Yet again, the Government claim something is getting better whilst those in the know say otherwise. This time, it is attacks on firemen, (or firefighters, as we call them in these sensitive times. Tell that to my personager though).

Attacking fire crew when they are attending an incident appears to now be a recreational activity for some of the lowlife scum that pass for human beings in this third world country of ours. It isn’t confined to the Brigade either, Joan the Paramedic told me that it happens to Ambulances as well.

“Someone should pass a law…” I hear the moral majority cry. Well they did, a private members bill eventually became the Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act 2006. passing into law on February 20th 2007 by Statutory Instrument SI 2007/153 (click on the footnote 1 to see the actual act).

So, we’ve passed a law, and it has got worse. Why is that?

Well, pardon my ignorance, but wasn’t assaulting people already a criminal offence? Surely the only thing this act achieves is to raise the bar on what sanctions the Judiciary can apply.

A person guilty of an offence under this Act is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

What is a level 5 fine?up to £5000 The sort of people doing this probably don’t have £5,000 so it is hardly an incentive to stop. What it really needs is to be policed vigorously, like it should have been in the first place. (I imagine the legendary Ray Mallon had it well under control in his time in Cleveland Police Force).

Of course, the Police are somewhat under-resourced, on account of the intensive Biro work required in 21st Century Policing. So, instead, I’d suggest to Fire Brigades that have this sort of trouble that they use their hoses as water cannon, and add an indelible dye so that the tossers carry the mark of cain with them for several weeks afterwards and the scuffers can round them up at leisure.

Before the hand wringing Liberals complain about infringing the human rights of these poor deprived children who aren’t to blame because society is, I say spherical and plural to that. With rights go responsibilities and they need to take the consequences of their actions.

A few years ago I started reading a number of mailing lists about how the EU was eroding our freedoms with its crushing centralisation. After a while, it got so depressing that I quietly unsubscribed myself from them all, saving my reading for the Blogosphere and my bi-monthly copy of Freedom TODAY.

Anyway, I was surfing round some newsfeeds this morning when I saw this headline…

European Union set to ban patio heaters to help save the planet

Admittedly it is the Daily Mail and it hasn’t made it onto the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation yet, but it is starting to pop up around the Web. You can probably guess my reaction:

What a bunch of Bansturbators!

My swearing out load was on reading the article- I said “Oh, for Fucks Sake!” and I’m probably not alone in doing this today.

I noticed via The Poor Mouth today that Jodrell Bank is to be considered a World Heritage Site. We visited it five years ago, the Sunday after New Year, a day etched on my memory, as well as my driving license.

The trip there & back was unremarkable, but a few days later, something unpleasant turned up on my doormat, in a brown envelope. It was a NIP, or Notice of Intended Prosecution. My vehicle had been caught by a speed camera doing 89 MPH in a 70 MPH zone on the M62 Swinton. I now needed to confirm who the driver was.

Shock! Nicked! I drive to the conditions and frequently exceed the posted speed limit when it is safe to do so, like the majority of drivers in Britain. (I also frequently drive considerably under the posted speed limit, particularly in built-up areas). I’d had a clean driving license for the previous twenty years and to suddenly find myself with three points was a shock. (I’ve been done for parking overstay and bus lane infractions and justifiably so, I was in the wrong but not causing a hazard on any occasion)

I then re-read the NIP rather more closely, trying to work out where I’d been caught. M62 Swinton? That wasn’t very informative, no junction or stretch or road identified. Indeed the M62 doesn’t go near Swinton, although the M60 stretch that passes it was originally the M62. The only speed cameras I saw on the journey were at the Thelwall Viaduct on the M6 between junctions 21 and 20, large hump backed bridge perpetually undergoing roadworks. Even here though, the lanes had been cleared and the 50 limit signs removed.

The more I read the NIP, the more annoyed I got. The tone was intimidatory, bullying even. It basically said that my best course of action was to simply take my punishment, own up and pay the fine, any attempt to challenge or query any part of this (such as to ask for further information) would involve a trip to see the Magistrates.

Now the reality was that I was bang to rights, it was me driving and they probably had clocked me at that speed (alhough it sounded a little high to me), but their paperwork was almost certainly flawed.

The other thing that annoyed me was that the motorway limit was being policed- accepted wisdom at the time was that the motorway national speed limit (70 MPH, but identified by ) was never measured automatically, it was via patrol cars and manned speed traps. In hazardous areas, Gatsos may well be used, but they were clearly marked, as was the speed restriction. (Indeed the variable speed limit systems on the M25 did not catch you doing 80MPH when not activated, i.e. National Speed Limit in force.)

Anyway, in the end, I just got my chequebook out, sent my license off and it came back, endorsed in Biro, no less.

The SP50 code means Exceeding Speed Limit on a Motorway and I am entitled to have it removed from my license as it is more than four years old. It seems there are sub-codes defining the circumstances of the offence, not shown on the license. It is possible to view personal details online, but you have to register for the Photo-ID style driving license. I’d have to do this anyway if I move house, but in the meantime I’m happy to hang on to that scruffy piece of paper that is thirteen years old already but is valid for another twenty years (if the Guvm’nt don’t move the goalposts…)

Now I have come to regard much of the so-called Road Safety Partnerships as being more about revenue streams than safety and the unintended consequences of using speed cameras are often detrimental to the stated purpose. One particular case of this is the average speed cameras, often applied through roadworks schemes. I have been driving through areas artificially constrained to 40MPH where travelling together all at the same speed gives no room for manoeuvre and is an uncomfortable experience. Indeed, people become so twitchy about speedometer watching that it probably causes more accidents when the speed is set too low.

I was very interested to read, therefore, of a surprising limitation of the SPECs/SVDD systems related to linked Cameras (or SCAMeras, as they are known by the jaded). It isn’t a product fault, (the Speed Check Services system seems rather good) it is an approvals thing.

If you want to know more, sign up to Adam Blairs’ Newsletter at beatthespeedtrap.com. He’ll try to sell you a Gatso detector along the way but be strong (unless you have 9 points on your license already, in which case, get your credit card out!)

Also, read up on Safe Speed, the campaigning group for road safety that opposes cameras for the right reasons.

It’s obvious to anyone who drives that drivers must vary their speed to suit the prevailing conditions. We do it naturally, we do it easily and we do it accurately. There’s room for improvement of course, but attempting to deny this essential road safety skill is not only stupid, it’s actively dangerous. One clear side effect of having a nation of drivers who slow down when hazards threaten is that we’re also a nation of drivers who speed up when conditions are clear and safe.

Safe Speed Press Release 573

This is a follow-on post from yesterday’s topic about Blogger arrest. (sweary alert) .

I was just about to say that I wasn’t about to bother looking closely at the Lionheart Detail at this stage are there are plenty of others more perceptive than me to dig. Then, up in my Feedreader RSS alert box popped a excellent blogpoint  from Devil’s Kitchen linking to another post, called, amusingly enough, First they came for the despicable bastards.  (It probably isn’t necessary to click through from DK as the paragraph quoted is sweary enough).

Anyway, the ‘Merkin blogosphere are very bemused  about the whole notion of a British arrest. No screaming tyres, handcuffs and aimed weapons here, instead a very British Dad’s Army Sergeant Wilson asking if Lionheart would mind terribly if he could pop in to Walmington-on-sea constabulary at a convenient time after the officer gets back from holiday. There he would be arrested and questioned to see if there was anything in the allegations. Terrible business old chap, but it is only suspicion…

Lionheart is abroad at the moment so has been advised by email. I wonder if he sends the email back telling the Officer to go forth and multiply, he could then be charged with resisting arrest?

Anyway, there is a presumption that it is an Islamic pressure group doing this, I’ve no idea. But, look at the Home Office definition again, with added emphasis.

Any incident, which constitutes a criminal offence, which is perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by prejudice or hate.

So, it could be anyone complaining about a perceived slight. The little old lady from the chip shop surfing in the library, the card carrying right on politically correct diversity & sensitivity officer in a Local Council,  a political activist keen to stir up trouble even though he is in the same party in a different faction.

Is being arrested such a big thing? It seems not these days, according to Coppersblog. Much time is taken up on trivial “domestics”, a sort of merry-go-round that passes for entertainment amongst the scratter classes when there is nothing on Sky+ or the Plasma TV is in demand; A accuses B, B counter accuses A, both arrange to visit the station to be arrested, long wait for duty solicitors, statements taken, both released,  PC fills in all the paperwork, Monitoring Officers offer random unhelpful comments, PC fills in more paperwork, Crown Prosecution Service decide not to prosecute, two detections achieved, stats look good, same time next Giro day?

Now it seems that the regular customers (i.e. offenders and victims) of the Police all know their rights but ordinary folk like me who rarely come in contact with the Police find the thought of arrest absolutely terrifying. Apparently we are much easier to prosecute because we don’t insist on solicitors because we assume that if we are in the right the police will see this quickly enough and move on to find the real criminals. This is naivety in the extreme, regrettably, as every now and then a journalist gets wrongly arrested for something and the police only reluctantly let go when some incontrovertible evidence turns up. (I can think of several examples including a girl accused of stealing a purse at a Gym but am too busy to track them down). They are trained to be suspicious but getting an increasingly unlikely suspect to accept a caution in lieu of further investigation is a result.

What are the consequences of being arrested for a normal person in work, even after being absolved of blame? Holidays in America, for a start, no more visa waiver, with unpleasant but otherwise straight-forward travel giving only a fingerprint to get in, now it is a trip to that horrible Embassy in London. The arrest is recorded onto the Police National Computer and could well show up on certain criminal records checks (even though you aren’t a criminal). However, the most criminal part of it is this; All (well, nearly all*) arrestees are now obliged to give a DNA sample  to go on the national register, sitting there waiting for any false positive to give you hassle for the rest of your life. This even happens to Children and it is apparently an absolute bastard of a job to persuade your Chief Constable to get it removed. (Here is an ACPO policy document PDF to give you the feel for how possessive they are.)

Now could Lionheart possibly have a case for political asylum? These are the sorts of things that Liberty campaigns against. OK, it isn’t torture, but is a great way of ruining someone’s career.

This is one reason why don’t Urbex and am very circumspect about what I write - I don’t ever want to be arrested and see a custody suite in anger. Now I provide DNA to the State quite regularly in the form of blood samples to my Doctor but I am (fairly) confident that it is used mostly for the purposes it was provided (although I hear of blind randomised testing for research purposes).

I don’t want to give it to the Police or the National ID register though. Why? because it is personal data. Very personal indeed, it belongs to me, not you or anyone else. Especially not the Government, they can fuck right off.

*except labour politicians it seems