Legality of slip road speed traps

Legality of slip road speed traps

Author
Discussion

Mopar440

410 posts

111 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
What's stopping them gaining evidence for speeding convictions from there?
is the OP 100% sure that's what they were doing?
For goodness sake, have you no self respect?

You've been defending without question the right of the police to be "legally" in this compromising and blatantly unsafe position, and now you ask if the OP is 100% sure that's what they were doing???

vonhosen

40,198 posts

216 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Mopar440 said:
vonhosen said:
What's stopping them gaining evidence for speeding convictions from there?
is the OP 100% sure that's what they were doing?
For goodness sake, have you no self respect?

You've been defending without question the right of the police to be "legally" in this compromising and blatantly unsafe position, and now you ask if the OP is 100% sure that's what they were doing???
One minute he is quoting motorway regs , the next he is saying it's not a motorway.
I'm saying they are exempt under Reg 16 from stopping on motorway slips, even if it is for speed enforcement.
I'm then questioning if he is even sure about what they were doing as he can't even seem to be clear about what type of road it is.
And from his OP he didn't even witness it.


Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 26th February 21:18

Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
Reg 16 exempts Police from regs 5, 8 & 10.
The law is clear, if it's for a Police duty then they are exempt under Reg 16.
Whether there is another option is irrelevant for that.

Was this even a motorway?
I'll ask again, have you got a google maps link to show exactly where they were?
This is, as another poster mentioned above, a very common and regular occurrence here in Scotland. Slip roads are used as speed traps on the M8 and other motorways daily.

Can I also just say that the responses, namely, arrogance and abusive replies I have received from what what appear to be serving police officers in answer to a very polite and genuine question are utterly disgusting, it is no surprise that respect is being quickly lost for the police if this is a measure of attitudes to the general public

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
like so many of these threads it;s pick or more of the three following

1. free wibble
2. jealousy
3. unconscious incompetence / Dunning - Kruger

vonhosen

40,198 posts

216 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
vonhosen said:
Reg 16 exempts Police from regs 5, 8 & 10.
The law is clear, if it's for a Police duty then they are exempt under Reg 16.
Whether there is another option is irrelevant for that.

Was this even a motorway?
I'll ask again, have you got a google maps link to show exactly where they were?
This is, as another poster mentioned above, a very common and regular occurrence here in Scotland. Slip roads are used as speed traps on the M8 and other motorways daily.

Can I also just say that the responses, namely, arrogance and abusive replies I have received from what what appear to be serving police officers in answer to a very polite and genuine question are utterly disgusting, it is no surprise that respect is being quickly lost for the police if this is a measure of attitudes to the general public
Where have I been arrogant or abusive towards you?
You asked a question & I gave you an answer telling you what the law is.
They are committing no offence under the legislation you quoted for stopping on motorways as part of their Police duty. The same legislation exempts them for that purpose.

Scotland the exemption is Reg 14 of The Motorways Traffic (Scotland) Regulations 1995 though rather than reg 16.

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 26th February 21:24

Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
Where have I been arrogant or abusive towards you?
You asked a question & I gave you an answer telling you what the law is.
They are committing no offence under the legislation you quoted for stopping on motorways as part of their Police duty. The same legislation exempts them for that purpose.
No, you are merely being anal, I will point to the post above yours with regards the others. I would expand on this by stating that I hoped to enter into an interesting discussion on the topic, one where sensible discourse could be shared and view points taken. Instead I have encountered nothing other than rudeness and immaturity. In your case Vanhoosen you have provided nothing more than a prescriptive exemption statement that appears to take the stance that all and any activity carried out by the police on any given motorway, despite its legality or obvious danger to the public, is fine as they are expemt from the law.

That attitude actually disturbs me one hell of a lot more than anything else.

Edited by Chim on Thursday 26th February 21:39

Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
like so many of these threads it;s pick or more of the three following

1. free wibble
2. jealousy
3. unconscious incompetence / Dunning - Kruger
Please point me to the applicable one of the above three with regards to my genuine and polite enquiry. You sir are an ignorant disgrace to the uniform you wear.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
mph1977 said:
like so many of these threads it;s pick or more of the three following

1. free wibble
2. jealousy
3. unconscious incompetence / Dunning - Kruger
Please point me to the applicable one of the above three with regards to my genuine and polite enquiry. You sir are an ignorant disgrace to the uniform you wear.
which uniform would that be mr expert ? or are you just presuming again on the basis of not actually bothering with any of the evidence ?

an awful lot of the complaints aobut exemptions are vbased in Jealousy, combined with the illusionary superiority that comes when one does not know what one does not know aobut an area of practise.

on a number of occasions in this thread it has been related to you that

1. exemptions from the law do exist for Emergency Services and the TO service.
2. there are relevant exemptions in this case on both motorways and none motorway roads (and in the case of none motorway roads stopping at the roadside is not illegal unless it;s either a no-stopping section or you cause an obstruction.
3. exemptions are regularly brought into question at court ( see ongoing saga over Ambulance RRVs thanks to Manchester Hatzola), however it does not appear that there are any well know cases regarding this exemption in the opinion of Police Officers, Trainers , other emergency services personnel and lawyers.

vonhosen

40,198 posts

216 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
vonhosen said:
Where have I been arrogant or abusive towards you?
You asked a question & I gave you an answer telling you what the law is.
They are committing no offence under the legislation you quoted for stopping on motorways as part of their Police duty. The same legislation exempts them for that purpose.
No, you are merely being anal, I will point to the post above yours with regards the others. I would expand on this by stating that I hoped to enter into an interesting discussion on the topic, one where sensible discourse could be shared and view points taken. Instead I have encountered nothing other than rudeness and immaturity. In your case Vanhoosen you have provided nothing more than a prescriptive exemption statement that appears to take the stance that all and any activity carried out by the police on any given motorway, despite its legality or obvious danger to the public, is fine as they are expemt from the law.

That attitude actually disturbs me one hell of a lot more than anything else.
You keep talking about exempted behaviour as illegal behaviour. That very behaviour ceases to be illegal under the legislation for those exempted from it.
Just as it's illegal for you to exceed the speed limit, but it isn't for them to where they are doing so for a Police purpose (& again a Police purpose is very wooly).

There isn't any 'attitude' in my post, it's just matter of fact.
I'm merely presenting the factual answer to your question. The Police can stop on the motorways where you may not where it is part of their Police duty.

That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that the Police are above the law in any way, just they are acting within it when stopped on the motorway as part of their duty.

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 26th February 22:11

Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
Chim said:
mph1977 said:
like so many of these threads it;s pick or more of the three following

1. free wibble
2. jealousy
3. unconscious incompetence / Dunning - Kruger
Please point me to the applicable one of the above three with regards to my genuine and polite enquiry. You sir are an ignorant disgrace to the uniform you wear.
which uniform would that be mr expert ? or are you just presuming again on the basis of not actually bothering with any of the evidence ?

an awful lot of the complaints aobut exemptions are vbased in Jealousy, combined with the illusionary superiority that comes when one does not know what one does not know aobut an area of practise.

on a number of occasions in this thread it has been related to you that

1. exemptions from the law do exist for Emergency Services and the TO service.
2. there are relevant exemptions in this case on both motorways and none motorway roads (and in the case of none motorway roads stopping at the roadside is not illegal unless it;s either a no-stopping section or you cause an obstruction.
3. exemptions are regularly brought into question at court ( see ongoing saga over Ambulance RRVs thanks to Manchester Hatzola), however it does not appear that there are any well know cases regarding this exemption in the opinion of Police Officers, Trainers , other emergency services personnel and lawyers.
MPH, having read many of your condescending and objectionable posts in the past and am hesitant to enter into any form of discourse with you, regardless of uniform or not you come across on these boards as a very unpleasant person. As the above, you have clearly failed to read or understand my original and subsequent posts, all of which I have quite clearly made my relevant points. Just to be clear and the hope you can finally comprehend clearly written english I shall again attempt to phrase the question

I wish to understand why the police are conducting one of their duties in a clearly unsafe manner, that being, stopping and parking vertically on a MOTORWAY slip road when this duty could be safely performed easily and without the need to break the law at another point on the Motorway. In fact, there are specific areas built on the Motorway for this very purpose.

Quoting a generic exemption statement does not in any way answer the above question. As to your assertion of "wibble", "jealousy" or the ridiculous "unconscious incompetence" to which you appear to have applied the recently adopted trendy term that you have just learned of Dunner-Kruger effect, I have displayed none of these traits and certainly mot the cognitive bias of dunning-Kruger that you are quite clearly using completely out of context.


Mopar440

410 posts

111 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
Can I also just say that the responses, namely, arrogance and abusive replies I have received from what what appear to be serving police officers...
No serving police officers replying to this thread as far as I know.


Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
You keep talking about exempted behaviour as illegal behaviour. That very behaviour ceases to be illegal under the legislation for those exempted from it.
Just as it's illegal for you to exceed the speed limit, but it isn't for them to where they are doing so for a Police purpose (& again a Police purpose is very wooly).

There isn't any 'attitude' in my post, it's just matter of fact.
I'm merely presenting the facts. The Police can stop on the motorways where you may not where it is part of their Police duty.

That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that the Police are above the law in any way, just they are acting within it when stopped on the motorway as part of their duty.
The exemption can only apply though if they are carrying out their duties in a safe and controlled manner. They are clearly not in this instance, the danger to the public is clear, they can avoid putting the public in Danger by undertaking this duty in a place that is safe to do so and they can do this easily without impact to that duty. My point therefore is simple, the exemption does NOT apply and they are breaking the law

Edited by Chim on Thursday 26th February 22:18

Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Mopar440 said:
Chim said:
Can I also just say that the responses, namely, arrogance and abusive replies I have received from what what appear to be serving police officers...
No serving police officers replying to this thread as far as I know.
Good to hear then, mistaken assumption on my part and pleased that its just a regular numpty I am dealing with smile

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
MPH, having read many of your condescending and objectionable posts in the past and am hesitant to enter into any form of discourse with you, regardless of uniform or not you come across on these boards as a very unpleasant person. As the above, you have clearly failed to read or understand my original and subsequent posts, all of which I have quite clearly made my relevant points. Just to be clear and the hope you can finally comprehend clearly written english I shall again attempt to phrase the question

I wish to understand why the police are conducting one of their duties in a clearly unsafe manner, that being, stopping and parking vertically on a MOTORWAY slip road when this duty could be safely performed easily and without the need to break the law at another point on the Motorway. In fact, there are specific areas built on the Motorway for this very purpose.

Quoting a generic exemption statement does not in any way answer the above question. As to your assertion of "wibble", "jealousy" or the ridiculous "unconscious incompetence" to which you appear to have applied the recently adopted trendy term that you have just learned of Dunner-Kruger effect, I have displayed none of these traits and certainly mot the cognitive bias of dunning-Kruger that you are quite clearly using completely out of context.
As has been explained to you on a number of occasions in this thread there is an exemption to cover this situation .

As has been explained to you again on a number of occasions in this thread , because this exemption exists the action is not illegal .

consequently your refusal to accept this can only be placed with one of the the three reasons suggested

those reasons being

1.'freewibble' i.e. you do not accept the law as it exists and wish to impose your own perverse interpretation of the law on others

2. Jealousy - you are jealous that the emergency Services and the TO service can do something you can't.

3. Dunning -Kruger / unconscious incompetence - i.e. the illusory superiority of people who do not understand the issues, training in place and controls in place when a group of people do a particular 'special thing'.


It is typical of the average pHer that when their ignorance of a subject is pointed out they become increasingly frustrated, aggressive and insulting towards the people pointing this out - often claiming that the poster is condescending , when in fat the posters are providing a clear, factual and concise summary of the subject , assuming the reader has a reasonable level of literacy and given the numbers of highly paid Company Directors claimed to be present a basic understanding of training concepts, management and so on.


vonhosen

40,198 posts

216 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
vonhosen said:
You keep talking about exempted behaviour as illegal behaviour. That very behaviour ceases to be illegal under the legislation for those exempted from it.
Just as it's illegal for you to exceed the speed limit, but it isn't for them to where they are doing so for a Police purpose (& again a Police purpose is very wooly).

There isn't any 'attitude' in my post, it's just matter of fact.
I'm merely presenting the facts. The Police can stop on the motorways where you may not where it is part of their Police duty.

That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that the Police are above the law in any way, just they are acting within it when stopped on the motorway as part of their duty.
The exemption can only apply though if they are carrying out their duties in a safe and controlled manner. They are clearly not in this instance, the danger to the public is clear, they can avoid putting the public in Danger by undertaking this duty in a place that is safe to do so and they can do this daly without impact to that duty. My point therefore is simple, the exemption does NOT apply and they are breaking the law
Where are you getting your legal authority for that argument?
The legislation places no such burden on them.

ie
A Police officer is exempt from speeding where it's for a Police purpose.
If he exceeds the speed limit dangerously whilst doing so for a Police purpose, it doesn't render his exemption from the speed limit invalid. He can't now be prosecuted for speeding because the speed he did was dangerous in the circumstances. You have to look for other legislation where he has no exemption such as dangerous driving.

So it is with the motorway regs. He can't be prosecuted under the motorway regs for something which the motorway regs have already exempted him, even if you think him doing it was dangerous.



Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 26th February 22:25

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
Chim said:
vonhosen said:
You keep talking about exempted behaviour as illegal behaviour. That very behaviour ceases to be illegal under the legislation for those exempted from it.
Just as it's illegal for you to exceed the speed limit, but it isn't for them to where they are doing so for a Police purpose (& again a Police purpose is very wooly).

There isn't any 'attitude' in my post, it's just matter of fact.
I'm merely presenting the facts. The Police can stop on the motorways where you may not where it is part of their Police duty.

That doesn't mean I'm suggesting that the Police are above the law in any way, just they are acting within it when stopped on the motorway as part of their duty.
The exemption can only apply though if they are carrying out their duties in a safe and controlled manner. They are clearly not in this instance, the danger to the public is clear, they can avoid putting the public in Danger by undertaking this duty in a place that is safe to do so and they can do this daly without impact to that duty. My point therefore is simple, the exemption does NOT apply and they are breaking the law
Where are you getting you legal authority for that argument?
The legislation places no such burden on them.

ie
A Police officer is exempt from speeding where it's for a Police purpose.
If he exceeds the speed limit dangerously whilst doing so for a Police purpose, it doesn't render his exemption from the speed limit invalid. He can't now be prosecuted for speeding because the speed he did was dangerous in the circumstances. You have to look for other legislation where he has no exemption such as dangerous driving.

So it is with the motorway regs. He can't be prosecuted under the motorway regs for something which the motorway regs have exempted him.

They can exceed the speed limit
I think with regard to speeding Chim may be presuming the practice of organisations to restrict exemptions to people who have recieved training ( in line with the goverance requirements imposed by PUWER and Corporate Manslaughter ) and is some how ascribing magic powers and additional wording to the law - which tends to point towards a free wibble type selective undsrstanding of the law.


Vaud

50,285 posts

154 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim, can you show us where this happened?

Post up the facts and those with experience can dissect - but you sound a bit passive aggressive right now?

A google map link has been asked for a few times but you seem reluctant to provide? The law is a context beast. Provide full context and you will have a richer debate.

Chim

Original Poster:

7,259 posts

176 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
Where are you getting your legal authority for that argument?
The legislation places no such burden on them.

ie
A Police officer is exempt from speeding where it's for a Police purpose.
If he exceeds the speed limit dangerously whilst doing so for a Police purpose, it doesn't render his exemption from the speed limit invalid. He can't now be prosecuted for speeding because the speed he did was dangerous in the circumstances. You have to look for other legislation where he has no exemption such as dangerous driving.

So it is with the motorway regs. He can't be prosecuted under the motorway regs for something which the motorway regs have already exempted him.


Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 26th February 22:23
There are many many instances where the police have been prosecuted for dangerous driving by the CPS, the exception has very strict limits, in many cases the prosecution is brought in terms of the officer conducting a pursuit or response to an emergency call in manner that created unnecessary danger to the public. I could site case after case of this. In my mind this applies here, the car in question is posing a completely unnecessary danger to the public, at some point someone is going to be involved in accident due to this practice, at that point I would imagine that the CPS will prosecute based on this provision. The simple question would be asked, s=could you have carried out your duty in a safer way without impacting of any kind to this duty, if the answer is yes, and it is, they will be found guilty

agtlaw

6,680 posts

205 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
There are many many instances where the police have been prosecuted for dangerous driving by the CPS, the exception has very strict limits, in many cases the prosecution is brought in terms of the officer conducting a pursuit or response to an emergency call in manner that created unnecessary danger to the public. I could site case after case of this. In my mind this applies here, the car in question is posing a completely unnecessary danger to the public, at some point someone is going to be involved in accident due to this practice, at that point I would imagine that the CPS will prosecute based on this provision. The simple question would be asked, s=could you have carried out your duty in a safer way without impacting of any kind to this duty, if the answer is yes, and it is, they will be found guilty
Again, wrong.

vonhosen

40,198 posts

216 months

Thursday 26th February 2015
quotequote all
Chim said:
vonhosen said:
Where are you getting your legal authority for that argument?
The legislation places no such burden on them.

ie
A Police officer is exempt from speeding where it's for a Police purpose.
If he exceeds the speed limit dangerously whilst doing so for a Police purpose, it doesn't render his exemption from the speed limit invalid. He can't now be prosecuted for speeding because the speed he did was dangerous in the circumstances. You have to look for other legislation where he has no exemption such as dangerous driving.

So it is with the motorway regs. He can't be prosecuted under the motorway regs for something which the motorway regs have already exempted him.


Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 26th February 22:23
There are many many instances where the police have been prosecuted for dangerous driving by the CPS, the exception has very strict limits, in many cases the prosecution is brought in terms of the officer conducting a pursuit or response to an emergency call in manner that created unnecessary danger to the public. I could site case after case of this. In my mind this applies here, the car in question is posing a completely unnecessary danger to the public, at some point someone is going to be involved in accident due to this practice, at that point I would imagine that the CPS will prosecute based on this provision. The simple question would be asked, s=could you have carried out your duty in a safer way without impacting of any kind to this duty, if the answer is yes, and it is, they will be found guilty
You are conflating completely separate issues.
I'm not saying there aren't prosecutions of Police for dangerous driving, I'm saying there aren't prosecutions for exceeding the speed limit because it wasn't done safely.

You said that a motorway regs exemption can't be claimed where it isn't used in a safe controlled manner & it therefore is illegal under that legislation as the exemption can't be claimed. That's not true.
You've got to look for & prove an offence under other legislation because the exemption under the motorways regs remains irrespective of whether it was used in a safe controlled manner.
You are imposing your own restrictions on exemptions use, restrictions that are not made in the legislation.