Why driving bans don't work?
- Thread starter brucemillar
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
brucemillar
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,663
- Car
- C55 AMG Wagon - W124 300te 4matic Wagon - BMW 4.8is X5 E53 - SWB Pajero 3.5 V6 24v
Stratman
I agree with you.
In my own case the driver who smashed into my car was already serving a three year disqualification/ban, his second ban. He had no Tax, Insurance or MOT and had never passed a driving test. But it was shown in court that he was commuting daily to work in his £25 Ford Fiesta, that was also on cloned plates as his one was an Insurance Write Off and he was taking his kids to & from school each day in the same car.
He had fraudulent paperwork, including a driving license and Insurance Certificate. That to me showed a planned and continual pattern of offending. He was fined £600 and disqualified for a further 18 months. I have since seen him driving (within days of the court case)
The Police told me he would do so, they knew he would do so, and they did not have resources to keep watch on him.
Oh, he used the standard Insurance dodge. Pay a 1st months premium to obtain a Certificate then pay no more but trouser the certificate. He hit me outside his own front door, which rather gave the game away for him. His wife proceeded to verbally abuse me in the street, shouting that I 'was on their side of the road' - He reversed into my rear quarter after reversing out his drive onto a main road, when his view of the road was zero, due to his neghbours parked car obstructing his vision. He had wife and two kids in the car. He caused £3000 of damage to my AMG Estae of which I received nothing, forcing me to claim on my insurance. I got no compensation from the Insurance Board.
Shocker. But true.
I agree with you.
In my own case the driver who smashed into my car was already serving a three year disqualification/ban, his second ban. He had no Tax, Insurance or MOT and had never passed a driving test. But it was shown in court that he was commuting daily to work in his £25 Ford Fiesta, that was also on cloned plates as his one was an Insurance Write Off and he was taking his kids to & from school each day in the same car.
He had fraudulent paperwork, including a driving license and Insurance Certificate. That to me showed a planned and continual pattern of offending. He was fined £600 and disqualified for a further 18 months. I have since seen him driving (within days of the court case)
The Police told me he would do so, they knew he would do so, and they did not have resources to keep watch on him.
Oh, he used the standard Insurance dodge. Pay a 1st months premium to obtain a Certificate then pay no more but trouser the certificate. He hit me outside his own front door, which rather gave the game away for him. His wife proceeded to verbally abuse me in the street, shouting that I 'was on their side of the road' - He reversed into my rear quarter after reversing out his drive onto a main road, when his view of the road was zero, due to his neghbours parked car obstructing his vision. He had wife and two kids in the car. He caused £3000 of damage to my AMG Estae of which I received nothing, forcing me to claim on my insurance. I got no compensation from the Insurance Board.
Shocker. But true.
Last edited:
Whilst I agree prison does not work with regard to reforming some of the vermin mentioned above, what it does do well is to separate them from the law abiding. To this end they need to increase terms, in Bruce's example above to 10 years (no time off for good behaviour), and if no prison space available then build more, all helps with jobs etc.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2008
- Messages
- 2,462
- Location
- Southport
- Car
- Mine: BMW X4 2.0d M-Sport (Red) Hers: BMW X1 2.0d M-Sport (Black) Sorry about that...
If "tagging" (with a GPS tag) was used in combination with ANPR cameras, could technology be able to determine with facial recognition software the identity of the driver?
Scott_F
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 4,165
All well and good in theory but not based in the real world.
Since 2010, austerity has seen the number of prison officers cut by a staggering 30% by Tory-led governments desperate to save money (whilst still pretending to be "tough on crime" of course).
Assaults on officers and other inmates are at a record high and staff, ex-inmates and monitoring groups all concur that the main reason for this is the critically low number of officers on duty at any and every given time.
Every single UK prison is awash with drugs of every type, mobile phones and other contraband and there are neither the numbers of prison officers to deal with this nor the will to do so for fear of sparking unrest.
So with too few officers for our existing prisons, there is neither the money nor the will to spend vast sums building new ones as part of some bizarre taxpayer-funded job creation scheme.
Only problem is that it costs us taxpayers a lot to keep people in prison .
Perhaps public floggings would be cheaper and more of a deterrent .
The mobile phone issue in prisons would very easily be solved by jamming all phone signals within the prison boundary - with that line of communication cut off then some of the drugs and other issues would be reduced if not eliminated .
OP
OP
brucemillar
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2010
- Messages
- 8,663
- Car
- C55 AMG Wagon - W124 300te 4matic Wagon - BMW 4.8is X5 E53 - SWB Pajero 3.5 V6 24v
I was on the Orange network for many years - at the time they were the first network to offer per second billing , which was a huge advantage over the others who rounded up to the next full minute even of you only went one second over a full minute .
I switched to O2 when the original iPhone was launched only on that network , and have just stayed there since .
While my home broadband remains with EE ( was on Orange for both mobile and broadband some time back ) and the service has been fine , I have been put off them by the adverts featuring Kevin Bacon , who I can't stand :wall bash:
Not a good reason to choose for/against a product I know
Scott_F
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 4,165
Jamming signals would also affect staff in the prison who have a legitimate requirement to use their phone whilst carrying out their duties and would also affect wireless internet connections which would make it impossible for people to work.
And it would also be unfeasible to restrict any jamming to the prison and prevent people and nearby homes from being affected.
Meanwhile, the drones with the goodies keep flying in.....
There should be no need for staff to use mobile phones within a prison 'whilst carrying out their duties' , warders on their rounds who need comms can easily use radios which operate on a different band and wouldn't be affected , likewise , no one within a prison ought to be using 'wireless internet' - all authorised internet connections can be supplied securely over ethernet and are likely to be confined to certain areas .
The jamming signals are generally of low power so don't stray far outwith the perimeter of the prison , and even if a small number of people nearby are affected - tough - that is the lesser of two evils . Many hotels use mobile phone jammers to force people to use their phones , without bothering neighbours .
Since mobile phones are grouped , it is possible to disable coverage to 'civilian' phones whilst leaving emergency services phones operating - this contingency exists for terrorist and similar incidents - so even around prisons it would be technically possible to disable selected services , although this would be across a broader area .
The control frequencies for drones could also be jammed locally , within what ought to be a no fly zone anyway .
The jamming signals are generally of low power so don't stray far outwith the perimeter of the prison , and even if a small number of people nearby are affected - tough - that is the lesser of two evils . Many hotels use mobile phone jammers to force people to use their phones , without bothering neighbours .
Since mobile phones are grouped , it is possible to disable coverage to 'civilian' phones whilst leaving emergency services phones operating - this contingency exists for terrorist and similar incidents - so even around prisons it would be technically possible to disable selected services , although this would be across a broader area .
The control frequencies for drones could also be jammed locally , within what ought to be a no fly zone anyway .
Scott_F
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 4,165
There are many other staff in a prison apart from wardens and most organisations will use secure wireless connectivity rather than messing about with cables under desks.
I have never, ever heard of a hotel doing that !! And you cannot confine jamming to a fixed boundary.
If it was that simple then they would be. But instead we have over-stretched prison staff watching drones arrive on CCTV, being grabbed through broken windows and their cargoes quickly secreted by inmates.
The technology isn't available to prevent it yet although a trial has started:
British prison is first to use 'disruptor' to create drone-proof 'shield' around jail
D
Deleted member 6183
Guest
Not sure about hotels jamming mobile phone signals.
Stratman
MB Enthusiast
Indeed there are - and none of them have a need for mobile phones to do their jobs , those who need telephones can have a landline for work calls . Most public organisations - certainly Fire Service , Police , NHS , and probably prison service too ( I've only been in prisons maybe half a dozen times ) all use wired Ethernet connections , and if by 'wireless connectivity' you mean wi-fi , that uses a different part of the spectrum from phones , and in any case is something you'd never want to be available in a prison .
Well I have . And with careful engineering of power and radiation patterns you can control the jammed area quite accurately . Most prisons tend to have quite a large boundary around their perimeter anyway , so very few people outside the walls would be affected , and if a handful were - that's unfortunate but the lesser of two evils .
Remember - we're talking about microwave wavelengths here - with the right antenna design the affected area can be controlled very tightly .
It really won't be that hard to block what are effectively remote controlled toys ; it would also be very easy to track the transmitters being used to control these drones and nab the people operating them . It wouldn't need any more than a strong carrier wave with some sort of random modulation - very easily done - and since nothing should be flying in the area then no legal objections .
The CAA can very easily designate no fly zones around prisons ( if they haven't already ) just as they already are around airports , together with the existing rules about proximity to inhabited areas , and the law can deal with people flying stuff into prisons - quite apart from the little matter of smuggling contraband into prisons .
Last edited:
Lots do it - plenty of devices commercially available
Cell Phone Jammers UK | Mobile Phone Blocker UK | GPS Jammer UK | WI-FI Jammer uk - 1 YEAR GUARANTEE - Cellphonejammers.co.uk
Buy Cell Phone Jammer uk, Mobile Phone Jammer for sale
Establishments such as prisons could use something much more sophisticated .
For use in places like hospitals , there are also devices which detect active mobile phones and sound alerts when they are detected .
Equally , it would be possible to monitor the frequencies used to control drones out with the perimeter of a prison and sound an alarm if any such signals were detected . With multiple detectors around the perimeter it would be very easy to triangulate the position of the transmitter .
None of this is rocket science .
Stratman
MB Enthusiast
Ofcom and cellphone jammers. It's a bit ambiguous but they would appear to be illegal in the UK.
Perhaps they're being confused with WiFi jammers, which have been used many times by hotels and conference centres to make you buy their own expensive WiFi, and theatres and cinemas to prevent the ringtone symphony. They're also illegal.
Perhaps they're being confused with WiFi jammers, which have been used many times by hotels and conference centres to make you buy their own expensive WiFi, and theatres and cinemas to prevent the ringtone symphony. They're also illegal.
Last edited:
I know these devices have been illegal for some time , but they are openly on sale ( probably not illegal to sell or possess them ) , some places still use them .
Regardless , they could be licenced or exempted in this specific application .
D
Deleted member 6183
Guest
I have stayed in hundreds of hotels, for business and leisure and never experienced this. Do you have any examples?
It tends to be smaller , independent places , likewise I used to travel a lot for work , I can't remember the names but there was one in London , one in Ormsby , one in Newcastle , and another in Inverness , usually the more budget end of the market , which one employer used to book me into . Their ploy was to make people use the hotel phones , but we just went out to make calls .
