California weighs 'digital adverts' on number plates

"Moron of the Month" award just has to go to the person who thought-up this idea
California weighs 'digital adverts' on number plates

Under the bill before the state legislature, the California motor vehicles department would have until 2013 to research digital number plates, including the amount of revenue they would raise, restrictions on the messages they display and any impact on traffic safety.

According to a state analysis of the bill, while the vehicle bearing a digital plate is in motion the plate would display the registration number.

But when the vehicle is stopped for four seconds or more, the number would be replaced with a scrolling set of messages including advertisements for private businesses, educational institutions and other organisations that have contracts with the state.

Criminals in California would love this idea.
"Hello 911 some masked men with guns just jumped out of a parked car and ran into the bank"
"Can you tell me the registration number of the car?"
"Yes, it is 'buy vanilla coke now with 20% less sugar'"
"OK Honey just hang about there and wait for the men to come back and drive off, hopefully you will not get shot and will have time to read the real registration number, if the suspects have not interfered with the car's movement sensor"

Wailing Greens tick me off

I have decided to vote Greens last (along with Liberal and Labor).

I have been extremely unimpressed by the Greens energy policy and housing policy. But the last straw is a moronic piece of legislation proposed by Australian Greens whaling spokesperson Senator Rachel Siewert.

http://rachel-siewert.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/greens-call-end-aussie-spy-planes-aiding-japanese-whaling

The Australian Greens today introduced a private Senators Bill to ban any form of Australian assistance to Japanese whaling, such as the use of spy planes.

My Bill creates a new offence making it unlawful to provide services, support or resources to an organisation engaged in whaling so the Australian government and local companies can no longer assist Japan's brutal whaling regime," said Australian Greens whaling spokesperson Senator Rachel Siewert.

Many Australians were appalled when it was revealed that Australian air services were used by a company with connections to the whalers to assist in this summer's slaughter.

The assistance provided to the whalers was to track the main protest vessel of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society so that a ship from the whaling fleet could hinder the Sea Shepherd's pursuit of the main fleet.

Without the Sea Shepherd on its tail, the main whaling fleet could undertake its mission of killing whales more easily.

In response to the information that the Japanese whaling fleet had hired Australian planes from Hobart and Albany to track the Sea Shepherd ships' movements, Senator Bob Brown committed the Greens to act to ensure no such assistance could be provided in the future.

Firstly, let me say that I do not approve of the killing of whales. I don't eat whale. I don't think there is a humane way of killing whales. I would prefer if the Japanese stopped killing whales. Perhaps we can strike an agreement with them in which they stop killing the whales.

If an Australian does kill a whale I don't mind if that person is punished at my expense. However placing a human in jail for two years is worse than killing a whale - in my opinion.

The Greens are proposing to jail an Australia for two years not for killing an actual whale but for providing any form of help to the Japanese who kill whales. Over-the-top.

The Greens use the example of Australian planes that tracked the movements of an anti-whaling boat. It is ludicrous to jail an Australian for two years for flying a plane that watches a boat that tries to follow and hinder a boat of Japanese that kill whales. I wouldn't jail an Aussie for two weeks for doing that thing. And the Greens want up to two years jail for that "offence".

The last thing we need now is more legislation. Most people have not learned the thousands of pages of laws that we already have. Most police don't know every law that our politicians passed just in the last year. We have so many laws because idiot politicians keep adding poorly thought-out garbage like this whaling bill.

I will not be voting Green again. At the next Federal election I will vote Labor last, Liberal 2nd last and Greens 3rd last. Any other candidate gets my vote ahead of these.

When does paint cost more than carpet?

Answer: When the NSW tax-payer is footing the bill.
Dragon's teeth to guard school zones
Some quotes from the article:
"THE NSW Government will spend $13 million on new line markings near every one of the state's 10,000 school zones."

"NSW has 3200 schools - but thousands more school zones because many schools have several road boundaries."

"The dragon's teeth markings would be painted on each side of the road for 35 metres at the start of each school zone."

"The program - which has the backing of road safety advocate Ron Delezio - would start this week."

So we have 3200 schools but 10,000 school zone entry points. Government is going to spend $13 million painting marks for 35 metres at the start of each zone. Let's do some calcs.
$13,000,000 for 3200 schools gives $4060 per school.
$13,000,000 for 10,000 zones gives $1300 per zone.
$1300 for a 35 metre length gives $37 per metre. I believe you can buy carpet cheaper than that. You surely can if you buy 350,000 metres of the stuff.

"Mr Daley said flashing lights had been installed in 293 school zones as part of a $46.5 million program that would eventually cover 566 school zones."
That is $82155 per school for flashing lights. Perhaps the painted road is not so expensive after all.

Racism cry is the only weapon

Using typical state Labor spin, with which we in NSW are all too familiar, Victorian Premier John Brumby this week announced his farcical response to the muggings of Indian students in Melbourne's crime-riddled western suburbs: a "Walk for Harmony". Oh, and some "hate crime legislation" to be rushed through Parliament.

But if the Victorian police just did their job, the problem would be solved, without resort to new legislation and bogus symbolism.

The above is not something I wrote but was written by Miranda Devine in her article Racism cry is the only weapon

The Moron of the Month award goes to Victorian Premier John Brumby for his part in the affair.

The situation is not that hard to understand. We just need good basic policing of good basic laws. Hiring some decent police and voting in some decent politicians would make a fine start.

The current system is a decrepit symbiosis between police and politicians:

Lazy police spend their time sucking-up to politicians, providing the bogus statistics the politicians want and providing the bloated fine revenue that the politicians want, instead of doing the basic policing that the public actually wants.

In return the politicians pander to the lazy police by making excuses for any police failure and giving over-the-top new powers to police and anything else they ask for.

Here's the pattern:
* Lazy police allow crime to flourish until incidents alarm the public
* Politicians rush thoughtless laws through Parliament with a flurry of tough proclamations
* Police get an excuse for past failure and get exciting new superpowers to use in future, to make their job even easier.
* Politicians get credit for doing something to tackle this brand-new threat to public safety.

Bikie laws a threat to rights, says Cowdery

link

THE Director of Public Prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery, QC, has condemned the Government's new bikie laws as "very troubling legislation" that could lead to a police state and represent "another giant leap backwards for human rights and the separation of powers - in short, the rule of law".
....
In a paper published on his website, Mr Cowdery says: "There may be a need for better enforcement [rather] than for legal powers."
....
"The spectre of a police state lurks here: an unacceptable slide from the separation of powers

Full text here

Gosh! Who would have thought! Now where else did I read something like that?

Rees Goes Gangbusters

The "Moron of the Month" award goes to Premier Nathan Rees, a law-writer who seems to think every problem can be solved by writing more laws.

Sydney ambush justifies bikie crackdown
The New South Wales Cabinet will consider new laws to ban motorcycle gangs today.
Under the laws, based on a South Australian crackdown, bikies would immediately be charged and face jail terms if they continue to associate with each other.
Premier Nathan Rees says the latest shooting reinforces the need for the new laws to crack down on bikie gangs.
"This underlines the need for the new laws that we're going to introduce that will prescribe gangs and make it an offence to associate with a gang," Mr Rees said.

The recent flare-up of bikie violence shows that our police force has been slack in that particular area, and is a symptom of the general incompetence of our police force.

The police have taken a soft approach against bikie gangs and have allowed them to get too much money from drugs and now become fearless in their crimes.

The murder in Sydney airport is evidence of their brazen attitude and is further evidence of incompetence of Australian security personnel. I don't expect police to be able to create a crime-free community but I would like a rapid response in such an important place as the airport, and I would also like the security cameras to be in top working condition. I understand that it is impossible to pick-up passengers in the drop-off area of the airport without being fined by security. Yet these goons were unable to stop a man being bashed to death in full public view nearby.

When I left school I checked the minimum school marks needed to undertake various careers. I remember laughing when I saw that the professions needing the lowest marks were teacher and policeman. I'm not laughing now. The dunces so recruited have worked their way through the system and the results are now evident in the quality of policing that we now have.

The community cannot expect perfect law enforcement. We can decide how much we are prepared to pay and how much enforcement we can reasonably get for that expenditure of resources. We must hire police who are smart enough, pay them enough, and then demand they do their job. Our police are now doing a pathetic job, growing fat and lazy pigging-out on easy fines, and putting serious crimes in the too-hard basket. We must demand they do a better job, and if necessary, pay more to get it done competently.

What is not needed is new laws. The Czar of incompetence, Premier Nathan Rees, has decided that the bikie violence proves we need new laws - laws which ban gangs. We do not need new laws. Murder is already illegal. We just need police to enforce the existing laws.

In writing new anti-bikie laws Rees is saying two things:
* Our police are not incompetent, the absence of these laws is the police's excuse for allowing the bikies to get away with crimes.
* Every constitution in history that allows freedom of association is wrong, and Nathan Rees knows better than the founders of all these systems.

The fact is that police will always like more power. Everyone wants more power. The trouble is that more police powers makes the police a juicier target for criminals to infiltrate. This is why all smart systems limit police powers. Police powers must be made strong enough to catch criminals but weak enough to be unattractive to criminals. Once the police are given super-powers, nasty people will move in and take-over the police. The police will then become the most powerful gang and become the government of the country. The usual name for such a place is a "Police State".

If offered super-powers by government, police will always welcome the offer. It makes their next job easier and gives them an excuse for their past failures.
Imagine a wife asks her husband to make something in the garage. He stuffs-up the job. What does she say to him?
"Darling would you like me to give you a new powertool so you can do better next time?"
OR
"Get back in that garage and fix it!"

I propose that we don't give police new powers and instead we order them to get out on the street and do their job right.

Rees is proposing new laws that will ban gangs and make it illegal for gang members to meet each other. What is a gang? A gang is a group. A family is a gang. A company is a gang. A political party is a gang.

Rees is the gang-leader of the most incompetent government gang in Australia. His gang, NSW Labor party, runs this state in a way that borders on criminal. If I could ban just one gang in Australia it would be the Labor party. The second gang I would ban would of course be the Liberal party. These major-party thugs get together and block-vote their moronic legislation through parliament regardless of the wishes of the voters in their electorates. Ban them all I say.

Would you trust me to ban gangs? After banning the Labor party and the Liberal party I'd ban the bikie gangs, then cigarette companies. Still trust me? I'd ban Sydney Airport Corporation, Qantas, all advertising companies, the RTA, local council factions, the Broncos football team, The Wiggles, The Rolling Stones, Wikipedia editors, Microsoft, all banks, Big Brother TV audience, major-party voters and I'm only just getting started. Perhaps you shouldn't trust me with the power to ban gangs?

I wouldn't trust Nathan Rees with the power to ban gangs. I don't trust Rees to do anything well. I don't trust him to fix basic things like roads, schools and hospitals. I most certainly don't trust him to meddle with basic freedoms such as free speech and freedom of association. Only the very best people should be used to adjust the foundation of a democratic society. A statesman with a proud record of serving the people over many years might be trusted with such a task. Nathan Rees is not in that class at all.

Putting aside all exaggerations, the laws proposed by Rees could very easily be used to attack any political party that opposes the party in government. It would be very easy to pay some known criminals to join a rival party and make trouble there. Imagine that I wanted to have Pauline Hanson's party banned. Here is what I could do:
* Arrange for a bunch of known drug users to join and agitate her party to support legalising drugs.
* Arrange for a bunch of known perverts to join and agitate her party to support legalising child pornography.
* Arrange for a bunch of gun owners to join and agitate her party to deregulate automatic-rifle ownership.
* Arrange for a bunch of ex-cons with records of violent crime to join and support all of the above and organise a protest rally that turns violent.

Now I have turned her party into a gang in which some members are clearly supporting illegal drugs, porn and guns, and some have a proven history of violence. Quite possibly Rees's new laws could then be used to ban Pauline Hanson's party and prevent Pauline and her law-abiding supporters from ever meeting again.

Even a NSW voter should be smart enough to see the danger in these proposed laws.

Cinema Privacy Ushered Out

Worried by the competition from handycam movie copies, moronic cinema companies are now spying on their patrons with night-vision telescopes.

Cinema 'cops' deploy night vision devices

As a movie watcher you have always had a choice of going to the hassle and expense of watching the movie when it comes out at the cinema, or waiting for the DVD to be released and watching it in the comfort of your own home. Movie companies know this and so they deliberately delay the DVD release of movies to force you to take the more expensive cinema option.
Of course the cinema experience has more to offer than just getting to see a movie earlier. Some people prefer the atmosphere of a big-screen cinema to watching a DVD. These are valuable customers that movie and cinema companies should appreciate and respect.

In recent years some people have been sneaking video cameras into the cinema, recording the movie and then selling illegal copies of it on DVD. If you have ever had the misfortune of watching one of these you would know that the quality is awful and it is something to be avoided. Modern movies have super high resolutions and fancy surround sound. These are lost on the pirate DVDs. Only the most impatient cheapskates would buy such DVD copies. In my opinion these pose no threat to the legal viewing of the movies.

Surprisingly cinema companies do perceive handycam copying to pose a great threat to their business. Even more surprisingly, they seem to be prepared to sacrifice their greatest strength - the cinema atmosphere, in order to combat a minor weakness - the threat that unobserved patrons might make a crappy handycam copy for resale.

Cinemas who decide to spy on patrons could find that their decision backfires and costs them more patronage than it gains them. This is because patrons who value a bit of privacy and respect from the companies they deal with, might react to the spying by avoiding those cinemas altogether. They might decide to avoid the nosey ushers and wait for the DVD release.

It is easy to understand why some patrons will feel this way. Instead of being allowed to relax and enjoy the movie in the darkened cinema, you will have to be conscious of the fact that an employee is being paid to watch you with a telescope. They could be watching you at any time. Who knows where they are and what they can see with their fancy device.

In times past, a young man could have waited until the cinema lights dim before making a move on his girlfriend in privacy. Now cinema ushers will be scrutinising the legitimacy of his every move. It will be their job to know exactly what is in his hand - it could be a recording device. Is that a mobile phone in his pocket, or is he just pleased to see the movie?

Under this cinema policy, whatever you do in the dark becomes the business of the ushers to know, in order to avoid a violation of copyright. What about violation of privacy?

The cinemas might think it is a great idea to employ these pervy owls. It might stamp out copying by your average handycam and your average mobile phone - at the expense of patron privacy of course. However once the pirates find they cannot use standard cameras, they quite likely will turn to tiny hard-to-detect cameras. In order to detect these smaller cameras, the cinemas will then "need" to make their searches and monitoring far more invasive. Is this what they really want to do?

I think that instead of employing spies, cinemas should employ a bit of commonsense in the way they treat their patrons. If some dodgy people want to make dodgy copies, and other dodgy people want to watch them, so be it. Spoiling the cinema product to claw back these dodgy customers is not good business sense.