"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

As long as it is used to throw the book at the ******s who think
its
clever to use registration plates with illegally spaced letters
and or
numbers to make the plate read something different at first glance

ANPR quite often fails to recognise non standard plates. In the case
of
speed trap systems like SPECS then the plate is passed on to a human
operative to check. Not sure what will happen on ANPR since there
will
obviously be 10's of thousnads of mis-read plates in the space of a
day,
mostly for legitimate reasons.


All the more reason for these vehicles to be removed from the road
when ever they are spotted by Police or Traffic Wardens etc., there
would only need to be a dozen or so cases were the owner looses [1]
their vehicle and is fined before people fit the correct *standards*
compliant plates.....

[1] I would suggest that the vehicles are scrapped / crushed, as now
happens to many abandoned and unclaimed vehicles removed from the curb
side.

:::Jerry:::: wrote:

obviously be 10's of thousnads of mis-read plates in the space of a
day,
mostly for legitimate reasons.



All the more reason for these vehicles to be removed from the road
when ever they are spotted by Police or Traffic Wardens etc., there

I was talking about the *legitimate* failures to read a plate - i.e.
partially obscured by another vehicle, poor visibility, ANPR system
capturing sign written text on vehicles etc.

You will also have false positive problems as well to deal with. What
happens when a fine drops through your letterbox for driving a vehicle
that you have created a SORN notice for simply because the system
misread a similar plate incorrectly?

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In message , John
Rumm wrote

Yes, it must be a good thing to pick up the persistent dodger who has
never taxed the vehicle and probably does not have MOT / Insurance
either. But do you also want to prosecute the little old lady who fully
intends to renew her tax as she has for the last 40 years, but forgot
to go to the post office at the right time, and is now 20 days past the
renewal date? What about all the poor sods who have had someone
"borrow" their name and address when filling in the vehicles V5?

As usual, many of the schemes can only cut 'crime' if criminals give
correct details in the first place.


, remember back to the assurances given that speed cameras would only
ever be placed "close to accident black spots" on the actual roads
where the accidents happened... how long did that last before "close to
accident black spot" became "within a 'n' mile radius, and on any road
in the area"?)

.... and after the once badly designed road has had a major layout change
to cure the problem.
--
Alan

In message , John
Rumm wrote
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

obviously be 10's of thousnads of mis-read plates in the space of a
day,
mostly for legitimate reasons.

All the more reason for these vehicles to be removed from the road
when ever they are spotted by Police or Traffic Wardens etc., there

I was talking about the *legitimate* failures to read a plate - i.e.
partially obscured by another vehicle, poor visibility, ANPR system
capturing sign written text on vehicles etc.

You will also have false positive problems as well to deal with. What
happens when a fine drops through your letterbox for driving a vehicle
that you have created a SORN notice for simply because the system
misread a similar plate incorrectly?


Isn't number plate cloning becoming an increasing problem with the
London congestion charge? The fine goes to the registered owner of the
plate and not to the person driving the car with the false plates.

I note that there a few speed cameras local to me that take front and
back photographs in an attempt to identify the driver (I presume in the
event of an appealed fine). I bet this technology works well for cars
with (illegal?) dark tinted windows i.e. those driven by drug dealers
.
--
Alan

In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

You will also have false positive problems as well to deal with.
What happens when a fine drops through your letterbox for
driving a vehicle that you have created a SORN notice for simply
because the system misread a similar plate incorrectly?

Wasn't there a congestion charge levied on a classic
car in a bristol museum, clearly permanently off-road.
Afair the law was written such that the museum was
forced to pay the fine anyway, then had the expense of
trying to reclaim it.

--
Tony Williams.

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In message , John
Rumm wrote

Yes, it must be a good thing to pick up the persistent dodger who has
never taxed the vehicle and probably does not have MOT / Insurance either.
But do you also want to prosecute the little old lady who fully intends to
renew her tax as she has for the last 40 years, but forgot to go to the
post office at the right time, and is now 20 days past the renewal date?
What about all the poor sods who have had someone "borrow" their name and
address when filling in the vehicles V5?

As usual, many of the schemes can only cut 'crime' if criminals give
correct details in the first place.


, remember back to the assurances given that speed cameras would only ever
be placed "close to accident black spots" on the actual roads where the
accidents happened... how long did that last before "close to accident
black spot" became "within a 'n' mile radius, and on any road in the
area"?)

... and after the once badly designed road has had a major layout change
to cure the problem.
--

A road that I frequently traverse (A259 aka 'The Coast Road')
has an interesting section: - travelling westward there's
a divided carriageway each with very wide three lanes ... but for
a very short section it's pinched down to two lanes with
shops along it - many ***** drivers double-park in the
nearside lane 'while they pop-in to a shop' - they seem to
think switching 'flashers' on excuses their blatant disregard
to safety or convenience of other drivers. Now; please guess -
where are the traffic police and/or their speed-detector sited?

--

Brian

In message , Stefek Zaba
writes
:::Jerry:::: wrote:
It's due to people objecting without good reason to giving the
police
the above information that some think there is a need for compulsory
ID.

What's 'good reason'? And who establishes it?


One only has to look at this article today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503711.stm

to see an example of police abusing their powers

--
geoff

In message ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

All the more reason for these vehicles to be removed from the road
when ever they are spotted by Police or Traffic Wardens etc., there
would only need to be a dozen or so cases were the owner looses [1]
their vehicle and is fined before people fit the correct *standards*
compliant plates.....

It really isn't that important in the grand scheme of things

It's just moving the discussion away from the more important discussion
about ID cards


--
geoff

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , Stefek Zaba
writes
:::Jerry:::: wrote:
It's due to people objecting without good reason to giving the
police
the above information that some think there is a need for
compulsory
ID.

What's 'good reason'? And who establishes it?


One only has to look at this article today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503711.stm

to see an example of police abusing their powers


Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to learn to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and the rest
is history, as they say....

It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very easy to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was ?

:::Jerry:::: wrote:

Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to learn to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and the rest
is history, as they say....

Indeed. And their learning pattern (level flight, not takeoff or
landing) was suspicious enough to make at least one instructor report at
least one of them to their local FBI office. Who took it seriously
enough to pass it up the line. Where it was spiked.

And all of whom, BTW, had full and accurate ID.

It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very easy to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was ?

Nor should we all walk round with Accreditation to 'back up the fact
that we are who we say we are'. Had he been a terrorist casing the joint
(that most unknown of Government locations - the Houses of Parliament,
for Gawd's sake) he'd have to have been a particularly brazen
double-bluffing one to have (in his words as quotes in the BBC report)
'asked four officers if I could photograph them in front of the Houses
of Parliament'. Every time I've walked past the HoP, I've seen multiple
tourists taking pictures of each other with the HoP as background; I
can't help thinking that posing as such would be a rather smarter way to
get a few shots of the HoP without attracting attention...

Stefek

"Stefek Zaba" wrote in message
...
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to learn
to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and the
rest
is history, as they say....

Indeed. And their learning pattern (level flight, not takeoff or
landing) was suspicious enough to make at least one instructor
report at
least one of them to their local FBI office. Who took it seriously
enough to pass it up the line. Where it was spiked.

AIUI one of those involved mentioned that he wasn't that intrested in
learning how to take off and land, IIRC he is the same person who was
arrested and has recently been found guilty of 9/11 offences.


And all of whom, BTW, had full and accurate ID.

Yes, as I've mentioned before.


It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very easy
to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes
wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was ?

Nor should we all walk round with Accreditation to 'back up the fact
that we are who we say we are'. Had he been a terrorist casing the
joint
(that most unknown of Government locations - the Houses of
Parliament,
for Gawd's sake) he'd have to have been a particularly brazen
double-bluffing one to have (in his words as quotes in the BBC
report)
'asked four officers if I could photograph them in front of the
Houses
of Parliament'. Every time I've walked past the HoP, I've seen
multiple
tourists taking pictures of each other with the HoP as background; I
can't help thinking that posing as such would be a rather smarter
way to
get a few shots of the HoP without attracting attention...


Quite, but you are missing the ****ing point, who cares if someone is
asked what they are doing or are asked (told) to move on, when are the
idiots going to realise that complaining like this might just make
some police officers think twice about asking WTF someone is doing in
future, that person who isn't asked or moved on might just be the
person who blows our political / democratic system to bits.

Remember, the Yorkshire ripper was caught not be intelligence (that
was leading off towards a fake phone call) but pure and simple stop,
search and questioning of someone who (in the eyes of the Policeman)
looked suspicious.

In message ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

One only has to look at this article today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503711.stm

to see an example of police abusing their powers


Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to learn to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and the rest
is history, as they say....

It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very easy to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was ?

I'm not sure you can make that assumption

Anyway, why should you need accreditation to take some photos ?

This isn't just a one off

Significantly more peace protesters have been arrested under the
prevention of terrorism act than "terrorists"

I put that in inverted commas, since even of those arrested as
"terrorists" only a couple have been actually charged with anything and
even less convicted

please ... WAKE THE **** UP

--
geoff

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message
ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

One only has to look at this article today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503711.stm

to see an example of police abusing their powers


Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to learn
to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and the
rest
is history, as they say....

It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very easy
to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes
wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was ?

I'm not sure you can make that assumption

Anyway, why should you need accreditation to take some photos ?

This isn't just a one off

Significantly more peace protesters have been arrested under the
prevention of terrorism act than "terrorists"

I put that in inverted commas, since even of those arrested as
"terrorists" only a couple have been actually charged with anything
and
even less convicted

please ... WAKE THE **** UP


No, you wake the **** up !
I'm not saying that the prevention of terrorism act is not being miss
used, nor am I saying that it is, what I'm trying to say is that what
on the surface might seem clear to some could well have other issues -
no one would have batted an eye lid about people apparently wanting to
be come commercial aircraft pilots pre 9/11.

It's to easy to shout FOUL or GOAL without considering what else might
have been happening on the pitch at the same time - how do we know
that there wasn't some police surveillance / operation going on that
this 'photographer' had stumbled into to the middle off for example,
the Police are hardly going to publicise the fact are they...

Don't just believe the spin someone puts on something just because
it's what you want to hear.

In message ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

One only has to look at this article today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503711.stm

to see an example of police abusing their powers


Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to learn
to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and the
rest
is history, as they say....

It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very easy
to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes
wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was ?

I'm not sure you can make that assumption

Anyway, why should you need accreditation to take some photos ?

This isn't just a one off

Significantly more peace protesters have been arrested under the
prevention of terrorism act than "terrorists"

I put that in inverted commas, since even of those arrested as
"terrorists" only a couple have been actually charged with anything
and
even less convicted

please ... WAKE THE **** UP


No, you wake the **** up !
I'm not saying that the prevention of terrorism act is not being miss
used, nor am I saying that it is, what I'm trying to say is that what
on the surface might seem clear to some could well have other issues -
no one would have batted an eye lid about people apparently wanting to
be come commercial aircraft pilots pre 9/11.

It's to easy to shout FOUL or GOAL without considering what else might
have been happening on the pitch at the same time - how do we know
that there wasn't some police surveillance / operation going on that
this 'photographer' had stumbled into to the middle off for example,
the Police are hardly going to publicise the fact are they...

Don't just believe the spin someone puts on something just because
it's what you want to hear.

A couple of years ago, I got stopped by a couple of plods

"Cut that bend at a bit of a funny angle didn't we sir"

"No"

"Well I think you did, have you been drinking ?"

"No"

breath test ...

negative

I had been pootling along quite correctly on a road I know very well

Same thing really ...

--
geoff

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message
ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

One only has to look at this article today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503711.stm

to see an example of police abusing their powers


Once upon a time there were a group of people who wanted to
learn
to
fly, after they did they took the controls of four planes and
the
rest
is history, as they say....

It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very
easy
to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes
wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was
?

I'm not sure you can make that assumption

Anyway, why should you need accreditation to take some photos ?

This isn't just a one off

Significantly more peace protesters have been arrested under the
prevention of terrorism act than "terrorists"

I put that in inverted commas, since even of those arrested as
"terrorists" only a couple have been actually charged with
anything
and
even less convicted

please ... WAKE THE **** UP


No, you wake the **** up !
I'm not saying that the prevention of terrorism act is not being
miss
used, nor am I saying that it is, what I'm trying to say is that
what
on the surface might seem clear to some could well have other
issues -
no one would have batted an eye lid about people apparently wanting
to
be come commercial aircraft pilots pre 9/11.

It's to easy to shout FOUL or GOAL without considering what else
might
have been happening on the pitch at the same time - how do we know
that there wasn't some police surveillance / operation going on
that
this 'photographer' had stumbled into to the middle off for
example,
the Police are hardly going to publicise the fact are they...

Don't just believe the spin someone puts on something just because
it's what you want to hear.

A couple of years ago, I got stopped by a couple of plods

"Cut that bend at a bit of a funny angle didn't we sir"

"No"

"Well I think you did, have you been drinking ?"

"No"

breath test ...

negative

I had been pootling along quite correctly on a road I know very well

Same thing really ...


Now what happens when people like you make a song and dance about the
Police trying to do their job when they start thinking that stopping
people because they think something is wrong is just to much hassle
(to many forms, to many 'do-gooders' and claims lawyers etc.) so they
don't bother to stop that bloke who has just cut the corner - a mile
further down the driver cuts down a group of people on the road side
due to being drunk...

In message ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes
It's far to simple to shout 'abuse of power', it's also very
easy
to
blame the police for not doing their job after something goes
wrong, I
also assume this freelance photographer didn't have any form of
accreditation to back up the fact that he was who he said he was
?

I'm not sure you can make that assumption

Anyway, why should you need accreditation to take some photos ?

This isn't just a one off

Significantly more peace protesters have been arrested under the
prevention of terrorism act than "terrorists"

I put that in inverted commas, since even of those arrested as
"terrorists" only a couple have been actually charged with
anything
and
even less convicted

please ... WAKE THE **** UP


No, you wake the **** up !
I'm not saying that the prevention of terrorism act is not being
miss
used, nor am I saying that it is, what I'm trying to say is that
what
on the surface might seem clear to some could well have other
issues -
no one would have batted an eye lid about people apparently wanting
to
be come commercial aircraft pilots pre 9/11.

It's to easy to shout FOUL or GOAL without considering what else
might
have been happening on the pitch at the same time - how do we know
that there wasn't some police surveillance / operation going on
that
this 'photographer' had stumbled into to the middle off for
example,
the Police are hardly going to publicise the fact are they...

Don't just believe the spin someone puts on something just because
it's what you want to hear.

A couple of years ago, I got stopped by a couple of plods

"Cut that bend at a bit of a funny angle didn't we sir"

"No"

"Well I think you did, have you been drinking ?"

"No"

breath test ...

negative

I had been pootling along quite correctly on a road I know very well

Same thing really ...


Now what happens when people like you make a song and dance about the
Police trying to do their job when they start thinking that stopping
people because they think something is wrong is just to much hassle
(to many forms, to many 'do-gooders' and claims lawyers etc.)

No, there are quite a number of cases which have recently gone through /
are going through the courts of police overstepping the mark or have
applied laws in an inappropriate way. Cases where we were assured by the
government that the laws would be targeted and used only for their
intended purpose. Again I come back to cases of peace protesters
arrested under terrorism acts

The police have to get it right, that's what they're paid to do.

so they
don't bother to stop that bloke who has just cut the corner -

Ah, but I didn't cut that corner, it was purely and simply a pretence
for them to stop me and me

a mile
further down the driver cuts down a group of people on the road side
due to being drunk...

Don't talk uninformed wank

--
geoff

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article , Jethro_uk
wrote:
Forget all that. The whole scheme will fall by the wayside anyway,
since AFAIK no government project involving IT has *ever* worked
(by that I mean when the [massively over budget] bill is paid the
system does what it says it does).

A slight exaggeration perhaps. DVLA seems have come good after a
hugely problematic start and I'm impressed at the way in which
Companies House have made life easier and cut their charges.


But I can't see this turning into a "but apart from the DVLA and Companies
house what has government IT ever done for us ?" type thread.

The DVLA have had 4 decades to get their IT sorted ... so you'd expect it to
work. Companies house I will have to take your word for, as I haven't used
it.

To be fair, the smaller scale government IT projects are quite good ... ISTM
they have put a lot of stuff online, and made provision for people to access
services via the internet in a sensible way (I applied for a tax credit
online, and it worked 100%). Also local government seems to be coming of
age, with informative and practical web sites.

It's just the gradiose "will do everything *and* make the tea" type plans
tend to get messed up .... which suggests it's not the technical know-how
(i.e. people like me), but the project management .... which is all the more
worrying as project management is what government is all about. I can do my
job, but they can't do theirs !

"Jethro" wrote in message
...

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article , Jethro_uk
wrote:
Forget all that. The whole scheme will fall by the wayside anyway,
since AFAIK no government project involving IT has *ever* worked
(by that I mean when the [massively over budget] bill is paid the
system does what it says it does).

A slight exaggeration perhaps. DVLA seems have come good after a
hugely problematic start and I'm impressed at the way in which
Companies House have made life easier and cut their charges.


But I can't see this turning into a "but apart from the DVLA and Companies
house what has government IT ever done for us ?" type thread.

The DVLA have had 4 decades to get their IT sorted ... so you'd expect it
to
work. Companies house I will have to take your word for, as I haven't used
it.

To be fair, the smaller scale government IT projects are quite good ...
ISTM
they have put a lot of stuff online, and made provision for people to
access
services via the internet in a sensible way (I applied for a tax credit
online, and it worked 100%). Also local government seems to be coming of
age, with informative and practical web sites.

It's just the gradiose "will do everything *and* make the tea" type plans
tend to get messed up .... which suggests it's not the technical know-how
(i.e. people like me), but the project management .... which is all the
more
worrying as project management is what government is all about. I can do
my
job, but they can't do theirs !


More credit where credit's due - I found the on-line Inland Revenue tax
return system excellent (at least for a wage slave like me). Mind you the
better it is the quicker they get their money - a bit different to "the
better it works the quicker you get your money" of other systems, or am I
being overly cynical?


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

In article ,
Jethro wrote:
It's just the gradiose "will do everything *and* make the tea" type
plans tend to get messed up .... which suggests it's not the
technical know-how (i.e. people like me), but the project
management .... which is all the more worrying as project
management is what government is all about.

Yes, the little systems, that basically involve letting you look at
static data are generally pretty good: a couple of weeks ago someone
from another church phoned me up about a planning appeal decision and
I was able to look at it while he was still on the phone. LB Richmond
have pretty good access to planning applications under consideration,
and for genealogists have just put all the cemetery registers on
line.

But it does all seem to fall apart on the big systems probably
because (a) there are so many 'stakeholders'; (b) the number of
interfaces is probably to the square or cube of the system size; and
(c) as these systems get more complicated no one person can
understand them. And of course the client keeps changing the brief.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm
[Latest version QSEDBUK 1.10 released 4 April 2005]

"raden" wrote in message
...
snip clap-trap

Don't talk uninformed wank


Stop talking to yourself....

Bob Mannix wrote:

More credit where credit's due - I found the on-line Inland Revenue tax
return system excellent

Seconded - I've been filing on-line for about five years now.

better it is the quicker they get their money - a bit different to "the
better it works the quicker you get your money" of other systems, or am I
being overly cynical?

Possibly, because it works the other way round too. This year I was due
a small refund and was quite amazed when it turned up in my bank a/c
only four days after filing the return.

--
Andy