Victorian Speed Camera blunder

[Ext User(TMG)]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/new-speed-camera-blunder/2006/07/11/1152383721616.html

[Ext User(Ron)]

"TMG" <TMG@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:g9Isg.2864$tE5.2806@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

> http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/new-speed-camera-blunder/2006/07
> /11/1152383721616.html

I think it is DEAD WRONG to use civilians to fine people for speeding.
It is part of "Law and Order", a Police job!

Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins, domestic
violence...... Do that have any Police and what do the do?

Ron

[Ext User(Noddy)]

"Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97FDB19705CB0mcgricenewsguycom@129.250.170 .90...

> I think it is DEAD WRONG to use civilians to fine people for speeding.
> It is part of "Law and Order", a Police job!

I agree, but that's part of the Labour Government's privatisation cash grab.

> Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins, domestic
> violence...... Do that have any Police and what do the do?

Don't get your car stolen in Victoria. Cops no longer attend.

--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Ext User(Dan---)]

"TMG" <TMG@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:g9Isg.2864$tE5.2806@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/new-speed-camera-blunder/2006/07/11/1152383721616.html


One thing to do with speed camera's.

Blow the cunts up!

--
Regards
Dan
Heaven is Hell.

[Ext User(Bernd Felsche)]

"Noddy" <dg4163@dodo.com.au> writes:
>"Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message

>> I think it is DEAD WRONG to use civilians to fine people for speeding.
>> It is part of "Law and Order", a Police job!

>I agree, but that's part of the Labour Government's privatisation cash grab.

>> Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins, domestic
>> violence...... Do that have any Police and what do the do?

>Don't get your car stolen in Victoria. Cops no longer attend.

They'll show if you tell them that the boot was full of fertiliser.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because
X against HTML mail | they threaten."
/ \ and postings | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.

[Ext User(Trevor Wilson)]

"Noddy" <dg4163@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:44b35e8a$1@news.comindico.com.au...
>
> "Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns97FDB19705CB0mcgricenewsguycom@129.250.170 .90...
>
>> I think it is DEAD WRONG to use civilians to fine people for speeding.
>> It is part of "Law and Order", a Police job!
>
> I agree, but that's part of the Labour Government's privatisation cash
> grab.
>
>> Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins, domestic
>> violence...... Do that have any Police and what do the do?
>
> Don't get your car stolen in Victoria. Cops no longer attend.

**Really? I witnessed a couple of thieves about two years ago, setting off
the alarm system of a fancy black Commodore. It was about 5:00AM. I asked
them if they needed any assistance. They politely declined my assistance. I
went inside the house to call the cops and then noticed that the crooks were
about 100 Metres up the road and moving fast. I relayed the info to the cops
and they turned up within 5 mins. Later that morning, the scientific guys
turned up and converted the black Commodore into a grey one, with all the
fingerprint dusting. It was a pretty impressive affair. I still don't know
why they went to so much trouble, but their response was certainly
impressive. I guess it may have been part of a car-jacking or some other
violent attack, as I can't imagine that sort of response for a property
crime.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Ext User(DalienX)]

Ron wrote:


>
> Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins,

Security companies already get most of the break-ins.
When the alarm goes off the security get a phone call and if it turns
out to be a real breakin and not a false alarm then the security call
the police.
Pretty crap setup imo.

[Ext User(Brendon)]

"Dan---" <575hp@detroitdieselpower.com> wrote in message
news:12b6pc3q4elv3af@corp.supernews.com...
> "TMG" <TMG@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:g9Isg.2864$tE5.2806@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/new-speed-camera-blunder/2006/07/11/1152383721616.html
>
>
> One thing to do with speed camera's.
>
> Blow the cunts up!

I cant resist posting this link: http://www.speedcam.co.uk/gatso2.htm

[Ext User(Tsunami)]

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:44b36412$0$21156$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>
> "Noddy" <dg4163@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:44b35e8a$1@news.comindico.com.au...
> >
> > "Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message
> > news:Xns97FDB19705CB0mcgricenewsguycom@129.250.170 .90...
> >
> >> I think it is DEAD WRONG to use civilians to fine people for speeding.
> >> It is part of "Law and Order", a Police job!
> >
> > I agree, but that's part of the Labour Government's privatisation cash
> > grab.
> >
> >> Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins, domestic
> >> violence...... Do that have any Police and what do the do?
> >
> > Don't get your car stolen in Victoria. Cops no longer attend.
>
> **Really? I witnessed a couple of thieves about two years ago, setting off
> the alarm system of a fancy black Commodore. It was about 5:00AM. I asked
> them if they needed any assistance. They politely declined my assistance.
I
> went inside the house to call the cops and then noticed that the crooks
were
> about 100 Metres up the road and moving fast. I relayed the info to the
cops
> and they turned up within 5 mins. Later that morning, the scientific guys
> turned up and converted the black Commodore into a grey one, with all the
> fingerprint dusting. It was a pretty impressive affair. I still don't know
> why they went to so much trouble, but their response was certainly
> impressive. I guess it may have been part of a car-jacking or some other
> violent attack, as I can't imagine that sort of response for a property
> crime.
>
>
> --
> Trevor Wilson

Well dunno where you live, but in WA just about every car that is broken
into or stolen would be printed. Unless of course it is obvious there would
be no prints, such as the crooks threw a brick thru the window and then were
disturbed so they ran off (IE pretty obvious they never touched the car)

[Ext User(Tsunami)]

"Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97FDB19705CB0mcgricenewsguycom@129.250.170 .90...
> "TMG" <TMG@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:g9Isg.2864$tE5.2806@news-server.bigpond.net.au:
>
> > http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/new-speed-camera-blunder/2006/07
> > /11/1152383721616.html
>
> I think it is DEAD WRONG to use civilians to fine people for speeding.
> It is part of "Law and Order", a Police job!
>
> Next Victoria will be using Security Officers on break-ins, domestic
> violence...... Do that have any Police and what do the do?
>
> Ron

Guess you would rather that Police Officers man the speed cameras. Then you
could complain when it takes ages for a cop to attend a robbery etc.
Seems the cameras are here to stay (unfortunately).... so it may as well be
private operators to free up our limited numbers of Police for more urgent
tasks. Furthermore:
You'll note the $100,000 fine for an error in the setup of the camera kinda
proves your logic is flawed. That is (1) the company stuffed up and were
detected (2) they were penalised to make them more careful in future. Do
you really think that would happen if a Govt employee set up the camera
wrong?

[Ext User(g)]

"Noddy" <dg4163@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:44b35e8a$1@news.comindico.com.au...
> Don't get your car stolen in Victoria. Cops no longer attend.

If your car was simply removed from the front driveway of your house (with
no witnesses, etc), why SHOULD Police attend? Nothing to see in the
driveway.....
Officer: "Hmm, yep, you're car's definitely not in the driveway, sir,
looks like you were right... it's been stolen...." (duh)

If details can be taken over the phone (ie, registration plate number,
circumstances of the theft, etc) by a public servant, then why should a
Police Officer attend?

Once the car is recovered (as the result of a pursuit, dumped, etc), then
yes, Police should attend to sight the vehicle, assess the scene for
fingerprints, etc...


g

[Ext User(Michael C)]

"g" <gantispammo@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:44b3a822$1@quokka.wn.com.au...
> If your car was simply removed from the front driveway of your house (with
> no witnesses, etc), why SHOULD Police attend? Nothing to see in the
> driveway.....
> Officer: "Hmm, yep, you're car's definitely not in the driveway, sir,
> looks like you were right... it's been stolen...." (duh)
>
> If details can be taken over the phone (ie, registration plate number,
> circumstances of the theft, etc) by a public servant, then why should a
> Police Officer attend?
>
> Once the car is recovered (as the result of a pursuit, dumped, etc), then
> yes, Police should attend to sight the vehicle, assess the scene for
> fingerprints, etc...

Maybe the police would see something that the owner missed, such as the car
they used previously.

Michael

[Ext User(veritas)]

Trevor Wilson wrote:
I can't imagine that sort of response for a property
> crime.

Yeah - The vehicle was probably involved/used in in a serious offence....
>
>

[Ext User(Noddy)]

"g" <gantispammo@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:44b3a822$1@quokka.wn.com.au...

> If your car was simply removed from the front driveway of your house (with
> no witnesses, etc), why SHOULD Police attend? Nothing to see in the
> driveway.....

Isn't it normal police duty to see if any witnesses can be found, or does
Joe Public now have to do his own leg work in solving crimes?

> Officer: "Hmm, yep, you're car's definitely not in the driveway, sir,
> looks like you were right... it's been stolen...." (duh)

Yeah, duh!.

We certainly don't want the coppers doing anything that resembles detective
work, do we? I mean, they might find something they left behind that help
them *catch* the cunts.

Oooohhh :)

> If details can be taken over the phone (ie, registration plate number,
> circumstances of the theft, etc) by a public servant, then why should a
> Police Officer attend?

By your logic, this would rule out the necessity of police presence for
*any* non violent crime. Shit, even if someone's been assualted, let's not
bother the coppers too much if the offender has decamped.

> Once the car is recovered (as the result of a pursuit, dumped, etc), then
> yes, Police should attend to sight the vehicle, assess the scene for
> fingerprints, etc...

Jeez, not placing a load on them are ya? :)

--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Ext User(g)]

"Noddy" <dg4163@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:44b46a60@news.comindico.com.au...
> > If your car was simply removed from the front driveway of your house
(with
> > no witnesses, etc), why SHOULD Police attend? Nothing to see in the
> > driveway.....
>
> Isn't it normal police duty to see if any witnesses can be found, or does
> Joe Public now have to do his own leg work in solving crimes?

If there is a line of inquiry, then yes, Police should attend. You'll find
that in the vast (and I really do mean VAST) majority of cases, there is no
line of inquiry. No witnesses, no video surveillance footage; the vehicle
has literally vanished, and it is long gone by the time the owner notices
that it's missing the next morning. Furthermore, most vehicles are stolen
during the hours of darkness, so even if a neighbour is lucky enough to
witness the offender, they will very rarely be able to positively identify
him/her.

On top of that, even if the hypothetical witness does get a good look at the
offender, all he is generally able to give is a description. Unless he
observes an offending vehicle's registration plate, or knows the offender by
name, or the offender has a particularly unusual feature (ie, a distinctive
tattoo) and can be identified via this feature alone (local Police
knowledge, or Police intelligence database search), then it quickly becomes
a seemingly unrewarding excercise.

Add this to the fact that Police door-knocks are extremely time consuming
and rarely yield successful results (particularly during the day when most
people are at work, and at night, when some people don't answer their doors,
or are out getting pissed, etc). Few people even bother to look outside
when they hear an alarm sounding, let alone go outside to investigate.

Police really do need the assistance of the public with these matters. If
someone witnesses unusual activity, they should report it immediately.
Police should then attend to obtain further information, conduct patrols in
an effort to locate the suspicious person, and so on. If the said
suspicious activity is in a "crime hotspot", then the matter should be
reprioritised accordingly.

Unfortunately, car theft is a volume crime nowadays. That's not to say that
it shouldn't be taken seriously, but when resources are already stretched,
everything becomes prioritised.



> > Officer: "Hmm, yep, you're car's definitely not in the driveway, sir,
> > looks like you were right... it's been stolen...." (duh)
>
> Yeah, duh!.

You'll find that most attendances would result in that. Hardly an efficient
use of Police resources, IMO.


> We certainly don't want the coppers doing anything that resembles
detective
> work, do we? I mean, they might find something they left behind that help
> them *catch* the cunts.

Once again, you will find that things are *very rarely* left behind,
especially if the vehicle was stolen from a driveway.
If there is video surveillance footage (or, indeed, something left behind),
then Police should attend and seize the footage/item for analysis.
Often these issues (checking with the security company for existence of
video surveillance footage, etc) can be dealt with over the phone, and the
investigation is far more efficient when conducted in this manner.

Also remember that items "left behind" by offenders provide nothing more
than circumstantial evidence only, particularly in heavily populated areas,
or areas which are open to the public (where most car thefts occur). This
type of evidence alone is rarely enough to convict an offender.

Identifying and arresting the offender(s) is the relatively easy part;
proving that they committed the offence to a high standard of proof is
something else again.


> > If details can be taken over the phone (ie, registration plate number,
> > circumstances of the theft, etc) by a public servant, then why should a
> > Police Officer attend?
>
> By your logic, this would rule out the necessity of police presence for
> *any* non violent crime. Shit, even if someone's been assualted, let's not
> bother the coppers too much if the offender has decamped.

If the offender has decamped, and the threat no longer exists, then the
victim will usually report the matter at a Police Station. This, of course,
depends on a large range of factors including injuries, severity of the
assault, whether the weapon (if any) has been left behind, if the offender
is still in the vicinity, whether the offender is known to the victim, etc.

The community has every right to expect timely and punctual Police response
for most incidents, but it must understand that Police need community
involvement too, in order to efficiently and effectively do their job.
Life-threatening crimes in progress are given top priority, and rightly so.


> > Once the car is recovered (as the result of a pursuit, dumped, etc),
then
> > yes, Police should attend to sight the vehicle, assess the scene for
> > fingerprints, etc...
>
> Jeez, not placing a load on them are ya? :)

Unfortunately, even this approach does not yield high results.

In the case of a dumped stolen motor vehicle, the best known method of
identifying the offender is by taking fingerprints from the rear vision
mirror, and by swabbing the steering wheel, handbrake, and gearstick for
DNA. Even then, less than 3% of cases result in a positive identification
of the offender.

Each DNA swab costs approximately $200 to analyse, whether it results in a
positive "hit" or not. This amounts to $600 per vehicle, assuming the
steering wheel, handbrake and gearstick are all swabbed. Significant cost
for the community, I'm sure you'd agree, particularly considering that many
vehicles which are stolen nowadays are barely worth $600, mostly due to the
fact that cheaper (read: older) cars often do not have immobilisers, and are
more likely to be stolen in the first place.


And don't get me started on the courts. Upon conviction, many offenders
don't even get a fine large enough to cover the DNA swabbing of the vehicle
they stole............. let alone the repair costs to the vehicle, etc.


g