Camera detector devices

I've just discovered that tucked away in the small print of the road traffic bill is a proposal to ban the carriage and use of safety [sic] camera detection and jamming devices. Everyone's making a lot of fuss about speeding fines and points but this hasn't had a mention.

Most councils put the locations on their websites so why shouldn't people have locator devices? Beggars belief.

detection and jamming devices are being made illegal. As far as I'm aware, a purely GPS based unit is entirely legal, since it's just a map with them marked on it.
I can't remember where I heard about the detector/jammer units being made illegal, but it's definitely been mentioned somewhere.

likewise i have been told this as well..oh well couldnt afford one anyhow

Jammers have always been illegal , not detectors which maybe soon.

Unless you have an auto garage door and your caught with a jammer then your in a bit of bother as it interferes with police equipment.

More significantly the penalty for failing to disclose the driver of a vehicle is being doubled so that you will get 6 points. Since they have ignored the para 4 defence pretty well without exception in the magistrates courts for the last 6 months you need to maintain a log of who is driving your vehicle and bosses of employees with company cars will need to insist that a log is maintained.

Welcome to the dictatorship, some of you voted for this don't repeat that mistake next May

thats a matter of opinion ... why not vote for a govmnt that supports law and order.

if your not willing to pay the price for breaking the law...then dont do it. simple.

Originally Posted by Gforceuk

thats a matter of opinion ... why not vote for a govmnt that supports law and order.

if your not willing to pay the price for breaking the law...then dont do it. simple.

Because this Government does not support law and order they support fear and spin.

The policies and laws that they are passing or proposing do not address the issue of road fatalities at all. They are all about revenue raising as in this wonderful proposal;

Our aim is to put in place an effective prevention scheme that deters people from driving
uninsured but which does not require police intervention, and will have a minimum impact on the
honest motorist. We therefore intend to make it possible to prosecute a person for having control
of an uninsured vehicle without first having to catch him using it on a road.

We propose to introduce legislation making it an offence to be the registered keeper of a vehicle
the use of which is not insured in accordance with section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. Such
an offence would not require the police to prove that the vehicle was in use on the road. Subject to
certain exemptions, the possession of a vehicle without valid insurance would be an offence.
Liability would rest with the keeper of the vehicle.

This would be a new offence, additional to the existing offence of "using a vehicle on a road or
other public place without third party insurance" as required by Section 143 of the Road Traffic
Act 1988. The new offence would initially attract a fixed penalty of £100. If, after the issue of a
fixed penalty notice, the vehicle continued to have no policy of insurance for its use then the case
could be prosecuted in the Magistrates Courts. It is proposed that the maximum penalty on
prosecution be a fine at level 3 (£1000). The new offence would not attract endorsements on a
Driving Licence. Its purpose would be to deliver a sharp lesson to those motorists who fail to
renew their insurance on time, and to deter all motorists from committing the more serious
offence of actually driving whilst uninsured.

There are a number of circumstances in which the registered keeper of a motor vehicle has no
intention of driving or keeping the vehicle on the road and who therefore may assume that they
have no need for insurance. Examples would include a vehicle that is off the road for repairs or
restoration, or a vehicle which is laid up during the winter months. Providing that the keeper has
made a Statutory Off Road Declaration (SORN) to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
(DVLA), there would be no requirement for insurance to be in place.

And they genuinely believe this is the answer to uninsured drivers. A Government without a clue

Or how about this marvelous proposition,

Police will keep cash from more road fines

By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent


POLICE are to be allowed to keep the revenue from fines for a range of traffic offences in an attempt to encourage chief constables to deploy more officers on the roads.

Penalties paid by motorists for driving using a mobile phone, without insurance and failing to wear a seatbelt will be channelled back to the force which issued them.

Police must use the revenue on camera detection of motoring offences.

The Home Office is keen to promote the use of automatic numberplate recognition cameras, which have computers to check passing cars against insurance and DVLA data- bases. Offending drivers are then stopped by police farther down the road.

The reform, which is contained in the Serious Organised Crime and Policing Bill, follows criticism of the Home Office for failing to make the policing of roads a priority for chief constables.

The number of traffic police has fallen by 11 per cent since 1996 as forces have chosen to redeploy officers to other duties.

Detection rates for most traffic offences have fallen with the exception of speeding.

The decision five years ago to allow forces to retain speed camera fines has resulted in a huge rise in penalties, up from 400,000 in 1998 to two million last year.

Robert Gifford, the executive director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said that the changes would arrest the long-term decline in the number of dedicated traffic police on the roads.

"Roads policing is an effective tool in reducing road casualties. Its inclusion in a Serious Crime Bill shows that the Home Office is finally taking roads policing seriously.

"These changes will make elements of roads policing self-financing and will encourage police forces to direct more resources in this direction. This can only be good news for road safety," he said.

Other offences covered by the reform include driving without an MOT, licence or road tax, using an overweight vehicle or trailer, failure to stop for police, failure to identify the driver, offences relating to noise limits and motorcycle silencers, driving without proper control or view of the road ahead, and having no numberplate or an obscured numberplate

So we are going to turn the police into inland revenue officers who are focussed on collecting money. Of course the money will only be used for more cameras, not more police. Utter ******** sorry the sooner these fools and liars are kicked out of office the better.

Originally Posted by Gforceuk

thats a matter of opinion ... why not vote for a govmnt that supports law and order.

if your not willing to pay the price for breaking the law...then dont do it. simple.

I think you'll find Patch's issue is not with sticking to the law rather the wisdom of some of the actual laws that are passed.

You can make anything illegal and trot out the 'don't do the crime' line, but only if you slavishly assume all legislation is equitable, reasonable or just. History is littered with thousands of examples of legislative abuses of power, both minor and major.

we definately need more traffic police on the roads , it might teach some of the morons in cars how to drive...

so if that happens i dont care how they get the revenue to be honest.