Oppression!!

Victor

I think they are shouting "Oppression!!" a little too loudly.

http://home.eircom.net/content/reuters/uNews/10665800?view=Standard&cat=International

Speed camera pair lose final appeal
From ReutersFri, 29 Jun 2007 13:32:00
By Peter Griffiths

LONDON (Reuters) - Two campaigning motorists lost a last legal appeal on Friday against speed camera laws, which they claim breach their human rights.

Retired company director Idris Francis, 67, and pensioner Gerard O'Halloran argued that current rules force car owners to incriminate themselves.

They said the centuries-old right to silence should allow drivers caught on camera to refuse to confirm to police who was at the wheel.

But judges at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg voted by 15-2 to reject their case.

"The court did not accept the applicants' argument that the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself were absolute rights," the court said in a statement.

"Those who choose to keep and drive cars could be taken to have accepted certain responsibilities and obligations."

Francis said the ruling marked a "black day for justice and freedom" and showed how people's rights are being eroded by "tyrants".

"In my view it is a perverse decision," he said. "I find it totally extraordinary. The fight for freedom goes on. We can't allow the tyrants ... to succeed."

"So many people around my age say that if they were younger or if didn't have family ties, they would leave because of what is happening to this country."

Francis was caught doing 47 mph in a 30 mph zone in June 2001. He used his legal right to silence and refused to confirm that he was the driver of the vintage Alvius Speed 25 car.

He was convicted and fined 750 pounds with 250 pounds costs and three penalty points.

O'Halloran, from London, was caught on camera driving at 69 mph on a 40 mph stretch of the M11 in April 2000. He received six points and a 100 pounds fine with 150 pounds costs.

The Department for Transport said: "The government welcomes today's ruling, which confirms that certain responsibilities come with owning or driving a car."

The AA's head of road safety Andrew Howard said Britain's speed camera laws "had not been found wanting".

"While all systems used for remote enforcement have disadvantages, we are not sure that any of the other methods used around the world are better or fairer," he said.

The pro-camera road safety charity Brake, said it was a victory for common sense.

"We never thought that this would be taken seriously and quite rightly the European court threw this out," said Brake spokeswoman Dianne Ferreira. "If that hadn't happened it would have had a devastating effect on road safety."

Paul Smith, founder of anti-speed camera group Safe Speed, said he would continue his campaign to get rid of speed cameras which he claims are ineffective.

Last year, 3,172 people were killed on Britain's roads.

corktina

that will have cost them a few bob.....seems fair enough to me that the owner of a car would be held liable if he wont say who was driving......he should be assumed to be the driver unless he advises otherwise...