PDA

View Full Version : Plans to reduce speed camera tollerance to 5 km/h and add demerit points!



kiwistorm
13th August 2003, 08:08
<SPAN class=headlinesbig>Extract from todays Herald newspaper:</SPAN>

<SPAN class=headlinesbig>Hidden speed cameras in get-tough traffic plan</B></SPAN>

<SPAN class=copy>13.08.2003
</SPAN><SPAN class=copy>By STUART DYE

Hidden speed cameras are likely to make a comeback on New Zealand roads. And drivers snapped exceeding speed limits could get demerit points as well as a fine. The two moves are part of a plan to get tough on speedsters and reduce the road toll. Hidden cameras were tested in the Waikato in a trial that ended three years ago. A review of them could not establish conclusively that they were effective. Now the cameras are back as part of a move to reduce road deaths. Full details of the plan will be issued by the end of the year. Transport chiefs want to reach a target of no more than 300 deaths on the roads each year by 2010. The number of lives lost has dropped significantly over the past 10 years, but Transport Minister Paul Swain says the reduction has reached a plateau. "Unless we take concerted steps we cannot get out of this plateau," he told the Local Authority Traffic Institute's annual conference in Auckland. "We won't make any significant progress unless we are prepared to bite the bullet and try something new." The Government's transport committee is looking at several options. They include lowering the legal blood alcohol limit from 0.08 per cent to 0.05 per cent. Hidden speed cameras could work in tandem with the signposted ones already in use. Offenders might also be given demerit points if caught on camera. Points are now given only when a traffic offender is caught by police. A Police Association survey of 750 people this year found the majority supported the increased use of hidden speed cameras, and reducing the blood-alcohol limit for driving. Under the proposals, officers may also be given powers to lower the tolerance limit for speeding drivers from 10km/h to 5km/h. And demerit points could be doubled for driving dangerously at peak times and on public holidays. In a separate move, the Government is investigating a ban on drivers using cellphones. The Government's goal is to have fewer than 300 fatalities and 4500 hospital admissions a year as a result of road crashes by 2010. An interim step is to reduce fatalities to 400 and hospital admissions to 5870 by next year. Last year's road toll of 404 was the lowest since 1963. Mr Swain said this was despite New Zealand's vehicle fleet almost trebling in size and a huge increase in distances travelled since 1963. This year's road toll was slightly higher than at the same time last year. Alcohol and excessive speed were the two most significant factors in road deaths and injuries. "Together, they are the most significant factor in over half of all fatal crashes," Mr Swain said. The traffic institute conference ended yesterday. Earlier in the three-day meeting, pupils from Gladstone Primary School in Mt Albert performed songs in memory of the 84 children killed on the roads in the past five years. Institute president Andy Foster said the performance brought home the reality of the tragic deaths. He would continue lobbying the Government to introduce all the changes outlined to improve road safety. <B>The toll</B> * 404 people died on New Zealand roads last year. * 84 children have died on New Zealand roads in the past five years. * 276 people have been killed so far this year. <B>The latest plan</B> Road safety proposals to bring the numbers down include: * lowering legal blood alcohol limit * covert speed cameras * lowering 10km/h police tolerance level to speeding * reducing speed limits outside schools * double de-merit points for infringements at busy times </SPAN>

wkid_one
13th August 2003, 08:27
Interesting - the 10kph allowance was typically provided to allow for the inconsistencies in speedometer readings in different vehicles - this zero tolerance policy is ridiculous??&nbsp; Where does the research support that an additional 5kph is going to reduce the road toll??

I do agree however with the BAC level - this should be where the zero tolerance exists.....

Alcohol and excessive speed were the two most significant factors in road deaths and injuries, he said.

Me thinks 10kph over the speed limit isn't 'excessive speed' - it interests me that the police force are so focused on the road toll at the complete disregard for all other policing matters??

Mr Swain said this was despite the size of New Zealand's vehicle fleet almost trebling and a huge increase in distances travelled over that period.

Last year's road toll of 404 was the lowest since 1963.

Hmmm - don't these statements contradict the whole article - more vehicles and miles done - yet the road toll the lowest since 1963??&nbsp; I would guess average speeds are up in this time as well - and the road largely haven't changed?&nbsp;

I still stand by my original statements about this - surely with increasing vehicle numbers, and driven distances - the focus should be on improving roading to reduce the road toll......it seems in NZ - the Police and Government are more focused on blaming the drivers than their own inability to provide a safe driving environment??&nbsp;

Dave
13th August 2003, 09:19
Current wof rules allow a 10% varience in speedo readings (not that they check)
at 5% they would never be able to enforce a single ticket.
(sorry your honour,my tyres were soft and the speedo read wrong!)

Duke of Rogan
13th August 2003, 10:22
atleast on a bike we have only the one license plate, if they ever tried to make bikes have one on the front too... :angry2:

georgedubyabush
13th August 2003, 10:26
yeah, you'd have to resort to putting the front wheel up in the air to obscure their view of the plate.

MrMelon
13th August 2003, 11:02
That's pretty stupid.. I'm sure more crashes would be caused by people trying to keep such a close eye on their speedo so they don't go over 105, and not paying enough attention to the road.

MikeL
13th August 2003, 13:27
Originally posted by Duke of Rogan
atleast on a bike we have only the one license plate, if they ever tried to make bikes have one on the front too... :angry2:

Don't laugh too soon: they're talking seriously about that in at least one Australian state (Victoria, which seems to be the model that N.Z. for some unaccountable reason usually follows).

As for getting the road toll down to 300, there is something called the law of diminishing returns which will mean that to achieve that result will require hugely more input in the form of law changes, resources, policing etc. Sooner or later someone there must start using some common sense, surely???

(I won't hold my breath)

jrandom
13th August 2003, 15:33
Well, I mean, FFS.

Fully agree with the above comments re. increase of road usage, number of drivers, average speed etc. The likely situation is that the roads are now much safer than they used to be, and at a level that's as safe as any reasonable user could hope for. Not that we'll ever have actual, useful data presented to us by the media or government to allow us to make that determination.

Where the hell does this obsessive drive to get the road toll down come from, anyway? Sure as hell I only know two types of people:

(a) those like myself, who think it's utterly stupid and a waste of resources;

(b) others who can't be arsed thinking hard about it, and go along with the flow because an 'authority' told them to.

I have *never* met a (c) type person, who would actually argue in *favour* of it. It seems that an utterly immoral revenue-gathering minority is running the whole shebang.

Why, I wonder, aren't we hearing about any concerted citizen-driven effort to present a rational viewpoint to the great unwashed? Perhaps it's time for someone to step forward...

Hmmmmm.

'The Political Party of Sane Intelligent People'... nah, that'd never work.

:(

jrandom
13th August 2003, 15:34
Oooh, look! 30 posts, and I'm a sc00t3r b0i... moving up in the world! :p

Duke of Rogan
13th August 2003, 15:42
I think half of the NZ Police farce is being sent to the Solomon's anyway, pretty soon we'll have police free roads! :cool:

wkid_one
13th August 2003, 18:18
Originally posted by Duke of Rogan
I think half of the NZ Police farce is being sent to the Solomon's anyway, pretty soon we'll have police free roads! :cool:

I'm as optimistic as the next person - but don't hold your breathe.

MikeL - you are right - with vehicle registrations going up, driver licenses going up, average miles increasing etc etc - you can't realistically expect the road toll to fall??&nbsp; In my opinion holding it steady is an achievement - let alone reverting back to a level last seen in 1963 - fuck - what are they complaining about??&nbsp; Where is the welldone NZ in reducing the road toll??&nbsp; Instead it is 'sorry it is not good enough, we haven't collected enough revenue yet, so we intend to reduce the BAC level and tolerance'

Hmmmm - I see a 'Minority Report' scenario - where they go ' Here is your motorcycle license sir.......but you can't have it cause you will get 100 demerit points in the first 3 months....so sorry!'

There must be a statistically accepted number of road fatalities based on vehicles/miles registered/done.

bikerboy
13th August 2003, 18:33
Speeding is illegal. As soon as anyone argues against these police tactics people respond, it's illegal so you should get caught, fined, etc.

The real issue is what are reasonable speeds for the various types of roads, and then how much of the limited police resources should be targeting this offence, and finally what is a reasonable penalty.

Is it fair and appropriate to punish speeders twice?, demerit points and fines.

If one took a poll, I bet most people would place speeding as a low priority for the limited police resource compared to many other crimes the police say they don't have resources to combat. I also think if they asked; should taxes be raised to fight speeding to lower the road toll, the majority would say no.
:argh: :done: :whocares:

Kokopelli
13th August 2003, 19:07
The Government's goal is to have fewer than 300 fatalities and 4500 hospital admissions a year as a result of road crashes by 2010. An interim step is to reduce fatalities to 400 and hospital admissions to 5870 by next year. Last year's road toll of 404 was the lowest since 1963

I believe that is what appeals to them. They figure that they will be able to save lots of money in the health sector. So it is a win win situation, get money from tickets or save on health care. And it is very difficult to argue against that, as someone has pointed out before. After all speeding is illegal, and often innocent people get hurt.

Crimes against property does not attract as much attention, because it ends up being an insurance issue not the responsibility of the government. Unless they can be convinced that this approach wil cost them votes it is unlikely to change.

It comes down to money and not real concern about any victims.

wkid_one
13th August 2003, 21:38
Originally posted by bikerboy
Speeding is illegal. As soon as anyone argues against these police tactics people respond, it's illegal so you should get caught, fined, etc.&nbsp;


Don't disagree- but they are talking about 5kph - hardly a speeding issue..with common speedo variances of 10% - this action seems entirely unfounded on any statistical basis

Redstar
13th August 2003, 22:10
Its a good point that there is a side issue to the road toll and thats deaths to pedestrians caused by motorists. its an unmastakable statatistic that we over represent ourselfs in the death per k stakes but we sure as hell kill ourselves in preference to kids at crossings. we are more alert and aware in such situations.

Mitch
13th August 2003, 22:14
Originally posted by Kokopelli
The Government's goal is to have fewer than 300 fatalities and 4500 hospital admissions a year as a result of road crashes by 2010. An interim step is to reduce fatalities to 400 and hospital admissions to 5870 by next year. Last year's road toll of 404 was the lowest since 1963



&nbsp;

Ya generating an extra couple of million in revenue has nothing to do with it&nbsp; :eek:

Marmoot
13th August 2003, 22:36
extra couple of million dollars will mean more armco median (less head on collission), better roading surface (less slide), dual-laning (less head on, again). etc.

And probably 40% LESS DRIVER ON THE ROAD DUE TO LICENCE SUSPENSION!!!!
THIS STUPIDITY OF NOT RECOGNIZING THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURN MUST STOP!!!!

:angry2: :angry2: :angry2: :angry2: :angry2: :angry2:
.
..
....
.........thank you

SPman
14th August 2003, 23:20
more armco median (less head on collission),

nah....probably that wire cheesecutter fence they are putting on the motorway..(its cheaper)

Political tolerance limits are bullshit. Take all discretion and judgement out of the hands of the cops and then wonder why we treat them with contempt.......

For those of you who frequent Esportbike .com, there was a thread about this some time ago. Among the many officers on the site, the average tolerance they applied on the open road in good conditions, riding safely,&nbsp;etc, was between 15-18 MPH over the limit. (25-30k).

5k tolerance....what a pack of wankers and about what you would expect from Swain and Hawkins!.

DZL
21st August 2003, 14:23
Wkid One said;-

There must be a statistically accepted number of road fatalities based on vehicles/miles registered/done.

&nbsp;

Perzackly! With 'X' squillion miles covered by 'Y' drivers there MUST be a proportion of 'shit happens' type events . . . usually caused by folks being in some way 'switched off' &amp; thinking about something far removed from their rearview mirror, indicators, peripheral vision, etc etc . ..&nbsp; . my guess would be that the statistical 'plateau' will only be escaped if/when they find a way to detect &amp; combat the 'mind in neutral'&nbsp;mode!

The way they seem to do this in Oz is by using the 'zero tolerance' thing to keep&nbsp;drivers switched&nbsp;ON &amp; paying attention. Over there they will ping you for the slightest unfringement (wouldja believe for having ya front wheel&nbsp;over the wrong white line accross the lane at intersections!) &amp; it sure does tend to keep ya paying 'attention'!

Mebbe hidden cameras &amp; more points would acheive the same thing (by making us stay alert for secret spooks), but me personally I would rather see the plods pulling people over &amp; pinging the idjuts for not indicating well before turning, stuff like that.

&nbsp;

CIAO


&nbsp;

What?
21st August 2003, 19:46
I trust everyone is writing to Paul Swain and their local MP...

Marmoot
21st August 2003, 22:26
can they read??

What?
22nd August 2003, 06:13
Originally posted by Marmoot
can they read??

Don't believe so. Rumour is they have wet nurses to read stuff out loud to them.:D

750Y
23rd August 2003, 14:53
here's an idea, how about the goverment legislates to have speed governors on all motor vehicles, which limits them to 104 km/h. and trucks to 84km/h.

and wtf is that "fair weather rider" doing next to my name???

Lou Girardin
25th August 2003, 08:22
The Police will argue that it's extremely rare that an unmodified vehicles speedo will read slow. Unfortunately they're right. As for enforcing the 5 km/h tolerance, most people pay the fine. Those that defend it have no chance with JP's hearing cases. They'd believe day was night if a Policeman said so!
The best action everyone can take is to write letters to various media, and send copies to your MP, disputing Police policies. It takes mere minutes and really winds the cops up. I've had personal replies from the Superintendant of traffic policing, trying to convert me to their version of the way, the truth and the light.
If there is enough public outrage, even the hundreds of millions in fines won't compensate for the loss of votes.
P S. Buy a good radar detector and a laser jammer.

Dafe
11th May 2005, 20:18
To me it's plain and simple!!!
Madam Helen F*&$ing Clarke and her piss bandit Labour party are so intent on making our country operate like the southeast asian countries!
I'm sick of Helens trade policies!!!
I'm had a F$&king guttsfull of Helen's Beneficiary Policies!!!!

Did you hear about her defence policy???

Helen Clarke just scrapped the Airforces Strike Wing to remove a $60 million dollar defence cost!!!
Did anyone at all hear her saying how she is so supportive of the Airforce and in to show it she will insert $20 miliion dollars into the Airforce over a 10 year period!!!
She braggs coz NZer's are so thick, they think she's doing great things when infact she is trying to make herself look good by providing only half of the facts!
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OTHER $40 MILLION DOLLARS, HELEN CLARKE???
DID YOU GIVE TO SOLO MUMS OR TO LIFETIME DOLE BLUDGING IMMIGRANTS???
Helen Clarke and her Labour Party are behind your Traffic fines and since roadusers are complying and the monetary fines are drying up, the gready B&#$h and her B&#$ettes are now suggesting anything, rediculous or not, to keep the money rolling out of the workers pockets!!!
She's also figured that Police Officers are more profitable as fine collectors!
Fuck you and I!!!! - The Helen Clarke Attitude. :mad:

MikeL
11th May 2005, 21:00
Why did I just waste a few minutes of my life reading the previous post?
Don't bother to answer - it's a rhetorical question.

Lou Girardin
12th May 2005, 11:01
To me it's plain and simple!!!
Madam Helen F*&$ing Clarke and her piss bandit Labour party are so intent on making our country operate like the southeast asian countries!
I'm sick of Helens trade policies!!!
I'm had a F$&king guttsfull of Helen's Beneficiary Policies!!!!

Did you hear about her defence policy???

Helen Clarke just scrapped the Airforces Strike Wing to remove a $60 million dollar defence cost!!!
Did anyone at all hear her saying how she is so supportive of the Airforce and in to show it she will insert $20 miliion dollars into the Airforce over a 10 year period!!!
She braggs coz NZer's are so thick, they think she's doing great things when infact she is trying to make herself look good by providing only half of the facts!
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OTHER $40 MILLION DOLLARS, HELEN CLARKE???
DID YOU GIVE TO SOLO MUMS OR TO LIFETIME DOLE BLUDGING IMMIGRANTS???
Helen Clarke and her Labour Party are behind your Traffic fines and since roadusers are complying and the monetary fines are drying up, the gready B&#$h and her B&#$ettes are now suggesting anything, rediculous or not, to keep the money rolling out of the workers pockets!!!
She's also figured that Police Officers are more profitable as fine collectors!
Fuck you and I!!!! - The Helen Clarke Attitude. :mad:

I take it that you won't be voting Labour?

250learna
12th May 2005, 11:35
Don't laugh too soon: they're talking seriously about that in at least one Australian state (Victoria, which seems to be the model that N.Z. for some unaccountable reason usually follows).

As for getting the road toll down to 300, there is something called the law of diminishing returns which will mean that to achieve that result will require hugely more input in the form of law changes, resources, policing etc. Sooner or later someone there must start using some common sense, surely???

(I won't hold my breath)

but zxr wont look as good with a plate in the front :no:
and as i have said a million times the deaths are not caused by speeders doing 111kph on a straight motorway, its the guys in the narrow twisty country roads with 100kph limit that make up the majority of the toll. This strict motorway patroling is more for the revenue as far as i can tell, sure its a bigger hazard but nowhere nearly as big as a guy taking a blind corner with 25recomended speed at 80kph, but this kind of stuff is not a concern????!!

Biff
12th May 2005, 11:43
Shit - this has got to take the record as the oldest thread ever to be dragged back to like. Hasn't it?

Ghost Lemur
12th May 2005, 14:55
Shit - this has got to take the record as the oldest thread ever to be dragged back to like. Hasn't it?

I'd say it's right up there.

OT - Has anyone else noticed when someone revives an old thread some people feel the need to criticise the face (or at least point out that it's an old thread). Yet if someone posts a new thread on the same topic others point out that such a thread already exists and why aren't they posting in it. Been noticing it a bit and finding it amusing. Looks like a no win situation. Personally I'm all for posting in old threads as it opens up the old replys to members who may have not been round to read them the first time. That in turn saves people having to repeat themselves.


elen Clarke and her Labour Party are behind your Traffic fines and since roadusers are complying and the monetary fines are drying up, the gready B&#$h and her B&#$ettes are now suggesting anything, rediculous or not, to keep the money rolling out of the workers pockets!!!

That funny I remember getting speeding tickets under National too. And if you think that ANY party is going to throw away all that revenue, you're dellusional.

Next you'll be believing that Winston Peters is an honest politian who never plays games during an election year in order to raise his profile and get >10% of the vote as he did the election before (and before that, etc).

pritch
12th May 2005, 21:15
I don't think anybody mentioned this yet, but one refinement they have in Oz is double demerit points on public holiday weekends. You can do your licence on one camera shot.

Coming soon to a road near you?

thehollowmen
12th May 2005, 21:22
Interesting...
Now.. what happens if you own a car that somebody else drives? they speed, you get a ticket AND loose your license?

Maybe we should all form a company and sell our bikes to ourselves .. 'yes your honour I'm not sure who was driving'

DZL
12th May 2005, 22:39
That scenario (ie getting pinged for the actions of a 3rd party driving ya vehicle in an 'offense' situation) is, er, nonsense ~ if the writer had ever been pinged (& CAREFULLY read thru the paperwork) it would have been noticed/known/understood that there is a clause whereby ya get to 'dob' whoever is driving when the 'offense' occurs if it aint the owner . .. .

BrooC (aka DZL)


PS (Speaking as one who HAS been pinged MANY times!)

I really do have VERY mixed feelings around this whole topic. . .on the one hand it shits me that the snakes cruise around in radarcars issuing 'easy tickets' for those clocked at supposedly OTT speeds (ie CRAP), but I also wonder howthefuck are 'they' supposed to overcome the effects of the dickheads we all see doing random maniac overtaking manouvres, & sitting FAR too close off our bumpers at 100k .. .. . AFAIC mebbe we ALL need to have the balls to do whatever we can to confront those dorks (ie, phone it in, or hit the brakes when they're too close at 105k etc, then stand up to them at the next set of lights) insteada just slagging the obvious villains (cops). .

Oh, & another thang, it is FAR too easy to slag the current gumment (whoever it is) for these things, & vote to turf them out, but what-the-hell 'new' gumment ya think is gonna be ANY different?
The Greens will say ooah ya dint orter be driving precious-petrol-powered thingies anywho, & the Nits will say ooah 'Uts the Ma-Ories', & the ACTers will say 'user pays', & Winnie will blame it on the rag-heads .. . try to see a bit beyond kneejerk reactivity guys!

. . .. & eye say just get out there & have ya fun & DONT get caught . .. . use radar. . .chose ya roads. . .ride a 'classic' (slow) bike .. . & dont 'blame' someone else when ya lose a round .. . stop getting all outa shape about it being somebuddy elses 'fault'.

Wonko
12th May 2005, 22:43
Ever notice how Mr Petters always has a tibbit of information that he drags out for months every election year. Wine box ring any bells? With the Iraqi information, why doesn't he just give all his information to the imigration department via the house for the publicity. By draging it out he just looks like a kid who doesn't want to share his toys to get his name out there for a few more votes.

Hollowman, you are then asked via letter who was driving at the time of the offence. IIRC if the owner cannot prove who was driving then they get fined(I could be wrong)

Gremlin
13th May 2005, 00:15
Ever notice how Mr Petters always has a tibbit of information that he drags out for months every election year. Wine box ring any bells? With the Iraqi information, why doesn't he just give all his information to the imigration department via the house for the publicity. By draging it out he just looks like a kid who doesn't want to share his toys to get his name out there for a few more votes.
Although I intensely dislike him, he is one wily campaigner. Every election he comes up with something.

Last time he was doing the rounds at asian community halls telling them he didn't say all those nasty things. Soon after the election he says all asians should go home. :kick:

Marmoot
13th May 2005, 10:20
Don't believe so. Rumour is they have wet nurses to read stuff out loud to them.:D

Even if this was posted in August 2003......but.....wet nurses, hmm.... :love:
preferably with legs that go on and on and on...

Dafe
13th May 2005, 19:10
Thats why they're called, Politicians!!!
No I won't vote Labour, coz I'm sick of the Asian Invasion, the selling of NZ land to offshore investors, the numerous new benefits for non workers, the expectation for Australia to provide our defence, the continuing brain drain, the lack of criminal punishment, lack of elderly support, the restructuring of the Police Force becoming revenue collectors, the ever weakening health system and declining education system.
Perhaps I am dillusional, or perhaps the person in the thread above voted for the alterations as listed above.
As least somebody got it right - No, I won't be voting labour.
They'll probably get in again though, cos anyone who is educated or has any idea about politics, has probably already left our shores.
My two best mates both finished their degrees here and are now both engineers in Australia, with no intention of returning to NZ, or paying their student debts.




I'd say it's right up there.

OT - Has anyone else noticed when someone revives an old thread some people feel the need to criticise the face (or at least point out that it's an old thread). Yet if someone posts a new thread on the same topic others point out that such a thread already exists and why aren't they posting in it. Been noticing it a bit and finding it amusing. Looks like a no win situation. Personally I'm all for posting in old threads as it opens up the old replys to members who may have not been round to read them the first time. That in turn saves people having to repeat themselves.



That funny I remember getting speeding tickets under National too. And if you think that ANY party is going to throw away all that revenue, you're dellusional.

Next you'll be believing that Winston Peters is an honest politian who never plays games during an election year in order to raise his profile and get >10% of the vote as he did the election before (and before that, etc).

DZL
13th May 2005, 19:58
Oh, really smart, 'bad shit' under labour so ya wont vote for em .. . & do ya seriously think that ANY of the other fuckwits will be any better? More likely they'll actually be WELL worse!
'Devil ya know' I say, at least until Rodney the dobber, Brash the (faceless menace?), Whinny the Poo, & Jeanette the longdropper have shown they have SOME level of competence!
Its FAR to easy to wreck what ya got before ya got a workable replacement sorted!
THINK about it!

BrooC

idb
13th May 2005, 22:42
Personally I'm all for posting in old threads as it opens up the old replys to members who may have not been round to read them the first time. That in turn saves people having to repeat themselves.

If people didn't repeat themselves though there'd be stuff all posts....

idb
13th May 2005, 22:42
I say if people didn't repeat themselves though there'd be stuff all posts....

idb
13th May 2005, 22:43
And furthermore if people didn't repeat themselves though there'd be stuff all posts....

idb
13th May 2005, 22:44
And as I was saying, if people............naahh!

geoffm
14th May 2005, 09:05
That scenario (ie getting pinged for the actions of a 3rd party driving ya vehicle in an 'offense' situation) is, er, nonsense ~ if the writer had ever been pinged (& CAREFULLY read thru the paperwork) it would have been noticed/known/understood that there is a clause whereby ya get to 'dob' whoever is driving when the 'offense' occurs if it aint the owner . .. .
.
Of course, if you don't know who was driving, then you are out of luck. Ditto if the boss says you were driving "because apprentices always speed, so it must have been you" then how do you prove otherwise.
The system of acusation and no proof required is a basic building block of all good police totalitarian states.

John
14th May 2005, 09:42
Blame the minorities that always seems to work ??...