Taxi Driver Online

LOL, Sussex has an apprentice.

You made a statement that is clearly nonsense, as vests are now standard issue to ALL officers. So now you choose to ignore the spurious analogy YOU made. sigh.

Still it appears Alf Garnet has a chum

I think that you are getting mixed up with a stab proof vest - and a bullet proof vest/armour. The last time that I spoke to an officer re stab proof - they had to buy their own!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe that has changed, having said that stab proof is not a lot of good for our forces personnel that you neglected to mention.

Before you go down the route of the forces body armour, just remember that a Sargent lost his life because he was ordered to give his armour to A.N.other..................when it comes to money you and I are just a tax earner for them - anything else and you and I will also have to pay out of our own pocket - not for safety, just to keep an eye on you/I, because the L.A's do not trust the judgement that they made when they allowed whatever driver take up the position.

The job should not be treated with so much disdain by the L.A's, just remember in all walks of life, "Horses for courses", and that has got naff all to do with horse racing. A proper interview should take place as in all jobs to see if the person is right for what they want, but that does just not happen, and we carry the stigma of what goes around because of that. To add insult to injury they are now expecting us to fork out of our own pocket to help them to spy on ourselves - safety for us is the bye product and not something that they really care about.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

LOL, Sussex has an apprentice. [/quote]

You made a statement that is clearly nonsense, as vests are now standard issue to ALL officers. So now you choose to ignore the spurious analogy YOU made. sigh.

Still it appears Alf Garnet has a chum [/quote]


Yeah ok Little Sussex, if you want a role model you picked the wrong one, your man is self indulgent and not at all the upstanding individual he wants us to think he is.


I just had a thought, you should change names to Eastbourne, and to call yourself Taxeman is a con, you should be PrivateHirEman really with your outlook.

You made a statement that is clearly nonsense, as vests are now standard issue to ALL officers. So now you choose to ignore the spurious analogy YOU made. sigh.

Still it appears Alf Garnet has a chum [/quote]


Yeah ok Little Sussex, if you want a role model you picked the wrong one, your man is self indulgent and not at all the upstanding individual he wants us to think he is.


I just had a thought, you should change names to Eastbourne, and to call yourself Taxeman is a con, you should be PrivateHirEman really with your outlook.[/quote]

One can always tell when the argument is won, the retort is often personal and always of no relevance. For the record I aspire to one but myself

Not really mate, I was just highlighting how much you are Marks latest glove puppet.

When it comes to which vest it is, is pure semantics, YOU made the statement to TRY and proof a point that was/is false.

As for the "forces" I couldn't care less if I tried, I have no time for the military what so ever. Given the so called "war on Terror" has gone on for over 10 years the vast majority of these Psychopaths joined up AFTER this. KNOWING (if they have any intelligence) that the so called WAR is both a lie and illegal!!!

It was irrelevant in its form; The point was/is to prove that when the L.As issue a statement to say it is about safety - then it is absolute rubbish because governments/councils could not give a stuff about the actual casualties.

Re the drivers, it is about watching them, because they have licensed so many scum bags and are now expecting others to pick up the tab. Before much longer it will probably be compulsory to have CCTV installed in every room in your house, so they can watch your every move......................if you think that is far fetched then look up the stats to see that we are more watched than any other Western country.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

A quick synopsis.

Its not about Safety.

Its about safety because "they" Licensed so many scum bags.

Its "simply" about watching you.

Try reading the CCTV code of conduct and actually understanding how data is collated, then you would realize how stupid the comment is regarding "watching you"

I wonder as to how stupid your reply looks now?????????

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745





If you naive enough to believe the clap trap - then so be it.




Righttttt - I get the picture, the most surveilled country in the western world have got cams all over the place........................and they are not watching you/me/ and anything that takes their fancy - I guess that they must just be there for show.

You just cannot see through the propaganda of your own country.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

Cameras can be fitted quite cheaply, and must be a benefit for everybody. The problem is that some Companies approach Councils and become approved installers. some times at 10 or more times the cost of the equiptment.

CCTV will become regualr in all vehicles, quite soon, and it will be insurance companies that reward it, rather than demand it.

Quite what the "new" spy bill has to do with CCTV in cabs I don't know.....Your again very poorly informed, the "new" spy bill is poppy cock, ALL electronic comms are already monitored. Its a nonsense piece of Government spin.


LET ME REPEAT THIS FOR THE LAST TIME.......ALL THE DATA IS IN YOUR BOOT......NO ONE IS WATCHING ANYONE!!!!

Should an incident arise a written request...even by the police has be presented, giving grounds for viewing and the viewing can ONLY be for the named incident. As all proper systems are date/time stamped, the data controller simply goes to the time of the incident.

Some ppl just love to spread fear!

Agreed

Which brings me to another myth often spouted by the privacy mob, in relation to audio.

I would say that currently 100% of the cab trade has a listening device in their vehicle when they are driving, and that device can transmit every conversation that takes place in the cab.

It's called a mobile phone.

_________________
IDFIMH

You must be wrapped up in the fairy tale thought that the "British" always play by the rules!

Let me put this to you..................an incident happens in your cab and the punter says the driver went ballistic and blah blah blah happened! unfortunately the incident is not picked up clearly...............so they trawl back on the CCTV to wherever and pick up that the driver can lose his cool, but it is not applicable to that incident! Are you saying that the good old "British" judicial system will not be able to use that as evidence that the driver is capable, and that they will not trawl back to see what dirt they can dig up on you?



So you believe in all that you read! and of course the Gov are just spouting rhetoric for the sake of spin! If that is the case as you claim - then why are they doing that when there are experts out there much better informed than you or I, that would pick up on that straight away.........................I have not seen your claim made by anyone - only you.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.