Domain: spiderbomb.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to spiderbomb.com.
Comments · 7
-
This discussion maybe ?
http://www.spiderbomb.com/blog/?p=317
there are people who are going around and saying 'radiation is good for your health'. but more importantly, there ARE people believing them. -
Re:Who the BBC isexcuse me... you go to prison for not paying the fine which you got for not paying the fee... so in effect, you can be sent to prison for not paying the fee...
A report on the imprisonment of fine defaulters claimed that:
defaulters on low incomes are often imprisoned on the grounds of 'culpable neglect', as the court judges that they have spent money on other priorities than the fine. Many such defaulters are in practice imprisoned because of an inability to manage on a low income. (Penal Affairs Consortium 1995:3)
A number of studies have pointed out the material difficulties faced by defaulters of fines. One study based on 35 case studies of defaulters (including television licence evaders) showed most of the defaulters to be out of work, often for more than twelve months (National Association of Probation Officers 1994). Most were living on State benefits and had multiple debts. Most offenders end up defaulting on their fines because they need the money for things such as shoes and clothing, food and housekeeping, rent, rates, unspecified bills, light and heating, and public transport (Softley 1978). The crucial problem appears to be that offenders are given fines that they simply cannot afford to pay. This is in spite of the fact that courts are required to take into account the offender's means in the setting of fines.
Table I shows the number of people imprisoned for defaulting on fines for television licence evasion by gender between 1991 and 1995. Over the 1990s there has been a sharp increase in the number of persons imprisoned for defaulting on fines for television licence evasion, from 394 to 749. There were 235 females and 493 males imprisoned for fine defaulting on television licence evasion offences in 1995. -
BBC viewpoint
For those that don't know, and are therefore probably thinking "How the hell can they give it all away for free", the BBC is funded by everyone in the UK who has a TV paying a yearly fee (104 I think - I pay 8/month by direct-debit until it's paid). From the last figures I can find (on the admittedly licence-fee-hostile CAL site) the BBC has 2.8 billion pounds per year running costs ($5,000,000,000, give or take...)
There are lots of people in the UK who object to paying for the licence fee (I'm not one of them), most of whom (in my opinion) want the same quality of service (or better ;-) without having to cough up the cash. Given the advantages (the BBC documentaries and wildlife programs to name but two would probably not get made in a more commercial environment) I'm fairly happy paying 8/month. Given that I'll happily blow 50 on a night out (pub & meal), it seems like good value to me...
And then of course without the constant need to please the paymasters, you can get this sort of benevolence (although I'd be willing to bet when the details come out that re-broadcasting is limited :-). You also get more (IMHO) objectivity. I trust the BBC far more than I trust most news organisations, foreign or domestic - there's a tradition of honest portrayal of news that places it up amongst the best, a tradition it lives up to, at least more often than most.
-
Re:A small clarification
If you use or install television receiving equipment to receive or record television programme services you are required by law to have a valid TV Licence.
The TV licenceing website is lying. Complaints have been made about it to the advertising standards authority, and an MP called Andrew Carey complained about it in the house of commons. This is easy to check, there are numerous websites with information about the TV licence.
Some links to get you started:
Abolish the TV licence
C.A.L.
Broadband and the TV licence -
Re:What and when?
You are just making this shit up, it's just not true, the maximum penalty is a 1000 fine, you cannot be put in prison for it.
The AC is correct. Whilst it might not be true that people are put into prison directly as a result of not having a licence, it seems that they can be if they refuse to pay the fine.
See http://www.spiderbomb.com/tv/prisonstats.html for some statistics.
-
Re:Privacy?
There's a movement to Abolish the TV Licence as some people claim they dont watch the BBC and shouldnt have to pay.
-
Re:that's not true either
The governement has vans that listen for TV tuners - 200,000 people a year are arrested for this. More info at the campaign to abolish the TV license. Remember the internet weather-forecasting toaster? It uses the internet instead of teletext (which requires no fixed wiring) because teletext requires a TV licence... go sound, no picture, go figure!