Quote:

---

Speed limits slashed: Thousands more urban areas will be 20mph zones

Many more drivers face losing their licences in a blitz to make Britain's roads 'the safest in the world'.

Under proposals announced yesterday, speed limits in thousands of urban areas - particularly outside schools - will be cut from 30mph to 20mph.

The speed limit on single-lane A roads, found mostly in rural areas, will be reduced from 60mph to 50mph.


Average speed scamera

Hi-tech cameras which measure a car's average speed over many miles rather than at a fixed point will be used to police these new limits.

More points and fines will also be given out for a range of motoring offences, and there will be a fresh crackdown on drink-driving - including what is effectively random breath testing.

Drivers face being banned after just two speeding offences with penalty points being doubled to six points for drivers who exceed the speed limit by 15mph in a 20mph or 30mph area, or by 20mph in higher speed zones.

Funds raised from any on-the-spot fines will go directly to the Treasury, which already makes more than £100million a year from speed cameras.

Police will be able to enforce random breath tests outside pubs which drink-drivers are known to frequent.

The new plans will also scrap the 'outdated' option for drivers caught moderately above the alcohol limit to request a second test by a doctor.

However, careless driving - currently punished in the courts with a maximum fine of £2,500 - is to be effectively decriminalised to a £60 fixed penalty.

Beefing up the driving test is also critical if ministers are to meet an ambitious target to slash the death rate on UK roads from 3,000 to 2,000 a year.

Philip Gomm, of the RAC Foundation, added: 'A blanket reduction in speed limits risks alienating motorists and ignoring individual road circumstances.'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1172379/Speed-limits-slashed-Thousand
s-urban-areas-20mph-zones.html

---

Quote:

---

Contra Costa California prosecutors stop prosecuting 90% of criminals due to lack of funds

Misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts and burglaries will no longer be prosecuted in Contra Costa County because of budget cuts, the county's top prosecutor said Tuesday.

District Attorney Robert Kochly also said that beginning May 4, his office will no longer prosecute felony drug cases involving smaller amounts of narcotics. That means anyone caught with less than a gram of methamphetamine or cocaine, less than 0.5 grams of heroin and fewer than five pills of ecstasy, OxyContin or Vicodin won't be charged.

People who are suspected of misdemeanor drug crimes, break minor traffic laws, shoplift, trespass or commit misdemeanor vandalism will also be in the clear. Those crimes won't be prosecuted, either.

"We had to make very, very difficult choices, and we had to try to prioritize things. There are no good choices to be made here," said Kochly, a 35-year veteran prosecutor. "It's trying to choose the lesser of certain evils in deciding what we can and cannot do."

Barry Grove, a deputy district attorney who is president of the Contra Costa County District Attorneys Association, said, "There's no question that these kinds of crimes are going to drastically affect the quality of life for all the citizens of Contra Costa County."

The decision not to go after any perpetrators of certain offenses, Grove said, amounts to "holding up a sign and advertising to the criminal element to come to Contra Costa County, because we're no longer going to prosecute you."

Don't even bother submitting the cases, Kochly said Monday in a memo to the Contra Costa County Police Chiefs Association. "If they are submitted, they will be screened out by category by support staff and returned to your department without review by a deputy district attorney," he wrote.

The district attorney's decision was upsetting news to Janet Kelleghan, an employee at Donna's Gifts in Concord, which has been victimized by thieves in the past.

"If they know they're not going to be prosecuted, there's going to be a lot more shoplifting," Kelleghan said. "I'd ask them to reconsider," she said of the district attorney's office.

Kochly said prosecutors will still consider charging suspects with certain misdemeanors, including domestic violence, driving under the influence, firearms offenses, vehicular manslaughter, sex crimes and assault with a deadly weapon.

www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/21/BAK9176EGO.DTL

---

Quote:

---

Angry drivers torching traffic cameras in England

www.metacafe.com/watch/2721966/speed_camera_set_on_fire_by_vigilantes/

Apparently, the Luddite tradition of machine breaking is alive and well in its country of origin. According to a report, a group calling itself MAD -- or Motorists Against Detection -- have taken to setting autonomous traffic cameras ablaze across the United Kingdom, and are detailing their exploits on a website (of course). The group's "PR" claims they have been active since 2000, and have destroyed over 1000 roadside cameras. Says the group's leader, Capt. Gatso, "The vigilante anti-speed camera group have announced a summer of MADness which will see them target for destruction all speed cameras in the UK. It's now going to be a period of zero tolerance against all speed cameras." The gang of disgruntled drivers also plans a day of action called "National Cover-Up Your Number Plates Day." Guy Fawkes would be proud.

www.engadget.com/2007/12/27/angry-drivers-torching-traffic-cameras-in-
england/
www.speedcam.co.uk/index2.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I am against vandalism.

But I have often wondered as a point of curiosity if such cameras couldn't be disabled with a portable electronic device or microwave emitter? Perhaps a magnatron fitted to a flashlight casing? Would that work?

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

---

Quote:

---

Arizona: County Prosecutor Dismisses Criminal Speed Camera Citations

Motorists will no longer be sent to jail on the mere accusation of a machine in Maricopa County, Arizona. County Attorney Andrew Thomas yesterday announced that he will dismiss all criminal speeding and reckless driving cases brought to him when the only evidence presented is a photo radar ticket. Thomas condemned the process that imposes jail time on those accused of driving 20 MPH over the speed limit without any human witness to the alleged crime.

“The bottom line is, the way the law is written and the way our Constitution is written, to bring criminal prosecutions based on photo radar evidence only is not something our office can do, or frankly should do, given the Constitutional mandates,” Thomas said.

In 2008 the legislature specifically eliminated license points from tickets issued under the statewide freeway ticketing program (view law). Lawmakers understood that motorists would be more likely to pay tickets without challenge if the only penalty was a $181 monetary fine that did not boost insurance rates or threaten a license suspension. This revised legislative language prohibits criminal prosecution.

Thomas’ decision is a slap in the face to the state Department of Public Safety (DPS) which has used high-profile photo ticket arrests as a public relations tool. In August, for example, a young motorist was led in handcuffs out of the Sky Harbor International Airport with a DPS camera recording the event for distribution to local media. Last week, DPS issued another press release citing similar arrests as a justification for the automated ticketing program.

“Ongoing apprehensions of major violators are further evidence enforcement works,” the press release stated. “DPS recently arrested three suspects for reckless driving and criminal speeding. Video and photos of the suspects are available on request.”

Thomas says he became personally involved after looking more closely at what the state police was asking him to do.

“DPS keeps pressing us on this,” Thomas said. “The cases we are receiving underscore why we have these constitutional rules. Some of the cases that were brought to my attention — there was one case in which the defendant was male but the driver in the photo appeared to be female. In another one the age didn’t match, and a much older woman, someone in her seventies, was the defendant but it appeared that someone else was driving the vehicle.”

Thomas said the proper way to prosecute the crime is to have a live police officer witness the offense, identify the individual responsible and testify to these facts in court.

“You have to have a witness,” Thomas said. “It isn’t something you can just ignore…. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a broad interpretation of the rights of defendants under the Confrontation Clause… Arizona courts have interpreted this clause as giving defendants the right to question and cross-examine witnesses. There is no opportunity to question or cross-examine a camera.”

Thomas did not offer an opinion on the legality of the civil photo radar citations because his office does not handle them. In January, Maricopa County Justice Court Judge John C. Keegan declared the civil speed camera tickets unconstitutional (view decision). The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office is one of fourteen in the state, although many of the other jurisdictions look to Maricopa County for guidance.

http://goldiron.wordpress.com/2009/02/24/arizona-county-prosecutor-dis
misses-criminal-speed-camera-citations/

---