The relationship between traffic and non-traffic offending in Western Australia

Self-selection policing is an approach whereby serious underlying criminality is detected by an offender’s minor crimes (known as trigger offences). Strategic offences are offences that indicate an increased likelihood that the associated offender will engage in later offending. The purpose of this study was to determine if first-time serious traffic offending in Western Australia indicates previous and/or future non-traffic criminality, thereby demonstrating the utility of serious traffic offences as trigger offences and strategic offences. The authors collated the crime data of all first-time serious traffic offenders in Western Australia between December 2004 and December 2014. Using this data, survival analyses were conducted to determine if and when a first-time serious traffic offender committed an initial non-traffic offence within 10 years of their first serious traffic offence. When comparing this data to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the authors found that first-time serious traffic offenders are more likely than the average Western Australian to have a previous or future initial non-traffic offence. Some groups of first-time traffic offenders were more likely to commit non-traffic offences than others including males, individuals under the age of 25, drug drivers and drivers without authority. These results support the use of first-time serious traffic offences as trigger/strategic offences and could be used to identify and divert traffic offenders with versatile criminal histories and traffic offenders at risk of future criminal activity.

Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Pada Anak Terhadap Pelanggaran Lalu Lintas yang Menyebabkan Kematian

Lately, the number of children who often do criminal traffic violations, It is so menghawatirkan because it is not uncommon to traffic violations cause a crash to arise the victim died. Not only that, problems also arises in terms of responsibilities, in this case the victim died from a traffic offence committed. The purpose of this research is to analyse the responsibility of children against traffic offences which cause the victim's death. The method used in writing this essay is primary legal material. Based on the research conducted found that the age of the child greatly influences the overthrow of punishment on the child. Children aged under 14 years can only be charged penalties act whereas the provision of criminal sanctions is a child aged over 14 years to 18 years old according age limit child according to Act No. 35-year 2014 About child protection article 1 point 1. Provision of criminal sanctions of prison-related responsibilities against the crime that he had arranged with the penalty provisions based on ½ (one-) maximum threat from adults in accordance to article 81 paragraph (2) of Act No. 11 years 2012 about the criminal justice system.

RFID Based Traffic Offence Fining System

This paper proposes an RFID based traffic offence fining system that automatically detects the defaulter who breaks the traffic signal. It comprises of an RFID reader for detecting the vehicle which breaks the traffic signal, a microcontroller for processing and collecting the data of defaulter and a GSM module for sending the message on defaulters registered mobile number and regional transport office (RTO). This proposed system is very unique and eliminate the traditional use of paper pen fining system.

ANALISIS YURIDIS ATAS HILANGNYA HAK MEMBELA DIRI PADA PERSIDANGAN PERKARA CEPAT PELANGGARAN LALU LINTAS STUDI KASUS PENGADILAN NEGERI SEMARANG

<p>Persidangan perkara pelanggaran lalu lintas menggunakan Acara Pemeriksaan Cepat, dalam proses tersebut masyarakat dihadapkan pada sistem peradilan yang bertujuan untuk mendapatkan putusan yang adil. Dalam menjatuhkan pidana pelanggaran lalu-lintas pada kendaraan bermotor banyak pertimbangan yang digunakan oleh Majelis Hakim baik dari segi legal yuridis maupun hal-hal lain termasuk keadaan sosial masyarakat. <strong></strong></p><p>Masyarakat pada proses peradilan tidak dapat berdiri secara pasif untuk mendapatkan keadilan. Harus ada upaya yang dilakukan masyarakat yang menjadi pihak yang berperkara dalam peradilan. Salah satu upaya yang dapat dilakukan adalah melakukan proses pembelaan diri dalam tahapan pembuktian. Dalam sidang perkara cepat pelanggaran lalu lintas pihak memiliki kesempatan untuk melakukan pembelaan diri. Sebagai penegasan dalam artikel ini, yang dimaksud dengan hak pembelaan diri adalah Hak masyarakat untuk dihadapkan dengan peradilan yang sesuai prosedur. Tidak hanya semata-mata adanya keputusan merupakan acuan berjalannya peradilan, namun didapatkannya putusan yang adil secara formil maupun materiil juga merupakan keharusan.</p><p>Kurangnya pengetahuan masyarakat akan proses pembelaan diri menyebabkan mereka bersifat lebih pasif dan menyerahkan sepenuhnya kepada hakim untuk menganalisa perkara sekaligus memutuskan perkara tersebut tanpa melihat dari dua sisi sudut pandang para pihak.</p><p>The trial of traffic offence use the speedy trial procedure, in that process the community is exposed to the judicial system which aims to to get a fair decision. In giving the punishment on traffic offenders especially users of motor vehicles many of the considerations used by Tribunal Judges, both in terms of legal juridical or other things including community social conditions.</p><p> Society in judicial process can not stand passively to get justice. There should be an attempt who implemented by the community become a party litigants in the judiciary. One effort that can be done is do the defending procces in the stage of the proof. In speedy trial procedure of traffic offence, the parties have the opportunity to conduct self-defense. As the assertion in this article, The meaning of the right self-defense is The right of the public to faced with the appropriate judicial procedure. Not only the sheer existence of decision is the reference over the judiciary, but get a fair decision in formyl or materially also a must.</p><p>Lack of knowledge society about the process of self-defense cause they are more passive and submit completely the judge to analyze the case and decide the matter without looking from either side of the point of view of the parties.</p><p> </p>

Analisis Yuridis Atas Hilangnya Hak Membela Diri Pada Persidangan Perkara Cepat Pelanggaran Lalu Lintas Studi Kasus Pengadilan Negeri Semarang

<p>Persidangan perkara pelanggaran lalu lintas menggunakan Acara Pemeriksaan Cepat, dalam proses tersebut masyarakat dihadapkan pada sistem peradilan yang bertujuan untuk mendapatkan putusan yang adil. Dalam menjatuhkan pidana pelanggaran lalu-lintas pada kendaraan bermotor banyak pertimbangan yang digunakan oleh Majelis Hakim baik dari segi legal yuridis maupun hal-hal lain termasuk keadaan sosial masyarakat. Masyarakat pada proses peradilan tidak dapat berdiri secara pasif untuk mendapatkan keadilan. Harus ada upaya yang dilakukan masyarakat yang menjadi pihak yang berperkara dalam peradilan. Salah satu upaya yang dapat dilakukan adalah melakukan proses pembelaan diri dalam tahapan pembuktian. Dalam sidang perkara cepat pelanggaran lalu lintas pihak memiliki kesempatan untuk melakukan pembelaan diri. Sebagai penegasan dalam artikel ini, yang dimaksud dengan hak pembelaan diri adalah Hak masyarakat untuk dihadapkan dengan peradilan yang sesuai prosedur. Tidak hanya semata-mata adanya keputusan merupakan acuan berjalannya peradilan, namun didapatkannya putusan yang adil secara formil maupun materiil juga merupakan keharusan.<strong> </strong>Kurangnya pengetahuan masyarakat akan proses pembelaan diri menyebabkan mereka bersifat lebih pasif dan menyerahkan sepenuhnya kepada hakim untuk menganalisa perkara sekaligus memutuskan perkara tersebut tanpa melihat dari dua sisi sudut pandang para pihak.</p><p class="Default"> </p><p align="center"><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p>The trial of traffic offence use the speedy trial procedure, in that process the community is exposed to the judicial system which aims to to get a fair decision. In giving the punishment on traffic offenders especially users of motor vehicles many of the considerations used by Tribunal Judges, both in terms of legal juridical or other things including community social conditions. Society in judicial process can not stand passively to get justice. There should be an attempt who implemented by the community become a party litigants in the judiciary. One effort that can be done is do the defending procces in the stage of the proof. In speedy trial procedure of traffic offence, the parties have the opportunity to conduct self-defense. As the assertion in this article, The meaning of the right self-defense is The right of the public to faced with the appropriate judicial procedure. Not only the sheer existence of decision is the reference over the judiciary, but get a fair decision in formyl or materially also a must. Lack of knowledge society about the process of self-defense cause they are more passive and submit completely the judge to analyze the case and decide the matter without looking from either side of the point of view of the parties.</p><p> </p>

ZAKAZ PROWADZENIA POJAZDÓW MECHANICZNYCH NA ZAWSZE

A P e r m a n e n t P r o h ib it io n t o D r iv e V e h ic l e sSummaryTaking into consideration present needs of security in communication, the legislator has significantly modified the regulations concerning prohibition to drive vehicles. In art. 42 § 3 and § 4 of the Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as „PC”) the prerequisites of facultative (§ 3) and obligatory (§ 4) application of this measure are defined. From the beginning of the validity of this regulation it has been a subject of discussions in the legal doctrine. As far as discussed regulation seems to be coherent with demands of everyday users of law and is fully justified by increasing traffic offence, especially connected with perpetrator’s state of insobriety, the text of some of the provisions cause many interpretative problems. This study tries to determine some of the aspects concerning facultative and obligatory grounds for adjudicating the measure. The main doubts are caused by a wide definition of the persons, who may be punished with this measure (art. 42 § 3 PC). It provides that, this measure may be applied to the „person participating in a street traffic”, but not only to a driver of a vehicle but also to a pedestrian, if on conditions described in the regulation, he would commit one of the mentioned offences. In case of a graded form of the prohibition, viz. to be applied for a lifetime, described in art. 42 § 4 PC, special severity results from its obligatory adjudication, which brought out objections connected with restricting the court’s discretion. A permanent prohibition of driving any vehicle is a very repressive sanction, especially when applied to professional drivers. It may turn out that the most severe sanction adjudicated for a traffic offence from art. 42 § 3 or § 4 PC, is connected with lasting for life stigma, because, in accordance with Polish Penal Code, a person to whom it was adjudicated, will be regarded as a man with a criminal record.