hedgehog

Further to the thread concering someone convicted because of information posted on an internet forum I thought this might interest some. Perhaps the most frightening quote, for those who value their freedom is the following from a "safety camera manager":

one of the things we now do is monitor websites and other drivers’ resources to see what is going on

All the more reason to fight them every inch of the way and a clear indication that they are concerned about motorists defending themselves and getting the information to do this on the web. Such an admission also explains the number of "trolls" who attempt to spoil any threat which offers a defence to persecuted motorists.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...689428,00.html

davyboy

...Yet if you stole the same car and commited the same speeding offence, you would get a lesser punishment.

Apparition

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=440087

As mentioned above, here is the other thread about all this..... they are probably watching this too.........
Yve

mart360

There,s somthing strange going on here,

the police are now acting on heresay...

it goes to confirm how innefective and unprofessional our "service" is...

more and more they are becoming the equivalent of the thought police,

what next nicked for thinking about speeding.

revving your car to over 3000rpm,

"if it was this fast you must have been doing over 30 sir"!!!



you can see it comming!!!

black boxes in cars.... computerised mot testing!!!

mot sir £45....

telementary data indicates 3 speeding offences £180


over the 12points totting up sir.. cars impounded, the police have been informed..

where does it end!!!


m

Bonehead

Moving abroad!!!

Scooby_Dee

What's to stop anyone joining a site with someone elses name and bragging to get them in trouble? I know that people have joined sites before pretending to be others, it's not funny for the person they're making out to be.

Vegescoob

As I've posted before.
The NL mantra "You will conform".
Get used to it.
If you want me to do a very long philosophical post about all this I can.
But basically, take it from me that NL are a bunch of hypocritical, selfserving, control freaks.

ScooBStu

“People have gone to jail for less than this. The fact that this happened is a warning to drivers if they try this.”

WTF - As I always have and always will say get your f**king ***** out of your f**king patrol cars and catch some real criminals. I think they are pathetic - By the way I have never been in trouble with the police currently have no points on my license and have not for over 8 years of driving.

I am a law abiding citizen and I cant stand the way people are treat - So it is obvious what the real criminals think of you lot - Just for the people reading it.

Makes me sick.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Hedgehog, are you actually suggesting that this is in any way surprising? Why on earth would anyone with an interest in motoring issues NOT look at web sites?

Most of the arguments presented by either side of the debate are only relevant if they actually are read and understood by others who may not agree; preaching to the converted is largely pointless, unless it inspires people to act upon their convictions.


Scoobynet is full of trolls, it's nothing to do with one specific issue. You clearly do a lot of research yourself on sites that aren't necessarily pro-motorist - so what's so new or surprising that others do the same?

Let them read arguments presented with honesty and transparency and prepare valid responses - it's clearly something at which they need the practise. (And, as I've said before, if anyone can manage to prove to me rigorously and scientifically that 'speed kills' above all other factors then I'll believe you; if you're reading this - and you'll know who you are - then that's the challenge).

Vegescoob

That is my exact point.
NL view is "speed kills".
There will be no debate, no true analysis of "accidents" or stastistics.
This applies to other areas.
Your job has been "offshored".
Blair's comment, "that's the global economy, tough".
NL will do all it considers necessary to bring the population round to it's view.
It is a totalitarian party masquerading as a democratic one.

AndyP2005

Glad to see 'they' are wasting their time reading through piles of dross on car forums. btw piggy boys, I was doing 130phoophoonars down the local bypass last night on my moped while sniffing half a kilo of phnarr phnarr powder.

hedgehog

Do you not consider it a somewhat strange use of police resources to spend a day reading SN lest anyone happen to commit a crime and confess to it? You and i are paying for this after all. Personally i am not surprised as it has been clear, for some time now, that those close to the administration were uncomfortable with our use of the internet to spread information and support the defence of motorists and that they had put measures in place to monitor and attempt to limit this use. However, to have said so without such very clear support would have resulted in the usual trolls appearing with comments detailing paranoia. Now they've admitted it themselves the issue is now suitable for open debate without anyone thinking i am a nutter for mentioning it. Imagine them freely admitting to something that would have you calling me a nutter if i had said they were doing it! That's arrogance for you.

Would you rather a police officer spent his day catching bad drivers and other criminals or that he spent his time surfing the net awaiting someone to type something in error? What if he were to "encourage" someone to type a confession? If you didn't know who was behind the username then you couldn't claim that you were led on but, clearly, the partnerships have found a way of establishing who is behind your username. It is even possible that several officers of the law might post on the same thread to lead the unsuspecting into a situation where they might confess to something that they didn't even actually do. You can't believe much of what you read on the internet so why should it be suitable for use as evidence? However, these are all reasons why it pays to be aware of the trolls and why they may not be quite like "ordinary" trolls. Some of these trolls might put the unsuspecting in jail.

The fact is that the reason they are so interested in what we are saying is not to understand our point of view but to undermine it. The reason they need to do that is because we are winning against them in court, we are about to win against them in the ECHR, and they need to stop that. They also need to know the information upon which our case is built, both in the local magistrates court and in the ECHR. They can seriously limit the flow of information by silencing the internet which has, in the case of the persecution of motorists, taken a lead roll in empowering the motorist to stand and fight.

Once they get your name from SN and mark you down as a trouble maker are they reading your other emails? Monitoring your web use? I personally think it unlikely, but then most would think it unlikely that the police would spend their time reading posts on a forum for people interested in cars.

AndyP2005

Oh dear, 'someone' must have used my internet connection at work while I was away from my desk, just to say nasty or incriminating things about me. How will the braindead porcine tw@ts prove that one?

hedgehog

They will ask you to show "due dilligence" in establishing that it wasn't you driving your computer. If you can't produce evidence that you were elsewhere when the post was made and produce the person who made the post then I would expect them to establish, at least in a magistrates court which is all most of us can afford, that it was you who made the post. I believe that it may then be considered a voluntary confession under PACE.

AndyP2005

OK, I'll use the PC of that bitch next to me. Let her rot

Vegescoob

That's the trouble with this newfangled technology interweby stuff.
If only those in power had been able to keep it to themselves.
But, oh dear, the plebes have got it, so, best we keep an eye on them.
Lest they get ideas above their station.

AndyP2005

Of course, stop using it then, you effin pleb.

Vegescoob

On no it's ok.
Me patrician.

AndyP2005

pslewis

So, let me get this straight .............. if you do nothing wrong you actually have NOTHING to fear??

Seems mighty fair to me

Pete

Aaron C. Reskew

PMSL.

Mrs Smith gets a visit for ''confessing'' to have been the mastermind behind the Brinks-Mat robbery, Harold Shipman's assistant and the largest supplier of Charlie in the South East.

Vegescoob

It seems to be proving easy to crush the human spirit in this country.
Robotic "economic units" obeying their masters.

Jerome

How many police hours were devoted to this?

88mph is hardly a ridiculous speed. If they are prepared to put this much manpower into a relatively minor offence - including the getting someone else to take the points - I can only assume the police force concerned must have a stunningly low serious crime rate.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

SN has quite a few resident police officers, it would be hardly surprising for one of them to stumble across a relevant looking thread and bookmark it for further study during work hours. We're not talking about armies of officers surfing the net at work, just one or two isolated high profile cases.

To be honest, I've not seen any evidence that SN's resident trolls are actually intelligent enough to coerce people into admitting breaking the law.

Don't get me wrong - of course I'd rather the anti-motorist brigade kept themselves to themselves and never did any research, but that's not going to happen. The fact that they read more widely is not sinister in its own right, and frankly only an idiot would admit to breaking the law on a public forum.

What evidence do you have that anyone is trying to restrict the use of the internet? It's always been the case that what we post can be read by anybody.

Leslie

That really is a stupid remark PSL and has nothing to do with the principles being quoted.

Les

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

*Exactly* my point about SN's resident trolls

Jerome

Andy, I wasn't talking about a dedicated officer surfing the net, more the work involved in tracking them down. Unless these "criminals" were silly enough to make it easy to be traced, it could take quite a bit of legwork.

In light of the number of people I know who have been burgled to simply get a crime number for the insurance (and the number of victim counselling), or who have had expensive cars stolen to get the same thing - all because of a lack of police resources - I just hope this case was solved quickly with a couple of phone calls.

hedgehog

Well, they say themselves that they are monitoring the internet and to me this doesn't imply someone accidentally coming upon some information in their spare time. To me it implies an active process where people are tasked, at my expense, to read internet forums in case someone says something stupid. The point of the use of "high profile" cases is to attempt to deny those fighting the persecution the use of the internet as a medium for communication by generating fear that it is being watched. It is similar to the tactics used on the peer to peer networks where a few individuals are heavily fined in an attempt to scare others. With road charging and ISA coming they need to try and remove the infrastructure that could lead to serious and orchestrated objection to such systems. Remember we are taking them to the ECHR and that campaign has been organised and funded almost entirely through internet contacts so it is a very powerful force we have at our disposal and they must work hard to deny us effective access to it.

More precisely you have not seen any evidence that the people you believe to be the trolls are intelligent. What about others who you don't believe to be trolls just because they are intelligent enough to avoid your attention? Also you must remember that disruption of the communication process is at least as important in disrupting the fight as leading people astray. The people you assume are not intelligent may be a lot more focused than you think, just watch the way threads can degrade from intelligent discussion of facts to personal abuse with no value within a few posts. That is why you never get answers to your resonable questions about proof that speed kills, they don't need to answer if no one is listening to your point.

Perhaps this is the case but many people view this as being similar to chatting with trusted mates down the pub. It never occurs to them that they are being monitored and if you look back i have been posting encouraging people to remove some items posted in error for quite some time now. The monitoring is not a new thing. People will say lots of dodgy things in a friendly and informal situation and that doesn't necessarily make them an idiot, just ignorant of the lengths the persecution of motorists must go to in order to ensure an easy passage for the administration. If all conversations with your mates down the pub had to be recorded and analysed by police would you consider that sinister?


I don't mean restrict the use in the sense of stopping you posting or preventing people seeing your post. Read my first paragraph and you will see the rather more subtle meaning. Perhaps if i were to say they wish to restrict the effectiveness of our use of the internet would that be more useful and correct?

The partnerships need to eliminate objections to their methods and they need to restrict the amount of information we are able to access and spread about how to defeat their methods. That is their job and they might say that it is reasonable for them to do this. However, the ultimate purpose of their job, as viewed by the administration, is to restrict your access to private transport. Access to private transport is documented as being "socially divisive" and our administration has signed up to the Copenhagen Declaration which requires effective measures to stop people using private cars. Therefore if any of us wish to be allowed to drive a private car in the future we need to be aware of the larger political picture and the way in which many subtle tactics are being used to put us in a position where the loss of access to our cars becomes inevitable and we are left with no means to object. The internet has shown itself to be a very effective channel for organising objections and responses and so it is necessary to limit that effectiveness. For the administration this is simple logic.

GC8

Pete; are you really this stupid and uneducated? Consider this: when the ***** persecuted the Jews, the Roman Catholic church didnt protest; when the ***** came for the Catholics there wasnt anyone left to protest.....

Dont reply unless you understand.

Diablo

Having chatted this through with a solicitor mate over lunch, his point was that whilst the posts on the web may have alerted the police to what is, lets be fair, a criminal act, the driver (or his misses) would have had to admit to telling porkies to the police before being prosecuted.

Thats a bit diffrerent to being prosecuted for something you posted on a BBS.

Would any of you had thought different had the driver lied about running someone off the road, or causing an accident, or keying your car?

Somehow I think so.

The tosser should have kept his gob shut, then he would have been fine. People that stupid deserve to be caught....

This, like others, are public BBS. Might as well take out an ad in the local paper ......