And the rats get more cunning

[spudchucka]

In those days the limit was 55mph = 88 km/h, and if you're averaging 100km/h on those roads you were doing serious speeds on the straight bits.
BTW. Camera car operators can still manually record your reg as you pass. ( if he's awake)
Lou

Did they charge him with the average speed or did they charge him with the higher speed that he was obviously doing during the trip?

[Coldkiwi]

i reckon if I was in a position to bust someone from my office knowing that they'd make my life very difficult if I did so, I am pretty certain I would hesititate before deciding. in a hierarchical enforcement culture like the police I can only imagine this must be more pronounced.

[pete376403]

also if i am speedign and i see a camer facing the other way i congratulate them on catchign me (i dont slow down) and hope like hell that it has no film.

Read the O/P again - they are talking digital cameras which don't use film. The camera is attached to a computer which has virtually unlimited storage on its hard drive. The cameras ALWAYS have enough "film".
Incidentally with digital cameras there's no negative, and tools such as Photoshop or Gimp make it possible to alter a pic to whatever they want it to show. Supposing the police wanted to "prove" that a person was in a certain place at a certain time, and they just happened to have a speed camera shot of the persons car which showed this. After all, like Police, the camera never lies.

[jimbo600]

Merv, I hear what you say and you can be sure that heaps of cops feel the same way. Some traffic cops are outright unreasonable and that makes the job the general duties cops are doing more difficult.

To me speed enforcement like everything should be approached in a common sense manner. Example:

Speeding near schools, hospitals, old folks homes and residential areas - you get a ticket.

Speeding along open road, good conditions, minimal traffic - cop needs to consider the time place and circumstances - ticket where appropriate. The only variation is if the driver is a burglar, thief, drug dealer or other form of human scum - then stuff them, they get whatever the can be done for.

Having said this however it is widely known that warning people has no long term effect on their driving behaviour. Being fair to the coppers you must understand this when feeling hard done by for getting a ticket.

As for cops riding bikes and speeding, well they face the same consequences and more if they are caught. How do you think a dangerous driving conviction would effect a cops career, it wouldn't be that flash. But cops know this and if they take the risk they have to accept the consequences.

And before anyone says the cops will never ticket another cop - wrong - plenty wouldn't hesitate.

Absolutely correct Spud. I know for a fact that HP just love bagging real cops. I guess they are bitter because it must be an embarrassment to tell their kids what they do for a living. How do they live with themselves.

[speedpro]

"After all, like Police, the camera never lies."

In your dreams! What's that? oh, sarcasm, I get it.

I got convicted for dangerous driving because of a few stretched facts which painted a very convenient picture - for the prosecution! Even with a witness who contradicted the evidence I was a done duck.

That was a very long time ago.

[marty]

In those days the limit was 55mph = 88 km/h, and if you're averaging 100km/h on those roads you were doing serious speeds on the straight bits.
BTW. Camera car operators can still manually record your reg as you pass. ( if he's awake)
Lou

so what would they have charged him with? the old transport act was only 1965, so i'm picking the previous one was even more archaic

[Lou Girardin]

This was around '65 from memory and I'm pretty sure he was charged with exceeding 55mph. But in those days you often lost your licence for that. It was pre-instant fines and if you struck a grumpy magistrate you got done like a dinner. As I found out to my cost a few times.
As for booking cops, ambos and fire guys, I can only think of one or two in Auck that did it when I was in the job. I don't think the 'all for one, one for all' attitude has changed much. It's part of emergency service culture.
Lou

[spudchucka]

Read the O/P again - they are talking digital cameras which don't use film. The camera is attached to a computer which has virtually unlimited storage on its hard drive. The cameras ALWAYS have enough "film".
Incidentally with digital cameras there's no negative, and tools such as Photoshop or Gimp make it possible to alter a pic to whatever they want it to show. Supposing the police wanted to "prove" that a person was in a certain place at a certain time, and they just happened to have a speed camera shot of the persons car which showed this. After all, like Police, the camera never lies.

Just what we need around here, another conspiracy theorist!!

If digital cameras are to be used for evidence the courts would probably require experts in the field to give opinion evidence on the possability of tampering.

There would have to be a system in place that ensures that tampering was not a possability. For instance: digital image files are recorded to a central secure server and are only directly accessed by staff authorised to do so. m Or they are stored at an independant location, such as the ESR.

[spudchucka]

Absolutely correct Spud. I know for a fact that HP just love bagging real cops. I guess they are bitter because it must be an embarrassment to tell their kids what they do for a living. How do they live with themselves.

I know some real good buggers in HP but there are some right plonkers too.

Personally I don't think they should be able to work in the HP for more than 2 years without doing time back on the street. That would help to keep them grounded in reality and would force some of the arseholes out of the job - if they had to do some real work.

[jimbo600]

I know some real good buggers in HP but there are some right plonkers too.

Personally I don't think they should be able to work in the HP for more than 2 years without doing time back on the street. That would help to keep them grounded in reality and would force some of the arseholes out of the job - if they had to do some real work.

Now I like that idea. As for digital imagery, the high court deemed that digital imagery is verbatim. Negatives can also be altered without obvious tampering evidence. Also digital imagery is watermarked that is auditable within the chain of evidence.

Personally I would like to see HP revert back to MoT and leave the cops to do the real side of policing. I'm sure they would then start to rekindle public support.

[Lou Girardin]

I
Personally I don't think they should be able to work in the HP for more than 2 years without doing time back on the street. That would help to keep them grounded in reality and would force some of the arseholes out of the job - if they had to do some real work.

I've heard that if they don't keep up the 3 ticket per hour average, they face a transfer back to general duties.
Lou

[SPman]

I've heard that if they don't keep up the 3 ticket per hour average, they face a transfer back to general duties.
Lou

So that would tend to encourage the arseholes to stay !

[Lou Girardin]

I've found that the arsholes reach high rank, it's the good, reasonable guys that get pissed off and quit.
Lou

[SPman]

I've found that the arsholes reach high rank, it's the good, reasonable guys that get pissed off and quit.
Lou

Yeah, the few cops I know, are now all ex cops, for, basically, that reason.

[Drunken Monkey]

Incidentally with digital cameras there's no negative, and tools such as Photoshop or Gimp make it possible to alter a pic to whatever they want it to show.

There are standards for 'Digital Negatives', and methodology which must be adhered to for digital data (for text, sound and images) to be used as evidence in a court case. Not completely fool proof, but neither are film negatives if you know what you're doing.