handle, that is not in dispute.
What is in dispute is whether or not the police should have protection
that the average person is not allowed, that includes having firearms
for protection when entering a situation that could be hazardous to
youre life expectancy. Many ordinary citizens are put in dangerous
situations due to the requirements of their occupation such as carrying
large sums of money too and from the bank, they should be allowed to
chose whether they carry the means to protect themselves from criminals.
Without that choice we become a nation of victims, where anyone can take
anything you own by the simple expedient of being better armed than
youreself. When the criminal is unsure if he "outguns" you, he will err
on the side of (his)safety and avoid you, but if he knows for sure you
are unarmed then you are just prey for the taking!
--
Dave Reay
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
