Traffic policing (mildly OT)

On 18/5/04 12:09 pm, in article
[email hidden], "David Nutter"

Quoted message said:

Hello,

This was posted to uk.local.lincolnshire earlier today; it may be of
interest to some here.

http://www.polfed.org/0304road-policing.pdf

I am slightly concerned by the occurrence of "road fund license" on the
first page, however...

Old habits die hard..

My thoughts on tracking vehicles/technology led policing would be to have an
RFID (like in the tags in shops to stop you pinching the goods) in the tax
disk. These can be detected from a considerable distance and linked to a
national computer. Similar things already work for road tolls in other
countries.

within one year, any vehicle with a non current tax/insurance/MOT will be
detectable. Any vehicle with the wrong tax disk will be detectable through
ANPR linking the tax disk to the registration. This means that selective
stop and search can be performed, picking up uninsured/untaxed vehicles.

Even better if the vehicle is impounded there and then and the occupants
made to arrange their own transport from then on.

As there seems to be a direct correlation between the bad driving that is
responsible for a lot of accidents and lack of insurance etc. this would go
a long way towards helping reduce this kind of problem.

The RFID in the tax disk would also allow point to point speed controls to
be implemented, ie providing a minimum time for travelling along the M6.

...d

TBH, I'd rather not live in a society where I can be monitored by the state
like that. Sure, it'd have benefits, but I think that they're massively
outweighed by the consequences for society as a whole.

David Martin said:

On 18/5/04 12:09 pm, in article
[email hidden], "David Nutter"

Quoted message said:

Hello,

This was posted to uk.local.lincolnshire earlier today; it may be of
interest to some here.

http://www.polfed.org/0304road-policing.pdf

I am slightly concerned by the occurrence of "road fund license" on
the first page, however...

Old habits die hard..

My thoughts on tracking vehicles/technology led policing would be to
have an RFID (like in the tags in shops to stop you pinching the
goods) in the tax disk. These can be detected from a considerable
distance and linked to a national computer. Similar things already
work for road tolls in other countries.

I'd rather see some traffic police knocking about to pick up on bad driving.
The only time I ever see any is on the motorway or driving round of a night
trying to spot drunk drivers / boy racers. The only other times you see them
are speed traps and tax disk checks.

Quoted message said:

within one year, any vehicle with a non current tax/insurance/MOT
will be detectable. Any vehicle with the wrong tax disk will be
detectable through ANPR linking the tax disk to the registration.
This means that selective stop and search can be performed, picking
up uninsured/untaxed vehicles.

By who?

Doki said:

Quoted message said:

My thoughts on tracking vehicles/technology led policing would be to
have an RFID (like in the tags in shops to stop you pinching the
goods) in the tax disk. These can be detected from a considerable
distance and linked to a national computer. Similar things already
work for road tolls in other countries.

I'd rather see some traffic police knocking about to pick up on bad driving.
The only time I ever see any is on the motorway or driving round of a night
trying to spot drunk drivers / boy racers. The only other times you see them
are speed traps and tax disk checks.

Quoted message said:

within one year, any vehicle with a non current tax/insurance/MOT
will be detectable. Any vehicle with the wrong tax disk will be
detectable through ANPR linking the tax disk to the registration.
This means that selective stop and search can be performed, picking
up uninsured/untaxed vehicles.

By who?

If you have 5 police doing stop and check for MOT etc. they can stop about
200 vehicles a day at an immediate cost of a couple of grand in salary.

These vehicles have been selected as not having a matching tax
disk/registration or other indicator of fault (no current MOT/insurance
etc.)

Allow half of those to be false positives so action is taken on 100.

100 vehicles caught is a big press thing. Start off with 16 grand in road
tax for the vehicles stopped plus fines.
Now with the knock on publicity a proportion of the 1.25 million un
taxed/insured/MOT vehicles in UK will be persuaded to pay up. Even if this
is only 5% there is an immediate financial benefit to the tax payer of
revenue protection.

As with public transport, you don't need to check every ticket, just have a
reasonable expectation that your ticket may be checked and a large enough
penalty if you don't have one.

This then allows the recovered revenue to be spent on more important things
like shared use paths and helmet promotion.

...d

David Martin said:

This then allows the recovered revenue to be spent on more important
things like shared use paths and helmet promotion.

;-)

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as David
Martin <[email hidden]> breathed:

Quoted message said:

As there seems to be a direct correlation between the bad driving that is
responsible for a lot of accidents and lack of insurance etc. this would go
a long way towards helping reduce this kind of problem.

Agreed 100%!

Quoted message said:

The RFID in the tax disk would also allow point to point speed controls to
be implemented, ie providing a minimum time for travelling along the M6.

<mode: tech>
Nice idea, quick and easy to implement too. There are experimental
detectors on a section of road in Leeds already, and in the US I believe
they've already put RFID tags in $20 bills, so putting on in a tax disk
should be fairly easy - though the issuing offices would need equipment
to program the tags at issue time.

If they were going to use it for speed controls though I'd want to see
the motorway limits raised significantly - the fact is it is possible to
cruise most of the M6 (northern section) at 90 without any major risks,
and the lack of speed cameras on such routes except at roadworks would
suggest this is tacitly allowed by the authorities.

100mph on non-urban motorways as a sop to the road lobby, while imposing
RFID and far more 20mph zones in towns might work, even the most avid
petrol-head doesn't really want people doing 50mph past primary schools.

RFID might have interesting side-implication though - it would open the
way for possible mandatory licensing of bikes, with easy detection of
unlicensed ones via handheld units issued to local plod, not to mention
what happens if you combine RFID with national ID cards, and make
carrying them mandatory.
</mode>

And from a personal liberties POV, do you really want the government to
be able to track your every movement and build up a picture of
everywhere you go?

--
- Pyromancer.
- http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
- http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
- http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.

David Martin said:

Quoted message said:

I am slightly concerned by the occurrence of "road fund license" on
the first page, however...

Quoted message said:

Old habits die hard..

Indeed. The Road Fund was wound up by Winston Churchill, AFAIR, so they are
about half a century out of date!

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

Victory is ours! Down with Eric the Half A Brain!

Pyromancer wrote:
[snip]

Quoted message said:

<mode: tech>
Nice idea, quick and easy to implement too. There are experimental
detectors on a section of road in Leeds already, and in the US I believe
they've already put RFID tags in $20 bills

Urban legend according to discussion on comp.risks recently.

Quoted message said:

[snip]

Peter

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Peter Amey
<[email hidden]> breathed:

Quoted message said:

Pyromancer wrote:
[snip]

Quoted message said:

<mode: tech>
Nice idea, quick and easy to implement too. There are experimental
detectors on a section of road in Leeds already, and in the US I believe
they've already put RFID tags in $20 bills

Quoted message said:

Urban legend according to discussion on comp.risks recently.

I did wonder, can't remember what site it was (link from el Reg?).
Claimed they were in Thomas Jefferson's left eye and that someone had
microwaved a batch (causing the tags to explode) to prove it.

The detectors in Leeds are real (and ugly!) enough though, presumably
the test vehicles have a transponder, which if this all becomes
mandatory will be fitted as part of the MOT.

--
- Pyromancer.
- http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
- http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
- http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.

Nathaniel Porter said:

TBH, I'd rather not live in a society where I can be monitored by the state
like that. Sure, it'd have benefits, but I think that they're massively
outweighed by the consequences for society as a whole.

Of course, mass state surveillance is a Bad Thing. It it tantamount to
restrictions on freedom of movement.

Restrictions and monitoring or a single mode of travel does not come
close to being something I could object to on principle. The citizen
effectively enters a social contract; in return for a license to
drive, certain rules must be obeyed and are enforced by monitoring.

I just don't buy the ABD line that motoring is an intrinsic right and
its monitoring or control are infringements of civil liberties.

Pyromancer said:

And from a personal liberties POV, do you really want the government to
be able to track your every movement and build up a picture of
everywhere you go?

I don't mind them tracking wherever a vehicle moves. That's a long way
from tracking my movements.

"[Not Responding]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pyromancer said:

And from a personal liberties POV, do you really want the government to
be able to track your every movement and build up a picture of
everywhere you go?

I don't mind them tracking wherever a vehicle moves. That's a long way
from tracking my movements.

s/vehicle/motor vehicle/

cheers,
clive

"[Not Responding]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Nathaniel Porter said:

TBH, I'd rather not live in a society where I can be monitored by the

state

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

like that. Sure, it'd have benefits, but I think that they're massively
outweighed by the consequences for society as a whole.

Of course, mass state surveillance is a Bad Thing. It it tantamount to
restrictions on freedom of movement.

Restrictions and monitoring or a single mode of travel does not come
close to being something I could object to on principle. The citizen
effectively enters a social contract; in return for a license to
drive, certain rules must be obeyed and are enforced by monitoring.

I just don't buy the ABD line that motoring is an intrinsic right and
its monitoring or control are infringements of civil liberties.

Absolutely - to a point . Having a system where the state (and others?) can
monitor everywhere you go by car is extreme and oppressive IMHO.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with less absolute means of monitoring -
speed cameras, ANPR, permitting police officers to stop you for checks etc.
is OK if used reasonably and responsibly.

It would also be missing the point. Surely the objective should be to have a
set of drivers who can get on with things on their own and don't need
monitoring?

I also suspect that you wouldn't be so keen if the single mode of travel
"they" chose to monitor happened to be yours ;-)

On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:42 +0100, "Paulmouk"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I think it was called Road Fund License until only a few years ago.

Not sure when. The Road Fund was wound up decades ago; it has been
called Vehicle Excise Duty since before I had my first car (20 years
or so?).

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David Martin said:

Quoted message said:

I am slightly concerned by the occurrence of "road fund license" on
the first page, however...

Quoted message said:

Old habits die hard..

Indeed. The Road Fund was wound up by Winston Churchill, AFAIR, so they

are

Quoted message said:

about half a century out of date!

--
Guy
===

I think it was called Road Fund License until only a few years ago.

Extract from info page.
(Tax Rates - Road Fund License
Car tax, formally known as Road Fund Licence, is a tax on cars of £155 per
year from 9 March 1999, and between £15 and £60 for motorbikes.
From June 1 1999, cars with engines smaller than 1100cc will pay only £100
per year. This is unchanged by the 2000 budget.)

Wasn't it the ring fencing for highway provision and maintenance (rather
than the name) that was ended in the 1930's?

Paul

you know? said:

On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:42 +0100, "Paulmouk"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I think it was called Road Fund License until only a few years ago.

Not sure when. The Road Fund was wound up decades ago; it has been
called Vehicle Excise Duty since before I had my first car (20 years
or so?).

Guy

I renewed mine yesterday and noticed that it now seems to be called a
'Vehicle Licence'. The form is called a 'Vehicle Licence Application' and
only refers to 'Vehicle Licences' and AFAICT the word 'excise' is totally
absent. In way of clarification it does mention 'a new licence (tax
disc)'. The back of the disc itself refers to 'refund of duty' and 'this
licence'. I can't imagine why they don't call 'duty' a 'licence fee'.
--
Michael MacClancy
Random putdown - "I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's
nothing trivial." - Irvin S. Cobb
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:45:18 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):
....

Quoted message said:

I also suspect that you wouldn't be so keen if the single mode of travel
"they" chose to monitor happened to be yours ;-)

Of course, since traffic policing has been left to wither away to a
third of its former self, it's less and less likely that they'll
monitor anybody.

In the Eighties, traffic policing was about 15% of policing duties.
Now it's about 5%. And now we've got an epidemic of vehicle licence
evaders, uninsured drivers, etc, etc, Coincidence? I don't think
so.

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

"Gawnsoft" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:45:18 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):
...

Quoted message said:

I also suspect that you wouldn't be so keen if the single mode of travel
"they" chose to monitor happened to be yours ;-)

Of course, since traffic policing has been left to wither away to a
third of its former self, it's less and less likely that they'll
monitor anybody.

In the Eighties, traffic policing was about 15% of policing duties.
Now it's about 5%. And now we've got an epidemic of vehicle licence
evaders, uninsured drivers, etc, etc, Coincidence? I don't think
so.

Of course, this is a problem. But I think the answer is to have more human
police officers, rather than having an unnaccountable police state that I
think tagging system as suggested would lead to.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not against traffic policing. I'm just against
having the state constantly spy on motorists (and others as I dare say it
would be extended) to do it.

The best system would simply to have bobbies on the beat who could stop
people to check such things as insurance, VED etc. And while there at it
they could deter and catch "real criminals" (for want of a better term), and
provide many other simple services at the same time.

OK, that's a touch idealist, but isn't it so much nicer than having some
unaccountable anonymous civil servant somewhere?

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Gawnsoft
<[email hidden]> breathed:

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:45:18 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I also suspect that you wouldn't be so keen if the single mode of travel
"they" chose to monitor happened to be yours ;-)

Quoted message said:

Of course, since traffic policing has been left to wither away to a
third of its former self, it's less and less likely that they'll
monitor anybody.

The discussion was about automatic electronic monitoring, no traffic
police involvement required, just mandatory transponders and a national
detector network.

Quoted message said:

In the Eighties, traffic policing was about 15% of policing duties.
Now it's about 5%. And now we've got an epidemic of vehicle licence
evaders, uninsured drivers, etc, etc, Coincidence? I don't think
so.

Probably not. What's really needed is a "Twatso" that can spot and
record the kind of stupidity that gets people killed[1], irrespective of
speed, plus more traffic plod, plus a review of speed limits and a
national standard for applying them.

[1] Especially things like passing a cyclist and instantly turning left,
or the pedestrian nutters I had to swerve round on my bike last night
who decided to play chicken in the middle of Leeds. It's just a pity
the bus behind me wasn't going faster, they'd still be scraping the
remains off the tarmac...

--
- Pyromancer.
- http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
- http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
- http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.