Staying in North Wales

[Allan[_2_]]

Hi.



After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
running.

We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
have
2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
information can be had here - www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk - We have
also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
Welsh Tourist Board )

Thanks for your time

Allan

[Sir Jeremy]

On 29 Dec, 13:07, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
> running.
>
> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
> have
> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
> information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk- We have
> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
> Welsh Tourist Board )
>
> Thanks for your time
>
> Allan


Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
anti-motorist policies

[Simon Brooke]

Sir Jeremy wrote:

> On 29 Dec, 13:07, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
>> running.
>>
>> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
>> have
>> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
>> information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk- We have
>> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
>> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
>> Welsh Tourist Board )
>
> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> anti-motorist policies

All the better for cyclists, then.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and there was nothing left for us to do
but pick up the pieces.

[Jeff York]

Simon Brooke > wrote:

>Sir Jeremy wrote:
>
>> On 29 Dec, 13:07, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
>>> running.
>>>
>>> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
>>> have
>>> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
>>> information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk- We have
>>> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
>>> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
>>> Welsh Tourist Board )
>>
>> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
>> anti-motorist policies
>
>All the better for cyclists, then.

Not really... Thanks to Mr Brunstrom's obsession with motorists, the
clear-up rate for just about all other crime in North Wales is about
the worst in the UK.

Check you have good, multiple, bike-locks. :-)

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 29/12/2007 17:55, Sir Jeremy said,

> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> anti-motorist policies

This is a cycling group, remember? You know, two wheels, pedals?

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Sir Jeremy]

On 29 Dec, 18:48, Paul Boyd > wrote:
> On 29/12/2007 17:55, Sir Jeremy said,
>
> > Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> > anti-motorist policies
>
> This is a cycling group, remember? *You know, two wheels, pedals?
>
> --
> Paul Boydhttp://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/


I take the bike on holiday, on the car

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 29/12/2007 19:08, Sir Jeremy said,

> I take the bike on holiday, on the car

You have a bike???????

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Simon Brooke]

Jeff York wrote:

> Simon Brooke > wrote:
>
>>Sir Jeremy wrote:
>>
>>> On 29 Dec, 13:07, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
>>>> running.
>>>>
>>>> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
>>>> have
>>>> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
>>>> information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk- We have
>>>> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
>>>> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
>>>> Welsh Tourist Board )
>>>
>>> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
>>> anti-motorist policies
>>
>>All the better for cyclists, then.
>
> Not really... Thanks to Mr Brunstrom's obsession with motorists, the
> clear-up rate for just about all other crime in North Wales is about
> the worst in the UK.
>
> Check you have good, multiple, bike-locks. :-)

Thieves don't kill and maim. Cars do.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

' ' <------- this blank intentionally spaced left

[vernon[_2_]]

"Sir Jeremy" > wrote in message
...
On 29 Dec, 18:48, Paul Boyd > wrote:
> On 29/12/2007 17:55, Sir Jeremy said,
>
> > Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> > anti-motorist policies
>
> This is a cycling group, remember? You know, two wheels, pedals?
>
> --
> Paul Boydhttp://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/


I take the bike on holiday, on the car

And if you obey speed limits and the law, you have nothing to fear. Right?

[vernon[_2_]]

"Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote in message
news:WTaJOZmAQYS3lsfinospam@invalid...
> Hi.
>
>
>
> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
> running.
>
> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
> have
> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
> information can be had here - www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk - We have
> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
> Welsh Tourist Board )
>
> Thanks for your time
>
> Allan

It might be me but I couldn't find any prices.....

[sadjack]

>
> Not really... Thanks to Mr Brunstrom's obsession with motorists, the
> clear-up rate for just about all other crime in North Wales is about the
> worst in the UK.
>
> Check you have good, multiple, bike-locks. :-)

i'd like to see your evidence for this. can you point me to it?

north wales is god's country. it must be or he would not have made it so
beautiful.

[Rob Morley]

In article >, Simon Brooke
says...

> Thieves don't kill and maim.

They do.

[JNugent[_2_]]

Paul Boyd wrote:

> On 29/12/2007 17:55, Sir Jeremy said,

>> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
>> anti-motorist policies

> This is a cycling group, remember? You know, two wheels, pedals?

Yes - but do all cycling holidays consist of cycling all the way there
and all the way back again?

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 30/12/2007 13:42, JNugent said,

> Yes - but do all cycling holidays consist of cycling all the way there
> and all the way back again?

Not necessarily, but it also isn't necessary to speed. I'm not going to
say I never break the speed limit, but if I get caught it's my own
stupid fault for speeding, not Brainstorm's for catching me.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Sir Jeremy]

On 29 Dec, 20:22, Paul Boyd > wrote:
> On 29/12/2007 19:08, Sir Jeremy said,
>
> > I take the bike on holiday, on the car
>
> You have a bike???????
>
> --
> Paul Boydhttp://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Of course, but I don't wear lycra or a silly plastic helmet. Neither
do I think that I'm saving the planet just because I own a bike.

[Sir Jeremy]

On 29 Dec, 23:21, sadjack > wrote:
> > >
> >
> north wales is god's country. it must be or he would not have made it so
> beautiful.


I'll stick to Devon & Cornwall, or North Yorkshire, or France or
Ireland. Thanks.

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 30/12/2007 14:00, Sir Jeremy said,

> Of course, but I don't wear lycra or a silly plastic helmet. Neither
> do I think that I'm saving the planet just because I own a bike.

Then in that case you probably fit in with the majority of cyclists. I
wouldn't be seen dead in lycra, only wear a helmet off-road and ride a
bike because I enjoy it. I have no guilt complex about also driving a car!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Sir Jeremy]

On 30 Dec, 14:23, Paul Boyd > wrote:
> On 30/12/2007 14:00, Sir Jeremy said,
>
> > Of course, but I don't wear lycra or a silly plastic helmet. Neither
> > do I think that I'm saving the planet just because I own a bike.
>
> Then in that case you probably fit in with the majority of cyclists. *I
> wouldn't be seen dead in lycra, only wear a helmet off-road and ride a
> bike because I enjoy it. *I have no guilt complex about also driving a car!
>
> --
> Paul Boydhttp://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

True enough, I suppose, I've never had any problems in "real" life,
but
I certainly don't fit in with the majority of cyclists I meet on the
internet

[Sir Jeremy]

On 29 Dec, 21:33, "vernon" > wrote:
> "Sir Jeremy" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On 29 Dec, 18:48, Paul Boyd > wrote:
>
> > On 29/12/2007 17:55, Sir Jeremy said,
>
> > > Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> > > anti-motorist policies
>
> > This is a cycling group, remember? You know, two wheels, pedals?
>
> > --
> > Paul Boydhttp://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
>
> I take the bike on holiday, on the car
>
> And if you obey speed limits and the law, you have nothing to fear. Right?


Its not a question of having anything or anyone to fear, just
preferring to spend one's hard earned where it'll be appreciated
without having to spend all holiday watching the speedometer incase
you creep over the speed limit. Its also a way of showing dissent

[Allan[_2_]]

Hi

Like most holidays the price depends on the time of the year. We however
have an additional problem with advertising prices in that all the
properties are different. If you can fill in the little form on the
contacts page of the web site I can give you prices within 10 mins.

Thanks

Allan

vernon:
> "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote in message
> news:WTaJOZmAQYS3lsfinospam@invalid...
>> Hi.
>>
>>
>>
>> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
>> running.
>>
>> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
>> have
>> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. -
more
>> information can be had here - www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk - We
have
>> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
>> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
>> Welsh Tourist Board )
>>
>> Thanks for your time
>>
>> Allan
>
> It might be me but I couldn't find any prices.....

[Roger Merriman]

Paul Boyd > wrote:

> On 30/12/2007 13:42, JNugent said,
>
> > Yes - but do all cycling holidays consist of cycling all the way there
> > and all the way back again?
>
> Not necessarily, but it also isn't necessary to speed. I'm not going to
> say I never break the speed limit, but if I get caught it's my own
> stupid fault for speeding, not Brainstorm's for catching me.

and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
found.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

[SW]

On Dec 30, 3:06 pm, Sir Jeremy > wrote:
>
> Its not a question of having anything or anyone to fear, just
> preferring to spend one's hard earned where it'll be appreciated
> without having to spend all holiday watching the speedometer incase
> you creep over the speed limit. Its also a way of showing dissent

You mean there are people out there who are incapable of driving
within
the limit without keeping their eyes glued to the speedo ?? And
these
very same people do not take their holidays in North Wales ???
That's fantastic - it sounds a brilliant place to go on holiday. I
think I'll
go there next year - thanks !!!

[JNugent[_2_]]

Roger Merriman wrote:

> Paul Boyd > wrote:
>>On 30/12/2007 13:42, JNugent said,

>>>Yes - but do all cycling holidays consist of cycling all the way there
>>>and all the way back again?

>>Not necessarily, but it also isn't necessary to speed. I'm not going to
>>say I never break the speed limit, but if I get caught it's my own
>>stupid fault for speeding, not Brainstorm's for catching me.

> and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
> found.

All of that is true.

But there is still a point to be made, and just like many people
boycott (or have boycotted or used to boycott) goods and services
emanating from South Africa, France, Israel, America, Germany, etc, I
can understand why some would take the view that as limited as the
effect might be, some economic boycott of Brunstrom's bailiwick is
justified and desirable in principle.

That's easy for me to say; even though it was a boyhood haunt, I've
only been there once in the last twenty years and I feel no
inclination whatever to go there now.

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 31/12/2007 00:19, Roger Merriman said,

> and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
> found.

There is talk of reversing that decision and making them blend in with
their surroundings again.

http://tinyurl.com/2j84xx for a reference.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Jeff York]

Simon Brooke > wrote:

>Sir Jeremy wrote:
>
>> On 29 Dec, 13:07, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
>>> running.
>>>
>>> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
>>> have
>>> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
>>> information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk- We have
>>> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
>>> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
>>> Welsh Tourist Board )
>>
>> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
>> anti-motorist policies
>
>All the better for cyclists, then.

Not really... Thanks to Mr Brunstrom's obsession with motorists, the
clear-up rate for just about all other crime in North Wales is about
the worst in the UK.

Check you have good, multiple, bike-locks. :-)

[Matt B]

Roger Merriman wrote:
> Paul Boyd > wrote:
>
>> On 30/12/2007 13:42, JNugent said,
>>
>>> Yes - but do all cycling holidays consist of cycling all the way there
>>> and all the way back again?
>> Not necessarily, but it also isn't necessary to speed. I'm not going to
>> say I never break the speed limit, but if I get caught it's my own
>> stupid fault for speeding, not Brainstorm's for catching me.
>
> and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
> found.

It's not so much the danger of being caught speeding, as the danger of
being involved in an accident, away from the cameras, which wouldn't
have happened if cameras weren't being used as the cornerstone of road
safety policy.

It is apparent from the statistics that the rapid decline in road
casualty rates correlates with the growth of camera partnerships - is it
mere coincidence? Cameras may have a marginal positive effect in their
immediate vicinity, but what effect have they had on driving as a whole?

No doubt the recently introduced /special/ laws which prohibit the use
of hand-held mobile phones whilst driving will have a similar negative
effect on road safety, effectively condoning and promoting the use of
hands-free phones. Studies have shown that it is the distraction of the
conversation, not the holding of the phone itself, which is dangerous -
i.e. hands-free phones are just as dangerous as hands-free.

So, with the effect of cameras being the promotion (by not condemning
it) of the use of inappropriate speed up to the arbitrary limit, and the
effect of the hand-held phone ban being the encouragement of dangerous
hands-free phone conversations, what hope is there that our road safety
record will dramatically improve?

--
Matt B

[Simon Brooke]

Paul Boyd wrote:

> On 31/12/2007 00:19, Roger Merriman said,
>
>> and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
>> found.
>
> There is talk of reversing that decision and making them blend in with
> their surroundings again.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2j84xx for a reference.

Good.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; single speed mountain bikes: for people who cycle on flat mountains.

[_[_2_]]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:18:13 +0000, Simon Brooke wrote:

> Paul Boyd wrote:
>
>> On 31/12/2007 00:19, Roger Merriman said,
>>
>>> and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
>>> found.
>>
>> There is talk of reversing that decision and making them blend in with
>> their surroundings again.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2j84xx for a reference.
>
> Good.

I agree.

If speed cameras are to be as effective as they could be, the motorist must
not know where or when he may be in their view.

Mobile, concealed cameras are the answer. Motorists who do not break the
law have nothing to fear.

[Matt B]

_ wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:18:13 +0000, Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> Paul Boyd wrote:
>>
>>> On 31/12/2007 00:19, Roger Merriman said,
>>>
>>>> and speed camera's being painted yellow are quite easy to spot i've
>>>> found.
>>> There is talk of reversing that decision and making them blend in with
>>> their surroundings again.
>
> I agree.

You'd rather catch motorists on technicalities than reduce road
casualties then I take it.

> If speed cameras are to be as effective as they could be, the motorist must
> not know where or when he may be in their view.

FSVO "effective", neither of which leads to a reduction in road casualties.

> Mobile, concealed cameras are the answer.

Yes, indeed, if catching "speeders", as opposed to helping ensure
appropriate speeds, is you objective.

> Motorists who do not break the
> law have nothing to fear.

Eh? You'd rather be hit by a clueless automaton driving "legally"
(within the ACPO guidelines) at 35 mph in a built-up area, than ensure
drivers always drive safely at an appropriate speed would you?

--
Matt B

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

Sir Jeremy wrote:
>
> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> anti-motorist policies

Give us one example of a motorist driving within the law and being prosecuted.

[Matt B]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> Sir Jeremy wrote:
>>
>> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
>> anti-motorist policies
>
> Give us one example of a motorist driving within the law and being
> prosecuted.

Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-

October 2004, 1,100:
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4578705.stm>

March 2005 "dozens":
<http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2007/01/30/wrong-time-speed-case-thrown-out-55578-18548622/>

December 2006, 3,000:
<http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2007/10/26/driver-demands-refund-after-speeding-conviction-quashed-55578-20010644/>

South Wales has similarly "prosecuted" motorists driving within the law:-

2003, 2,500: <http://archive.westerntelegraph.co.uk/2003/11/20/5563.html>

--
Matt B

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

Matt B
>
> Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-

Most of these were exonerated only on technicalities - because the paperwork hadn't been
done properly - and their fines/points were revoked, so where's the problem?

[JNugent[_2_]]

wrote:
> On 2 Jan,
> Matt B > wrote:
>
>
>>Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-
>>
>>October 2004, 1,100:
>><http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4578705.stm>
>>
>>March 2005 "dozens":
>><http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2007/01/30/wrong-time-speed-case-thrown-out-55578-18548622/>
>>
>>December 2006, 3,000:
>><http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2007/10/26/driver-demands-refund-after-speeding-conviction-quashed-55578-20010644/>
>>
>>South Wales has similarly "prosecuted" motorists driving within the law:-
>>
>>2003, 2,500: <http://archive.westerntelegraph.co.uk/2003/11/20/5563.html>
>>
> Only the last ones, the others were (in fact one admitted) breaking the law,
> but got off on a technicality.

The one who "admitted" committing the offence simply *must* have been
misreported (or had her words misunderstood), since she proved that
she was elsewhere at the time of the alleged offence. I take it she
wasn't driving a Ford Tardis.

[Matt B]

wrote:
> On 2 Jan,
> Matt B > wrote:
>
>> Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-
>>
>> October 2004, 1,100:
>> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4578705.stm>
>>
>> March 2005 "dozens":
>> <http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2007/01/30/wrong-time-speed-case-thrown-out-55578-18548622/>
>>
>> December 2006, 3,000:
>> <http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2007/10/26/driver-demands-refund-after-speeding-conviction-quashed-55578-20010644/>
>>
>> South Wales has similarly "prosecuted" motorists driving within the law:-
>>
>> 2003, 2,500: <http://archive.westerntelegraph.co.uk/2003/11/20/5563.html>
>>
> Only the last ones, the others were (in fact one admitted) breaking the law,
> but got off on a technicality.

The first 1,100 were because the signs were in the wrong place - i.e. no
law was being broken by those prosecuted.

The second lot, the "dozens", were prosecuted for doing something at a
time that they weren't doing it - i.e. no law was necessarily being
broken at the time stated. It could be that they were breaking the law
at another time - that is irrelevant, they weren't charged with that.

The 3,000 were incorrectly prosecuted - i.e. the prosecutions were not
valid.

--
Matt B

[JNugent[_2_]]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:

> Matt B

>> Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-

> Most of these were exonerated only on technicalities - because the
> paperwork hadn't been done properly - and their fines/points were
> revoked, so where's the problem?

Breaking a speed limit is a purely arbitrary technical "offence".
Technicalities matter in technical "offences".

Revoking fines and points is all very well. How do the authorities
revoke the stress and distress the unjust process causes in such
cases? How does it get people their jobs back if they were incorrectly
banned? How does it compensate them for loss of earnings (and maybe
losses on disposed-of vehicles)?

Still, never mind, they're only drivers, eh?

[Matt B]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> Matt B
>>
>> Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-
>
> Most of these were exonerated only on technicalities - because the
> paperwork hadn't been done properly - and their fines/points were
> revoked, so where's the problem?

What problem? I was satisfying your request: "Give us one example of a
motorist driving within the law and being prosecuted". Did I, or did I
not, supply at _least_ one example???

--
Matt B

[PK]

"A.C.P.Crawshaw" > wrote in message
...
> Matt B
>>
>> Never mind one, there are _thousands_ in North Wales alone:-
>
> Most of these were exonerated only on technicalities - because the
> paperwork hadn't been done properly - and their fines/points were revoked,
> so where's the problem?


technicalities in the law are there to prevent the "authorities" acting at
their whim to the citizen's disadvantage.

Are there other areas of law where you would like the authorities to ignore
the "technicalities"

pk

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

Matt B wrote:

> What problem? I was satisfying your request: "Give us one example of a
> motorist driving within the law and being prosecuted". Did I, or did I
> not, supply at _least_ one example???
>
It's a fair cop. s/prosecuted/successfully prosecuted/ and re-test ;)

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

JNugent wrote:
>
> The one who "admitted" committing the offence simply *must* have been
> misreported (or had her words misunderstood), since she proved that she
> was elsewhere at the time of the alleged offence. I take it she wasn't
> driving a Ford Tardis.

or the clock was wrong on the camera

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

Matt B wrote:
>
> The 3,000 were incorrectly prosecuted - i.e. the prosecutions were not
> valid.

I regularly drive along that section of road. The 30 mph zone was extended but the
statutory notices that no-one ever reads were not published, so the drivers who ignored
the re-positioned 30 mph signs were very lucky and have no cause to whinge.

[Matt B]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>
>> What problem? I was satisfying your request: "Give us one example of
>> a motorist driving within the law and being prosecuted". Did I, or
>> did I not, supply at _least_ one example???
>>
> It's a fair cop. s/prosecuted/successfully prosecuted/ and re-test ;)

Given that the basis used is "guilty until proven innocent", and the
number of "convictions" which have later had to be overturned upon
appeal, you can be fairly certain that there are also thousands of
uncontested prosecutions which were never-the-less invalid.

--
Matt B

[Matt B]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>>
>> The 3,000 were incorrectly prosecuted - i.e. the prosecutions were not
>> valid.
>
> I regularly drive along that section of road. The 30 mph zone was
> extended but the statutory notices that no-one ever reads were not
> published,

Hence the limit was invalid - so unenforceable.

> so the drivers who ignored the re-positioned 30 mph signs
> were very lucky

Sad that in this day and age we consider ourselves "lucky" if we manage
to escape an illegal prosecution.

> and have no cause to whinge.

Would you happily accept a prosecution for an offence that didn't
legally exist???

--
Matt B

[Ekul Namsob]

Matt B > wrote:

> A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> > Matt B wrote:
> >>
> >> The 3,000 were incorrectly prosecuted - i.e. the prosecutions were not
> >> valid.
> >
> > I regularly drive along that section of road. The 30 mph zone was
> > extended but the statutory notices that no-one ever reads were not
> > published,
>
> Hence the limit was invalid - so unenforceable.
>
> > so the drivers who ignored the re-positioned 30 mph signs
> > were very lucky
>
> Sad that in this day and age we consider ourselves "lucky" if we manage
> to escape an illegal prosecution.
>
> > and have no cause to whinge.
>
> Would you happily accept a prosecution for an offence that didn't
> legally exist???

If there were a clear sign informing me of the existence of the offence
and the law were reasonable, I wouldn't whine about it. Obviously, part
of this is subjective.

Cheers,
Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>

[JNugent[_2_]]

Ekul Namsob wrote:
> Matt B > wrote:
>
>
>>A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
>>
>>>Matt B wrote:
>>>
>>>>The 3,000 were incorrectly prosecuted - i.e. the prosecutions were not
>>>>valid.
>>>
>>>I regularly drive along that section of road. The 30 mph zone was
>>>extended but the statutory notices that no-one ever reads were not
>>>published,
>>
>>Hence the limit was invalid - so unenforceable.
>>
>>
>>>so the drivers who ignored the re-positioned 30 mph signs
>>>were very lucky
>>
>>Sad that in this day and age we consider ourselves "lucky" if we manage
>>to escape an illegal prosecution.
>>
>>
>>> and have no cause to whinge.
>>
>>Would you happily accept a prosecution for an offence that didn't
>>legally exist???
>
>
> If there were a clear sign informing me of the existence of the offence
> and the law were reasonable, I wouldn't whine about it. Obviously, part
> of this is subjective.

Surely you mean: "...if the *non-existent* law were reasonable"?

You'd willingly pay a fine and be branded a second-class citizen for
breaking a non-existent law, would you?

Yeah, right...

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

JNugent wrote:
>
> Breaking a speed limit is a purely arbitrary technical "offence".

This is the attitude that causes ten deaths every day on the roads.

[A.C.P.Crawshaw]

JNugent wrote:
>
> You'd willingly pay a fine and be branded a second-class citizen for
> breaking a non-existent law, would you?
>
If I'd passed a 30 mph sign at a greater speed then I wouldn't complain about being
fined. If I subsequently got off on a technicality then I would consider myself very lucky.

[Ian Smith]

On Wed, 02 Jan, JNugent > wrote:
>
> Breaking a speed limit is a purely arbitrary technical "offence".
> Technicalities matter in technical "offences".
>
> Revoking fines and points is all very well. How do the authorities
> revoke the stress and distress the unjust process causes in such
> cases? How does it get people their jobs back if they were incorrectly
> banned? How does it compensate them for loss of earnings (and maybe
> losses on disposed-of vehicles)?
>
> Still, never mind, they're only drivers, eh?

.... who were doing something they believed to be illegal, even if it
turned out not to be on a technicality.

It is simply notr credible that the drivers in question rigorously
monitored the statutory publications and new teh limit to be invalid.
If they had known that, they would have offered it as defence.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

[JNugent[_2_]]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:

> JNugent wrote:

>> Breaking a speed limit is a purely arbitrary technical "offence".

> This is the attitude that causes ten deaths every day on the roads.

What - recognising the difference between common law and
arbitrarily-defined administrative law causes death?

[JNugent[_2_]]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:

> JNugent wrote:

>> You'd willingly pay a fine and be branded a second-class citizen for
>> breaking a non-existent law, would you?

> If I'd passed a 30 mph sign at a greater speed then I wouldn't complain
> about being fined. If I subsequently got off on a technicality then I
> would consider myself very lucky.

And you would call a non-existent temporary reduction in the speed
limit (one which is illegally signed) a "technicality", would you?

[Matt B]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
>>
>> Breaking a speed limit is a purely arbitrary technical "offence".
>
> This is the attitude that causes ten deaths every day on the roads.

What "attitude"??? Can you cite _any_ evidence that shows a causal
relationship between speeding (speed in excess of the limit), as opposed
to the use of inappropriate speed (which may be below or above the speed
limit), and road casualties.

--
Matt B

[Matt B]

A.C.P.Crawshaw wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
>>
>> You'd willingly pay a fine and be branded a second-class citizen for
>> breaking a non-existent law, would you?
>>
> If I'd passed a 30 mph sign at a greater speed then I wouldn't complain
> about being fined.

If a council jobsworth put up an illegal "no cycling" sign in your
street, without having obtained the required authorisation to do so, you
would happily pay any fines improperly levied against you would you?

> If I subsequently got off on a technicality then I
> would consider myself very lucky.

The "technicality" being that no law was actually broken by yourself.

--
Matt B

[Matt B]

Ian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan, JNugent > wrote:
>> Breaking a speed limit is a purely arbitrary technical "offence".
>> Technicalities matter in technical "offences".
>>
>> Revoking fines and points is all very well. How do the authorities
>> revoke the stress and distress the unjust process causes in such
>> cases? How does it get people their jobs back if they were incorrectly
>> banned? How does it compensate them for loss of earnings (and maybe
>> losses on disposed-of vehicles)?
>>
>> Still, never mind, they're only drivers, eh?
>
> ... who were doing something they believed to be illegal, even if it
> turned out not to be on a technicality.
>
> It is simply notr credible that the drivers in question rigorously
> monitored the statutory publications and new teh limit to be invalid.
> If they had known that, they would have offered it as defence.

LOL. Now we are to be prosecuted based on "what we believe to be the
law", rather that what actually /is/ the law. You couldn't make it up,
could you!!!

--
Matt B

[John Kane]

On Dec 29 2007, 12:55 pm, Sir Jeremy > wrote:
> On 29 Dec, 13:07, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi.
>
> > After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
> > running.
>
> > We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
> > have
> > 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. - more
> > information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk-We have
> > also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
> > awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
> > Welsh Tourist Board )
>
> > Thanks for your time
>
> > Allan
>
> Many are boycotting North Wales because of Chief Constable Brainstorms
> anti-motorist policies

Definately a recommendation if I'm heading that way this summer.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

[John Kane]

On Dec 30 2007, 11:29 am, "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Like most holidays the price depends on the time of the year. We however
> have an additional problem with advertising prices in that all the
> properties are different. If you can fill in the little form on the
> contacts page of the web site I can give you prices within 10 mins.
>
> Thanks
>
> Allan

For someone like me from North America, the lack of prices is a real
put-off. I might be looking at 30-40 sites all around the UK if I
have not decided on any specific places to go and a lack of prices
almost immediately means that I'll drop the site.

Everything else looks very good but I really think some price guides
would be a good idea.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada


>
> vernon:
>
> > "Allan" <nospam@invalid> wrote in message
> >news:WTaJOZmAQYS3lsfinospam@invalid...
> >> Hi.
>
> >> After 3 years we finally have our Holiday Cottage business up and
> >> running.
>
> >> We are situated on the outskirts of the Snowdonia National Park and
> >> have
> >> 2 Cottages (4 Star), a farmhouse (4 star) and a luxury caravan. -
> more
> >> information can be had here -www.cottage-breaks-wales.co.uk- We
> have
> >> also sucesfully fulfilled the Walking and Cycling criteria and been
> >> awarded both certificates and Logo status from Visit Wales ( the old
> >> Welsh Tourist Board )
>
> >> Thanks for your time
>
> >> Allan
>
> > It might be me but I couldn't find any prices.....