Watching us all the time

Did you know this was going to happen? Oh come on it was obvious, this Labour government and its state police force just want to know everything about what we are doing, where we are going and who we are talking to - and if we complain "what have we got to hide?".

The latest story concerns this:

"A national network of cameras and computers automatically logging car number plates will be in place within months, the BBC has learned.

Thousands of Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras are already operating on Britain's roads.

Police forces across England, Wales and Scotland will soon be able to share the information on one central computer.

Officers say it is a useful tool in fighting crime, but critics say the network is secretive and unregulated. "

But this is just to be used against criminals, right? Wrong!

"John Catt found himself on the wrong side of the ANPR system. He regularly attends anti-war demonstrations outside a factory in Brighton, his home town.

It was at one of these protests that Sussex police put a "marker" on his car. That meant he was added to a "hotlist".

This is a system meant for criminals but John Catt has not been convicted of anything and on a trip to London, the pensioner found himself pulled over by an anti-terror unit.

"I was threatened under the Terrorist Act. I had to answer every question they put to me, and if there were any questions I would refuse to answer, I would be arrested. I thought to myself, what kind of world are we living in?"

Sussex police would not talk about the case. "

Who said "police state"?

The Times reports that :

"Drivers will be breathalysed at random and those close to the limit will stand a much greater chance of being convicted under plans to give police new powers to tackle drink-driving.

There will be a record increase in the number of breath tests to deter motorists from thinking that they can get away with having an extra drink."

The key lines are these ones:

"A consultation paper to be published within weeks will propose giving police the power to carry out “targeted breath testing”, which effectively means that they will be able to stop any driver.

At present, police can test drivers only in three circumstances: after a collision, after a traffic offence or when they have “reasonable suspicion” that a person is drink-driving.

Some forces, including North Wales, interpret “reasonable suspicion” more broadly than others and set up roadblocks to check all drivers where there is a history of drink-driving. The Government plans to give all forces the power to set up such roadblocks.

Police will be able to test any driver in an area where it is reasonable to assume that some motorists might be drinking and driving.

...

The Department for Transport is reluctant to use the term “random testing” for fear of alienating the public, but the new powers will effectively permit it."

Once again it is the motorist that is persecuted by the state, whilst muggers and burglars can carry on with little chance of ever being caught let alone punished.

Crime and punishment

I have planning a big post on this for a while but work has got in the way, so here's a taster.

The news is being reported today that

"serious offenders are getting off lightly because police are chasing performance targets"

and that

"I've known a caution for a serious offence of actual bodily harm where the victim required stitches." ... "A caution was issued for having a house full of cannabis plants. A 20-year-old man who had unlawful sex with a 15-year-old was cautioned."

and that

"Solicitors have also described how some offenders exploit the system by giving false addresses and said there was no proper confirmation of their identity. They also said half of fines are not paid in full. Mr Johnson said: "The criminals play the system day in day out. They admit the offence quickly to qualify for a ticket, which is the fastest way of getting out of the police station.""

We also learn that

"Another solicitor who works with the Ministry of Justice described the system as "staggering and deranged". "The bottom is falling out of the criminal justice system, workload in London courts is easily down by half."

We further learn that

"The Police Federation of England and Wales, which represents rank and file police officers, says that pressure on forces to improve crime detection rates is to blame. A federation spokesman said officers are being "encouraged to dispense instant justice where at all possible". He said: "It's a dumbing down of the criminal justice system. Persistent offenders, like shoplifters for example, can cross county borders picking up £80 fines and never pay them.""

What is really happening is this, the government has run out of money for the criminal justice system, they cannot afford to build any more prisons. They want to appear tough on crime but are infested with the kind of people who think that criminals are really just victims of society. The government also want to reduce the crime figures so as to reassure an ever more worried public and offence reduction is a good way of doing this, it also has the side-benefit of increasing crime detection rates.

There is of course still one area where no leniency is given, no allowances made for the perpetrator of the "crime". That is the area of traffic offences; if you park on a traffic meter for 2 minutes over the length of stay you have paid for, you will get a £40 or £50 fine. If you exceed the 50mph speed limit on an empty A-road at 4am and are caught on a speed camera, you will get a fine and three points and have your insurance increased as a result. Get caught four times in five years and you will lose your driving licence and so possibly your job.

In Labour Britain a repeat burglar will get chance after chance before even getting sentenced to a community sentence (which he need not even attend). In Labour Britain a thug may cause physical damage and yet just receive a fine (which he need not pay). In Labour Britain a driver will be charged, sentenced and fined all before he gets out of his car. Justice, don't make me laugh.

In Labour Britain in 2008 I worry more about being caught speeding and so losing my driving licence than any scrote worries about being caught and punished for carrying a knife, or burgling a house or dealing drugs.

Well done Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the succession of incompetent Home Secretaries who have presided over the collapse in law and order in this Country over the last 11 years. Thanks also to the increasingly politicised police force for worrying more about inclusivity and community relations than crime prevention and detection. Between you, you have well and truly screwed this Country over - are you proud?

Motorist told flag could be racist

Yet another story from the "what on earth do the police think they are doing" file. This is Wiltshire report that:

"A TEENAGE motorist was told to remove an England flag from his car by a police officer because it could be offensive to immigrants.

Ben Smith, 18, was driving back home to Ingram Road in Melksham on Thursday evening after filling up with petrol, when the officer stopped him on a routine patrol.

He checked the tax disc and tyres on his Vauxhall Corsa but when he noticed the flag of St George on the parcel shelf he told Mr Smith to take it down.

Mr Smith, who works for G Plan Upholsterers on Hampton Park West, said: "He saw the flag and said it was racist towards immigrants and if I refused to take it down I would get a £30 fine.

"I laughed because I thought he was joking, but then I realised he was serious so I had to take it down straight away. I thought it was silly - it's my country and I want to show my support for my country."

Mr Smith had recently installed new speakers in the parcel shelf of his car and wanted to cover them up so they did not get stolen.

He used the flag and laid it out flat on the shelf so it was not obscuring his view out of the rear window.

But it was only there a couple of days before he was stopped by the officer at about 9.30pm close to Melksham Enterprise Park and made to take it down.

He said he is used to getting stopped by the police because he is a young male driver and is often mistaken for a boy racer'.

But he thought it was "a bit strange" to be asked to take down the England flag when the officer found nothing else wrong with his car.

PC Dave Cooper, of Chippenham Road Policing Unit, said he had never come across an officer asking someone to remove an England flag from their car because it could be racist.

He added: "It all depends on the context of a stop. If they are going past a lot of Polish people, for instance, and abusing them, then we possibly would ask them to take the flag down."

He said there would be no police log of Mr Smith having been stopped with details of what was said to him, as there was nothing wrong with his car.

He added the officer could have been based anywhere around the county and just made an independent stop."

You can pretty much guarantee that:

a) the police would not stop a Polish man from displaying the Polish flag in his car
b) the police would not stop a Scottish man from displaying the Scottish flag in his car
c) the police wouldn't come to Mr Smith's house to investigate the theft of his new speakers from his parcel shelf, should they be stolen


and the police wonder why they have lost the support of many people in this country...

Baltimore looks exciting

Two police related stories from Baltimore have caught my eye, the first related to this piece of video...




You can read the news outlets views of the incident here and here. It concerns what happened when Baltimore City Police Officer Salvatore Rivieri asked 14-year-old Eric Bush and his friends to stop skateboarding at the Inner Harbor.



The second story relates to Tevin James having his jaw broken by another Baltimore policeman, you can read this story here.


I have just crossed Baltimore of my "To Visit" list...



Thanks to The Agitator for the spot.

Ken's war against the private motor car continues

I read that the next link in Ken's long avowed aim to rid London of motor cars has been announced. This time it is to raise the charge to enter central London from £8 to £25. So much for the "congestion zone", it appears that Ken is trying to justify this increase on the grounds on the grounds of reducing emissions.

Ken is proposing that low emitting cars will pay nothing, but has left himself some wriggle room - an aide is reported to have said "We're convinced there's no risk of increased congestion in the first few years but we'll put in very careful monitoring so we would be able to bring in a band B charge of £4 very quickly if we need to,"


I note that The Mayor is also scrapping the 90 per cent discount for zone residents owning "gas-guzzlers" - meaning they will have to pay the full amount wherever they live.

I hate the phrase "gas-guzzlers" and resent the way that the press and especially the BBC are following Ken's agenda by using the term. This little remarked upon wrinkle will raise income for Ken and punish the mainly Conservative voters of Kensington and Chelsea.


I did enjoy this line "The plans, unveiled by the Mayor at his City Hall press conference, are likely to form the centrepiece of his reelection campaign." Please do Ken, I think it might tip the balance towards Boris. I must listen to radio bloke tomorrow - that's TalkSport - should be interesting...

Dealing with the real criminals

You will all be relieved to hear that this Labour government has decided to finally crack down on some of the most serious criminals in this land. I am of course referring not to burglars or muggers but to Motorists caught using a hand-held mobile phone.

"Motorists caught using a hand-held mobile phone while driving could be jailed for two years under tough new guidelines issued today by prosecutors."

Thankfully the new guidance doesn't end there, also liable for a prison sentence are those "drivers who adjust sat-navs, tinker with MP3 music players such as iPods or send text messages at the wheel".

I have a bluetooth earpiece, I bought it before the legislation that outlawed using a hand-held mobile while driving was introduced in 2003. I feel safer driving whilst using it rather than holding a phone to my ear or trying to balance my mobile betwixt ear and shoulder (and my chiropractor bills have been reduced as a result). I also get irritated when I see drivers using a mobile telephone whilst driving especially as their Transit van careers towards me as the driver tries to talk on his mobile whilst avoiding the newest road humps on a quiet suburban back street.

Rob Gifford, of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said "This sends a clear message to motorists: don't mix driving and communicating, just as you would not drink and drive...This is long overdue. At last the law has caught up with the reality of the road, with too many people using their phone while driving."


I see that those of us using a handsfree mobile should not feel smug, in an effort to improve the crime detection statistics, sorry make the roads safer, "drivers were also warned that similar penalties could be imposed for using a hands-free device if they were judged not to be in control of their car. Police now check mobile phone records after accidents to see if the driver was making a call at the time."

It is amazing how much Police resources can be allocated to detecting, investigating and prosecuting drivers for such heinous crimes, thankfully the Police have all but ended the less serious crimes of mugging and burglary so they have the time free to do this.


"Using a hand-held mobile was made illegal in 2003, when the penalty was limited to a £30 fine, but it acted as little deterrent and the latest figures show that in 2005 129,700 motorists still flouted the ban.

In February the law was toughened, with drivers facing a £60 fine and three points on their licence."

Ah so there is a revenue raising angle to this legislation as well, good for a moment I was worried that the Labour government had forgotten to add that to the punishment.


"A new offence of causing death by careless driving is to be created under the Road Safety Act, due to come into force early next year."

The roads are too crowded, so rather than build new roads or try and stop people driving who have no licences in cars that are not taxed, insured or MOT'd, this government have decided to attack the drivers who are easier to catch and prosecute. As I have said before the generally law-abiding middle-classes are easier to police and punish than the criminal classes, so this Labour government have decided to go for the easy option.


"Ministers are keen to take an even stronger line after figures showed that mobile phones were linked to 13 fatal accidents in 2005 and 52 serious crashes."

I wonder how many people were killed or seriously injured by muggers last year? I wonder if those muggers caught were given a custodial sentence or were their defence legal team allowed to plead mitigating factors? It really, really pisses me off that a driver is considered guilty of the "crime" they have been accused off and will be punished accordingly, whereas a "scrote" will be given every excuse for his behaviour and allowed a second, third ... forty-third chance before facing a custodial sentence. Truly we live in a land where our priorities on crime and punishment have become ridiculously confused.

Why have they closed the motorway again?

For quite some time now I have been wanting to write an article about why major roads seem to be being closed more often than used to be the case. I kept putting it off because it is quite involved and I thought many people already understood the main reason. Then on Top Gear the other Sunday, Jeremy Clarkson had a small rant about the same subject and yet still people have been asking "Mr NotaSheep, what is going on with the M4/M40/M1/M2/M... being closed?". The bottom line is that Mr Brunstrom, the car loving Chief Constable of North Wales Police, is the man responsible. Mr Brunstrom was Head of Road Policing of the Association of Chief Police Officers until 2005 and it was he who changed the guidelines to follow when there is a major road traffic accident.

Take a look at this, "Disruption to the road network following an incident can have far ranging effects including damage to the economy. Although the investigation should, in all cases take precedence over the need to re-open roads thought should be given to the appointment of a diversion manager to assist with the flow of traffic on other routes in conjunction with the highway authority in order to minimise disruption."