kerrrrching!!! nice earner
phone and dashcam footage was sent to police via Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign.
Is it just me or does that read like its come from some cheap , dystopian future type novel?
dieseldog999:
kerrrrching!!! nice earner
Although note of course that Essex police don’t get the cash…
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
kerrrrching!!! nice earnerAlthough note of course that Essex police don’t get the cash…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
i dont think it matters who gets it as its just a cameravan/security camera money raker with the motorist being the easy cash cow again.
dieseldog999:
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
kerrrrching!!! nice earnerAlthough note of course that Essex police don’t get the cash…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
i dont think it matters who gets it as its just a cameravan/security camera money raker with the motorist being the easy cash cow again.
Disagree - In my view, if the bloke(s) making the decision to issue the tickets/prosecute are not benefiting themselves or their own particular organisation then it’s not a cash cow or a “nice earner” by any logical use of the terms.
They deserve all they get tbh. There are certain rules on the road that we have to agree to abide by. Driving the wrong way is illegal unless instructed to do so by The police or highway agency staff.
I don’t agree with sending your dashcam footage in unless it is something very serious that warrants it either.
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
kerrrrching!!! nice earnerAlthough note of course that Essex police don’t get the cash…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
i dont think it matters who gets it as its just a cameravan/security camera money raker with the motorist being the easy cash cow again.Disagree - In my view, if the bloke(s) making the decision to issue the tickets/prosecute are not benefiting themselves or their own particular organisation then it’s not a cash cow or a “nice earner” by any logical use of the terms.
Of course it is…, all these Govt departments all ■■■■ in the same pot, so it doesn’t matter which one it goes to.
Nite Owl:
phone and dashcam footage was sent to police via Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign.Is it just me or does that read like its come from some cheap , dystopian future type novel?
Would this be collaborators/grasses sending video footage of transgressions in for their pat on the head and maybe a free pass when they transgress?
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
kerrrrching!!! nice earnerAlthough note of course that Essex police don’t get the cash…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
i dont think it matters who gets it as its just a cameravan/security camera money raker with the motorist being the easy cash cow again.Disagree - In my view, if the bloke(s) making the decision to issue the tickets/prosecute are not benefiting themselves or their own particular organisation then it’s not a cash cow or a “nice earner” by any logical use of the terms.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
£86000 bexause the fannys contributing to the " Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign." means big brother pockets £86000 because 86 frivers see it as ok to drive back down a gridlocked otorway with standing traffic.
they shouldnt do it and wouldnt do it in noral circumstances but if there were any kittens killed then i think we would have heard about it.
mr and mrs basil and doris dashcam should feel proud of themselfs by now.
robroy:
Of course it is…, all these Govt departments all ■■■■ in the same pot, so it doesn’t matter which one it goes to.
At the end of the day, we all ■■■■ in the same big pot and we all drink from the same big cup (which is itself fed from the aforementioned pot).
dieseldog999:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
£86000 bexause the fannys contributing to the " Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign." means big brother pockets £86000 because 86 frivers see it as ok to drive back down a gridlocked otorway with standing traffic.
they shouldnt do it and wouldnt do it in noral circumstances but if there were any kittens killed then i think we would have heard about it.
mr and mrs basil and doris dashcam should feel proud of themselfs by now.
All of which has SQR(FA) to do with anyone “earning” anything.
Nite Owl:
phone and dashcam footage was sent to police via Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign.Is it just me or does that read like its come from some cheap , dystopian future type novel?
It’s not just you. Problem is, it’s not a novel and it’s not the future 
Roymondo:
dieseldog999:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
£86000 bexause the fannys contributing to the " Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign." means big brother pockets £86000 because 86 frivers see it as ok to drive back down a gridlocked otorway with standing traffic.
they shouldnt do it and wouldnt do it in noral circumstances but if there were any kittens killed then i think we would have heard about it.
mr and mrs basil and doris dashcam should feel proud of themselfs by now.All of which has SQR(FA) to do with anyone “earning” anything.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^so who spends the 8600 then if its not being earned?
dieseldog999:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^so who spends the 8600 then if its not being earned?
HMG - i.e. All of us. But neither HMG nor society as a whole has actually done anything to “earn” that sum - so no, it’s not a “nice earner”.
So, if some say it’s “grassing 'em up”, where is the line drawn?
Is reporting suspicions about a kiddie fiddler too much? Of course not. Nor a murderer. I wouldn’t accuse anyone here of being that shallow.
What of theft?
Someone ripping off an old ladies ■■■■■, caught on dashcam? I’d report it. And not many of you would call me a grass, I’ll bet. Would you report someone on a tax fiddle? They are after all stealing from (not the tax-man) the public ■■■■■. They are partly responsible for short funding of hospitals and schools.
Cue: howls of outrage and derision. …But no argument against the plain truth of the statement.
Why is it so different that those who think they are above the law of the land concerning traffic law get such protection? Their attitude of entitlement may be only one aspect of their general driving behaviour?
They think are too important to be delayed by an accident? Maybe they think they are too important to slow down outside the school gates too?
If you are really citizens of a society maybe you should learn to accept all the rules, even if you don’t like them.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
dieseldog999:
£86000 bexause the fannys contributing to the " Safer Essex Road Partnerships’ Extra Eyes campaign." means big brother pockets £86000 because 86 frivers see it as ok to drive back down a gridlocked otorway with standing traffic.
they shouldnt do it and wouldnt do it in noral circumstances but if there were any kittens killed then i think we would have heard about it.
mr and mrs basil and doris dashcam should feel proud of themselfs by now.
can you send your calculator to my boss ?
Franglais:
So, if some say it’s “grassing 'em up”, where is the line drawn?
Is reporting suspicions about a kiddie fiddler too much? Of course not. Nor a murderer. I wouldn’t accuse anyone here of being that shallow.
What of theft?
Someone ripping off an old ladies ■■■■■, caught on dashcam? I’d report it. And not many of you would call me a grass, I’ll bet. Would you report someone on a tax fiddle? They are after all stealing from (not the tax-man) the public ■■■■■. They are partly responsible for short funding of hospitals and schools.
Cue: howls of outrage and derision. …But no argument against the plain truth of the statement.Why is it so different that those who think they are above the law of the land concerning traffic law get such protection? Their attitude of entitlement may be only one aspect of their general driving behaviour?
They think are too important to be delayed by an accident? Maybe they think they are too important to slow down outside the school gates too?If you are really citizens of a society maybe you should learn to accept all the rules, even if you don’t like them.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
You are right. We need laws and standards to operate a civilised society. However, there are degrees of criminality and there is a need for proper detection of crime.
A violent robbery against a pensioner isn’t the same as trying to get off a motorway illegally. Getting off a motorway illegally when the traffic is at a standstill isn’t the same as doing it in 70MPH flowing traffic. I agree, there should be penalties for those that committed the offences, but the bit that doesn’t sit right with me is the “policing from a computer” approach.
In the past, people wouldn’t have considered taking the course of action that they did, because they expected to be caught on the spot by a cop in a white hat, who knew every bit of The Road Traffic Act. Now, we have cameras that are (rightly) seen as earners. On top of that, we have dash-cam dullards who want to be teacher’s pet by sending (often vexatiously) hours of boring footage to The Police. The more people that do this, the more the cops will come to rely on it and the less real cops there will be. That’s not a good thing.
We already have armies of plastic “enforcement officers” from Community Wardens to HATO wombles, when what most people want is more Police Officers. Real coppers doing real jobs, not jobsworth halfwits in hi-vis jackets.
The problem is, the easier people make it for the government to save money, the more they will do it.
Consider charities, there are thousands of them in this country, it’s a huge business. That’s the problem, the simple and noble act of charity has been made illegitimate by corporate and governmental greed.
There should be no need for charities in this country.
I’m sure most of us have a favourite charity or two that we like to support, but it’s something that has been bothering me for years - who is really benefiting? I’m still struggling with it.
Do you see my point though? We need to stop doing the jobs of others, it’s bad for all of us.
Sorry for rambling.
Edited to remove a simple English word meaning illegitimate 
Come on give them a break, they had been waiting for a whole 25 MINUTES!!
Won’t be long until dash cams are mandatory
Drempels:
Franglais:
So, if some say it’s “grassing 'em up”, where is the line drawn?
Is reporting suspicions about a kiddie fiddler too much? Of course not. Nor a murderer. I wouldn’t accuse anyone here of being that shallow.
What of theft?
Someone ripping off an old ladies ■■■■■, caught on dashcam? I’d report it. And not many of you would call me a grass, I’ll bet. Would you report someone on a tax fiddle? They are after all stealing from (not the tax-man) the public ■■■■■. They are partly responsible for short funding of hospitals and schools.
Cue: howls of outrage and derision. …But no argument against the plain truth of the statement.Why is it so different that those who think they are above the law of the land concerning traffic law get such protection? Their attitude of entitlement may be only one aspect of their general driving behaviour?
They think are too important to be delayed by an accident? Maybe they think they are too important to slow down outside the school gates too?If you are really citizens of a society maybe you should learn to accept all the rules, even if you don’t like them.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
You are right. We need laws and standards to operate a civilised society. However, there are degrees of criminality and there is a need for proper detection of crime.
A violent robbery against a pensioner isn’t the same as trying to get off a motorway illegally. Getting off a motorway illegally when the traffic is at a standstill isn’t the same as doing it in 70MPH flowing traffic. I agree, there should be penalties for those that committed the offences, but the bit that doesn’t sit right with me is the “policing from a computer” approach.
In the past, people wouldn’t have considered taking the course of action that they did, because they expected to be caught on the spot by a cop in a white hat, who knew every bit of The Road Traffic Act. Now, we have cameras that are (rightly) seen as earners. On top of that, we have dash-cam dullards who want to be teacher’s pet by sending (often vexatiously) hours of boring footage to The Police. The more people that do this, the more the cops will come to rely on it and the less real cops there will be. That’s not a good thing.
We already have armies of plastic “enforcement officers” from Community Wardens to HATO wombles, when what most people want is more Police Officers. Real coppers doing real jobs, not jobsworth halfwits in hi-vis jackets.
The problem is, the easier people make it for the government to save money, the more they will do it.
Consider charities, there are thousands of them in this country, it’s a huge business. That’s the problem, the simple and noble act of charity has been made illegitimate by corporate and governmental greed.
There should be no need for charities in this country.
I’m sure most of us have a favourite charity or two that we like to support, but it’s something that has been bothering me for years - who is really benefiting? I’m still struggling with it.
Do you see my point though? We need to stop doing the jobs of others, it’s bad for all of us.
Sorry for rambling.
Edited to remove a simple English word meaning illegitimate
Aye - I can’t remember any copper ever knocking on my door and saying, ‘you look a bit tired mate, why don’t you hop up onto the bunk and I’ll do your next stint for ya’. Nobody ever offers to do my job for me.