Laws that work

[Gwyn Nicholas]

Having just aquired a puppy, and sitting quietly with her at 4:30 this morning, it occured to me that one Law that appears to work is that of not allowing your dog to stray. I remember as a kid, it was commonplace to see dogs of neighbours mooching around the street and in peoples gardens and it was law to have a dog licence then. Obviously it is a good law as stray dogs can form packs and are extremely dangerous.

I wonder why it is then, that laws like using mobile phones whilst driving (and arguably potentially more dangerous) are ignored and in the main unpoliced in this country. The wearing of seat belts by children including rear facing baby seats in front passenger seats with airbags or children under 12 (or 135 cm) in the front passenger seat. Things you see all the time on the road or at any superstore.

Seems to me that laws are made in this country to satisfy some sort of "target" rather than to achieve anything by its introduction other than perhaps wishfull thinking.

[5haron]

Social policing? If your dog is straying, being a nuisance or otherwise then it makes the owner vulnerable by fact that it's happening in full view of another and they're obviously unable to hide the breach of a law. Other misdemeanors, such as the ones you mention, whereas not exactly occurring in sole privacy are for instance, inside a car and as such give a false image of privacy, making it seems less obvious and the person less approachable for censure by the gen.public?

I often wonder what goes through people's minds when I see them doing stoopid things, like putting a baby in danger for the sake of gaining a few minutes.

[Gwyn Nicholas]

Good points Sharon. As you say, a straying dog is generally socially unacceptable yet what people do in the privacy of their own vehicle and with the safety of their children in that vehicle seems to be pretty much of a "tut tut" response. Both offences are governed by Law yet people are more responsive to the one that governs straying dogs, which I find quite bizzare. I believe many councils if not all, employ wardens who round up and collect stray dogs to keep them and the general public out of harms way so you have a Law that is actually "policed" without using a Policeman/woman. Perhaps there should be "wardens" who could check static vehicle and advise owners (who afterall may be ignorant of the Law - no defence) that they are breaking the law and putting their children at risk. Using mobile phones is a simple solution, if caught, the car where the offence took place is scrapped - I doubt it would take long for people to get the message because right now it is one Law (that cost us who knows what to implement) that is flagrantly being ignored.

[Barry69]

I agree the use of mobiles whilst driving is a crime, but unless it is policed it will become an excepted breech to the law, We need to ask why is it ok for lorry Drivers to still be allowed to use there CB whilst in control of 18 wheeler ? or a one manned Police vehicle with radio responce, We need the comms but must ensure we maintain a balance of the law, as government cutbacks will only increase the use of single manned police vehicles. This could well be the reason this law is flarnted and only enforced after an accident/incident :)

[sid burns]

I suppose reading the previous I have to reply..........Police officers ignoring drivers using mobile phones what an absolute load of ****!!

Firstly I must reply to single CREWED vehicles. Barry the button to operate the vehicle radio is next to the steering wheel so no hand requires to leave the wheel at any time.

Secondly you go on about using mobile phones whilst driving, dangerous activity correct!! What about when you’re eating / drinking / smoking / changing the CD / tuning into your favourite radio station need I go on? These are all as equally as dangerous, and there’s nobody including myself who can deny doing any of those activities, and there is an offence it called not being in proper control of you vehicle whilst driving.

The sad thing is if a police officer stopped and dealt with every offence he or she see’s when leaving the station they wouldn’t get more than a half a mile away. Maybe you should speak to the politicians you voted for as they make the laws not us!!

Kids without seat belts AHHHHHH not exactly a nice thing to deal with after a collision now that’s an offence that needs more punishment, I’m sure you would agree?

[Gwyn Nicholas]

Sid, I dont think anyone is saying that a Police Officers deliberately ignore the offence, certainly not me anyway. My point is that a specific law was made to outlaw the use of mobile phones whilst driving and as you pointed out it would have been covered by the offence of not being in control of the vehicle. As you rightly pointed out that you would not get far from the station if you stopped every for every offence because we do not have a enough police on the ground to do the job. Hence my original point, what is the point of bringing out new laws that cannot be policed because of that very fact.

When I have near misses with clowns with phones (and I have had two) it maddens me that although a specific law has been made, the punishment for the offence is not severe enough to make people think twice about committing the offence. That is not down to the boys in blue (for whom I have the utmost respect) that is down to the Law makers and Judges. If a Law is passed, it should carry severe consequences or It just adds to the workload that you lads are already struggling to cope with. It is an offence to let your dog roam free, it carries a heavy fine and even imprisonment depending on the circumstances. It is not an offence that is policed directly by the Police yet it works (as Sharon pointed out- socially unacceptable). When I was a youngster it was commonplace to see dogs wandering now it is fairly rare.

The Law (not the enforcers) in this country in my opinion is "an ass". A life sentence does not mean for life, why therefore call it that. If a criminal is sentenced to 10 years for a crime, then that is the time the Judge must think is worthy of that crime, and the time required to rehabilitate. Why then release after six years so that the guy can re-offend within two weeks of being set free. Our criminal justice system was once the envy of the world, now it is at best a joke and at worst a lottery. Biggs got a life sentence for robbing a train, rapists and child abusers get less and time off for good behaviour only to re-offend. Would Biggs have robbed another train if he had been released early, I think not.

The Law is there for the protection of society. If it is ignored because the punishment is not an effective deterant, it fails in its purpose.

[Rog Ball 01]

In my job as a mobile patrol officer, sometimes I have tyo answer the fone when driving. I admit that I have been stopped by police officers for using a fone when driving, and I will admit that I have been 'warned off' by them.

I no longer use the fone when driving, if I did and got a fine points added to my loicence, I would loose my job.

[Dai 55]

Bertie,
you dont have to answer the phone if you are driveing regardless of who is calling you,and you are breaking the law,all my vehicles have a hands free installed,and your work should think about getting the same,they should think twice before calling you when driveing,Health and safety issue,
dai 55

[Gwyn Nicholas]

This honestly happened this morning at 02:30 ish. I got up to go to the loo and I noticed a flickering torchlight flashing past my front door, I thought it must be Police (our street lights are off to save power) so I started downstairs only to realise I was commando (and I dont mean wearing a green beret) so I put some jeans on. When I go downstairs the light had moved off down the street and my wheeley bin was in the middle of the road. By the time I got into the street the phantom had gone. It was suggested to me that I should have phoned the police, I replied to what end, even if they showed up and caught the guy, what would the police do to him.

To me this creep is guilty of a. Trespass b. Removing private property from private land c.( the most serious) Endangering the lives of road users . Three serious and criminal offences. In my experience from what I have read and seen on the local news it is considered "high jinks" or more seriously "anti social behaviour". How are three individual serious crimes reduced to such petty charges. Sid, your experience would be helpful here, would your officers respond to such a call or would they wait until I caught the little sh1t, gave him a "Mooltan" talking-to and then when he then complains about being assaulted, pay me a visit. Again it is not the front line boys in blue that I'm angry with, it is the system of law in this country that makes a mockery of itself, protects the criminal and to hell with the majority who are Law abiding citizens. This experience could have be extremely frightning for older folk of which there are many around these ways.

[Gwyn Nicholas]

Just read in our local rag, that the Police carried out a raid on a property in the town. A van a car and at least four officers were used. The resident was found to be in possession of what is described as "personal use quantity" and as a result recieved a "CANABIS WARNING"
The guy must be wetting his pants.

There was also an accident in the country a week or two ago where, a pensioner hit a horse with his car and drove off leaving the rider injured and the horse needing to be put down. This happened in broad daylight. The pensioners defence "I didn't see any horse". Careless driving causing injury and leaving the scene of an accident, punishment.....£215 fine! LAW, what Law.