Nuxx Vomica.

Simon Mason said the following on 16/04/2008 14:08:

Quoted message said:

Bloody cameras!

<SNIP>

(Waits for someone to miss your point entirely :-) )

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

On Apr 16, 2:08 pm, "Simon Mason" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bloody cameras! I went into WH Smith today and just needed a ballpoint pen..
I was in a hurry to write a letter so took one of the loose pens out of the
pen box. It was only 35 pence, so I didn't bother to pay for it. The next
thing a jobsworth store detective ran out of the store and said he saw me on
their sneaky spy camera stealing a pen.

I mean it's a 35p pen FFS, peanuts to a large company like that, but he
insisted it was stealing. I said that in my car, I was allowed 10% plus 2
mph before I got nicked, so I could be driving at 79 mph on a motorway and
not get done according to the ACPO guidelines, but it cut no ice. One pen,a
box of pens, it was still stealing.

The sods didn't even have the decency to publish the whereabouts of the
cameras in the local rag or on the radio like they do with the safety
cameras, so I know where I can break the law. Swines.

--
Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

can I interest you in this site?

www.safepennicking.co.uk

I'm an qualified engineer and have devoted eleventy million person
hours to studying pen theft and why it ought not be a crime.

I've noticed that if you draw a random graph and colour it in people
go "Ooooh, that's impressive"!

I've concluded that pen theft is not stealing because of Regression To
The Mean and anyone who disagrees with me is part of the worldwide
conspiracy in favour of policing thieves.

spindrift said:

can I interest you in this site?

www.safepennicking.co.uk

I'm an qualified engineer and have devoted eleventy million person
hours to studying pen theft and why it ought not be a crime.

I've noticed that if you draw a random graph and colour it in people
go "Ooooh, that's impressive"!

I've concluded that pen theft is not stealing because of Regression To
The Mean and anyone who disagrees with me is part of the worldwide
conspiracy in favour of policing thieves.- Hide quoted text -

These cameras cost lives. Petty theft hating scum like Capman and
Nibdrift know this full well but are afraid to come out and say so.
How can these evil [censored] sleep at night?

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Stores operating CCTV systems are legally obliged to display prominent
signs warning of its presence.

I didn't see one. It should have been be painted bright yellow with warning
sings on the approach to the store, not stuck on some obscure ceiling
pillar.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

spindrift said:

Cars speeding along my road do so and don't get caught and often don't
kill anyone.

I love the use of the word "often" in that sentence :-)

Quoted message said:

They leave a ream of victims in their wake, people upset by the noise,
aggression and threat to life posed by speeding drivers.

The common law is perfectly adequate for dealing with those problems.
What would the same "victims" do if the culprit was not a motorist, but
a group of teenagers kicking a football rather boisterously at their
greenhouses? Perhaps they'd call for ball speed limits, and ball speed
cameras?

Quoted message said:

There doesn't have to be a death for there to be a victim, that's why
people the length and breadth of the land are campaigning for and
support speed cameras.

And ball speed cameras? No, because they have been brainwashed by many
years of false propaganda. Most resident complaints about "speeding"
turn out to be unfounded.

--
Matt B

"Nuxx Bar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Why am I bothering? The OP knows all this already, unless he's
*extremely* thick. I assume that his post was an attempt at
provocation and/or humour rather than an attempt at making a serious
point. I suppose it depends on whether the OP supports cameras
because he's a motorist-hater like Spindrift or Crapman, or because
he's a sad clueless idiot who doesn't understand the figures or the
process of driving.

I have had a driving licence for 34 years. My point was that sure there are
laws I would like to break myself. I'd like to go the the pub and have a few
pints like in the "good old days" and drive home. I'd like to do a ton on
the M62 with impunity. But I accept that there are laws and if I fall foul
of them, then I don't go around bleating about how unfair it it all is.
It's my own look out.

Frankly I couldn't give a toss about safety cameras because I don't break
the speed limit. Similarly, I don't fear CCTV in stores because I don't
shoplift.

Incidentally, in June I am driving to Moldova and Ukraine where the local
cops deliberately set up traps in various towns and you can be sure as hell
they won't be painted yellow or publish their whereabouts. If you stick to
the limits though they will leave you alone, much like this country.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

About 100% of those convicted for victimless actions by speed cameras are
using their vehicle as a /legitimate/ method of getting from "A" to "B".

What? Legitimately breaking the law? :-/

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Those that do "drift out" of a shop, forgetting to pay for something, can
use that as a valid defence, and would be exonerated if they were
convincing.

Christopher Biggins:

"He was found guilty of being over the limit after crashing his BMW in 1993
and banned for a year. Months later he was arrested after leaving Tesco with
a packet of batteries in the pocket of his pink tracksuit.
Biggins maintained it was an oversight and the charges were dropped."

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

FS Simon Mason said:

Bloody cameras! I went into WH Smith today and just needed a ballpoint
pen. I was in a hurry to write a letter so took one of the loose pens
out of the pen box. It was only 35 pence, so I didn't bother to pay for
it. The next thing a jobsworth store detective ran out of the store and
said he saw me on their sneaky spy camera stealing a pen.

I mean it's a 35p pen FFS, peanuts to a large company like that, but he
insisted it was stealing. I said that in my car, I was allowed 10% plus
2 mph before I got nicked, so I could be driving at 79 mph on a motorway
and not get done according to the ACPO guidelines, but it cut no ice.
One pen, a box of pens, it was still stealing.

The sods didn't even have the decency to publish the whereabouts of the
cameras in the local rag or on the radio like they do with the safety
cameras, so I know where I can break the law. Swines.

I bet they even banned you from going into the shop, and did not even
give you another three chances, with an opportunity in court to argue
that your livelihood depends upon redistributing pens.

Still nuxx bar will be along in a minute to tell you it is ok, as
everyone redistributes pens on a daily basis, and anyone who does not is
a liar.

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason said:

Incidentally, in June I am driving to Moldova and Ukraine where the local
cops deliberately set up traps in various towns and you can be sure as
hell they won't be painted yellow or publish their whereabouts.

How well does their road safety record compare with ours?

--
Matt B

Well, judging by the fact that my insurance company won't touch them with a
barge pole - not very well!

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Simon Mason said:

Incidentally, in June I am driving to Moldova and Ukraine where the
local cops deliberately set up traps in various towns and you can be
sure as hell they won't be painted yellow or publish their whereabouts.

How well does their road safety record compare with ours?

--
Matt B

Simon Mason said:

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Those that do "drift out" of a shop, forgetting to pay for something,
can use that as a valid defence, and would be exonerated if they were
convincing.

Christopher Biggins:

"He was found guilty of being over the limit after crashing his BMW in
1993 and banned for a year. Months later he was arrested after leaving
Tesco with a packet of batteries in the pocket of his pink tracksuit.
Biggins maintained it was an oversight and the charges were dropped."

Precisely. Have you ever heard of a motorist having a speed camera
conviction dropped for the same reason - although it is quite likely
that many, if not most speeding occurs as "an oversight".

--
Matt B

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Precisely. Have you ever heard of a motorist having a speed camera
conviction dropped for the same reason - although it is quite likely that
many, if not most speeding occurs as "an oversight".

--
Matt B

Biggins was lucky - me and you would have been done. He must have had a good
lawyer like when Sir Alex Ferguson was cleared of a traffic offence by
explaining that severe diarrhoea and the need to reach a toilet prompted his
driving on a motorway hard shoulder.

In fact, the lawyer known as "Mr Fixit" makes a living out of getting people
who can afford it off motoring offences while the "poor old motorist" has to
pay up. That's life I'm afraid - I prefer to keep my hard earned money in my
pocket though.

My wife has 9 points on her licence for 3 speeding offences and now that she
realises that she can't afford any more keeps to the limit. Pity it had to
come to that for her to learn though. Come to think of it, she was fined 60
quid for doing 50 in a 40 limit and I was fined 80 quid for peeing on a
patch of grass (true). She could have killed somebody and I was doing no
harm whatsoever.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Matt B said:

Ah, perhaps if they knew where the cameras were, they would be a bit
more careful, at least while they passed them ;-) Mind you, they'd
probably have to vent their resulting pent-up frustration then, and take
less care where they knew there were no cameras, leading to more danger
elsewhere. One of the reasons why cameras, though deterring speeding in
their vicinity, can have a negative effect across the road system as a
whole.

Do you have any evidence for this ?

I thought not.

Matt B said:

Simon Mason said:

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason wrote:
>
> Incidentally, in June I am driving to Moldova and Ukraine where the
> local cops deliberately set up traps in various towns and you can be
> sure as hell they won't be painted yellow or publish their whereabouts.

How well does their road safety record compare with ours?

Well, judging by the fact that my insurance company won't touch them
with a barge pole - not very well!

Ah, perhaps if they knew where the cameras were, they would be a bit
more careful, at least while they passed them ;-) Mind you, they'd
probably have to vent their resulting pent-up frustration then, and take
less care where they knew there were no cameras, leading to more danger
elsewhere. One of the reasons why cameras, though deterring speeding in
their vicinity, can have a negative effect across the road system as a
whole.

People should not be driving with pent-up frustration *at all*. If
people find driving frustrating, perhaps they should be getting on their
bikes, and working off a bit of that frustration, instead of sitting
cooped up in an un-natural environment.

And if people are only obeying the law where they know that there are
speed cameras, then perhaps we should stop advertising where they are.

Simon Mason said:

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason said:

Incidentally, in June I am driving to Moldova and Ukraine where the
local cops deliberately set up traps in various towns and you can be
sure as hell they won't be painted yellow or publish their whereabouts.

How well does their road safety record compare with ours?

Well, judging by the fact that my insurance company won't touch them
with a barge pole - not very well!

Ah, perhaps if they knew where the cameras were, they would be a bit
more careful, at least while they passed them ;-) Mind you, they'd
probably have to vent their resulting pent-up frustration then, and take
less care where they knew there were no cameras, leading to more danger
elsewhere. One of the reasons why cameras, though deterring speeding in
their vicinity, can have a negative effect across the road system as a
whole.

--
Matt B

While you silly people have been arguing, I have been doing the very
activity this group was set up for...and I didn't speed once! (More is
the pitty...I went through a 10mph zone!!)

"Martin Dann" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

People should not be driving with pent-up frustration *at all*. If people
find driving frustrating, perhaps they should be getting on their bikes,
and working off a bit of that frustration, instead of sitting cooped up in
an un-natural environment.

That's one of the reasons I took up cycling. I was fed up at sitting in
queues of cars going nowhere and paying lots of money to do so. I now cycle
6500 miles a year and save shedloads of cash.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Simon Mason said:

"Matt B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Precisely. Have you ever heard of a motorist having a speed camera
conviction dropped for the same reason - although it is quite likely
that many, if not most speeding occurs as "an oversight".

My wife has 9 points on her licence for 3 speeding offences and now that
she realises that she can't afford any more keeps to the limit. Pity it
had to come to that for her to learn though. Come to think of it, she
was fined 60 quid for doing 50 in a 40 limit and I was fined 80 quid for
peeing on a patch of grass (true). She could have killed somebody and I
was doing no harm whatsoever.

In fact, the chances of a particular motorist killing someone during a
specific single speed limit infringement are minuscule. "The data"
states that in 2006, 381 fatal collisions had speeding as a contributory
factor. If we were to be optimistic, and assume that, on average, each
of the UK's 30 million motorists broke the speed limit only once per
week, that gives: 381 fatal collisions per 1.5 billion speed limit
infringements, or about 1 fatal collision per 4 million speed limit
infringements.

Your "action" probably /was/ more dangerous ;-)

--
Matt B