Police tick off driver for snow on car roof

[Plotloss]

Whys that then?

It doesnt mention whether the chap was some sort of special branch or CID or what, just that he was plain clothes in a non marked vehicle.

If, in these red tape ridden days, that a rule has been broken then surely the complaint should be upheld?

[silverback mike]

Well, it doesn't actually say (as I have read it) that the alleged 'offender' has been reported for any offences, it says 'ticked off' which was a 'word in his ear' rather than anything else. Said ex special constable has been aggrieved at this by the sound of it, so nothing will come of it anyway.

If however, he had been reported for an offence by an officer then all aspects of it are looked at by defence, ie was he stopped correctly, is the paperwork correct, in other words, looking to get client off by checking the Police have done the process work correctly - also to see whether the stop / impending prosecution was legal.

It's a funny old game really, can't please everyone, but for one story like this there are generally a lot more good ones that don't get reported.....Like one of our lads delivering a baby recently He's got hands of a gorilla as well.

[Plotloss]

True enough, cant quite see the CPS running with it, though stranger things have probably happened.

Absolutely on the point that the good doesnt get reported, thats a shame but human nature also I suppose...

But by that same token,

As Lenny Henry once said, wouldnt it be nice if just once the Police stopped and said 'The way you took that corner, was well 'ard man...'

[silverback mike]

"Wipers on the side windows sir?"

[OUTLAW-1]

my guess is he dident complain on them grounds ie doggy stop
and there usahall careful to ignore things like that if he aint spelled it out in his complain even if it is blindingly oveous
and only deal with his complaint to the letter.

its hard enought getting to uphold real complain where there are grounds with 433 wicness with a few mp`s and mother teraser trown in as wickness

To be quite honist and I cant see any grounds he could have a complaint on that could be upheld.
that said if he done a informal complaint im shaw the said bib would have got a right bolcking from the inspector for geting it in the press and makeing em look stupide.

if it had been me ill just kept driving and ignored him and probly ended down a qite ally demanding an explanation of why he was following me




>> Edited by OUTLAW-1 on Sunday 8th January 09:48

[IaHa]

Plotloss said:

Whys that then? It doesnt mention whether the chap was some sort of special branch or CID or what, just that he was plain clothes in a non marked vehicle. If, in these red tape ridden days, that a rule has been broken then surely the complaint should be upheld?

What rule has been broken? Looks like he's waited for him to pull up, then spoke to him.

It's good advice, simply been either given and/or taken the wrong way.

[OUTLAW-1]

Plotloss said:

True enough, cant quite see the CPS running with it, though stranger things have probably happened. Absolutely on the point that the good doesnt get reported, thats a shame but human nature also I suppose... But by that same token, As Lenny Henry once said, wouldnt it be nice if just once the Police stopped and said 'The way you took that corner, was well 'ard man...'

i got close i was my way home wone playing lift off over the speed bumps. what car i was would have boke in half if it was standard supention
got pulled over cop said I aint stoped you because you speeding or driving dangerous just because your inpurity of negotiating the humps

ie just you check it want nicked and i diden give a shit if i snaped it half

to i pointed out that the frount supention had been damed by a muupet driving into nearsider front wheel in the local asda carpark
and when it fixed i decide to have some serous hardend and uprated supention fited all round.

>> Edited by OUTLAW-1 on Sunday 8th January 10:46

[john57]

nonegreen said:

This is nonsense we should not be paying people to busybody. There are crimes to be solved, perhaps the politicians are right traffic police are well past their sell by.

Your posts always make me laugh ..... it's good to see consistency. I do believe though that it said 'plain clothed' officer .... not your hated traffic police.

[scorcher]

So if its dangerous for a car to drive around with snow on the roof billowing off does this mean that it would be common sense for buses and lorries to be parked up 'til the snow and ice have melted away so as to not cause any danger to anyone else around them.
Obviously you couldn't climb up ( health and danger)/drivers would be unwilling.
If anyone has every seen a 6 foot square layer of ice come off the top of a lorry trailer
they'll know what I mean.Enough to seriously injure/kill an unlucky pedestrian/cyclist.
Obviously the man in question shouldn't be making a song and dance out of his ticking off but it does seem a bit trivial to me.

[turbobloke]

Far too trivial even for a 'word' and an illustration of how far removed from the public's sense of priorities some police officers have become. Sure our BiB are being cautious in judgement but it's a common sense issue. Snow blowing from a car's roof is barely visible on a list of possible driving hazards, it would clear from a following car's windscreen instantly / easily and there wouldn't be enough going on to the road to affect grip. If this hasn't happened to nearly everyone on here I'd be surprised, I guess Mr Plainclothes felt huffy that someone's snow was blowing in his 'face' and got a but uppity. As mentioned before, ice chunks would be another story, but buses and trucks are a more realistic hazard there and surely this guy knows the difference between ice chunks the fluffy stuff. On this basis every car in the country needs to be stopped: "Don't you realise, sir, that there are some loose stones on some roads in some parts of this county that are very hard to spot, and it could be dangerous if your wheel went over one and flung it up into the path of an oncoming vehicle. Better stay at home or hover, sir."

Bull5h1t safety fascism.

[GreenV8S]

turbobloke said:

Snow blowing from a car's roof is barely visible on a list of possible driving hazards, it would clear from a following car's windscreen instantly / easily and there wouldn't be enough going on to the road to affect grip.

Well I disagree, and I guess the policeman did too. A large block of snow landing on the windscreen can blind you for several seconds, and potentially much longer if it is too thick for the wipers to shift. It's a danger to *you* because it could easily slide forward onto the windscreen and blind you if you brake heavily, and it could easily blow off and hit the car behind you blinding *them*.

Given that so many people seem to be unaware of the danger I think it's well worth the police pointing it out if they get a chance. I wouldn't go as far as pulling them over or getting silly about points and fines, but a quiet word seems reasonable. I guess you'll always get a know-it-all who won't be told though.

[rich 36]

Probl'y barged him out the way at the cheese counter

pay back time

[Balmoral Green]

TBH this isnt really about the Police and snow on a roof. It's more to do with our media and the type of story they feel is worth reporting and blowing up out of all proportion, ably assisted by the indignant complainant. This well & truly comes from the '1 million pound gas bill' school of journalism. Far from complaining that our Police have got nothing better to do, maybe we should be complaining that our media have got nothing better to do than pander to the sort of punters that relish in the ridiculous outrage that this sort of story produces, ie, you lot!

Heaven forbid that anyone actually gave the issue itself any serious thought. They might conclude that actually, on reflection, it was bloody daft to drive around with so much snow on your roof that someone (anyone actually) thought it worthy of a ticking off.

I have had snow come forward off my roof under braking, the wipers couldnt cope with it, I couldnt see a damn thing, it was bloody stupid of me and I wont be doing it again.

[Peter Ward]

Balmoral Green said:

TBH this isnt really about the Police and snow on a roof. It's more to do with our media and the type of story they feel is worth reporting and blowing up out of all proportion, ably assisted by the indignant complainant. This well & truly comes from the '1 million pound gas bill' school of journalism. Far from complaining that our Police have got nothing better to do, maybe we should be complaining that our media have got nothing better to do than pander to the sort of punters that relish in the ridiculous outrage that this sort of story produces, ie, you lot! Heaven forbid that anyone actually gave the issue itself any serious thought. They might conclude that actually, on reflection, it was bloody daft to drive around with so much snow on your roof that someone (anyone actually) thought it worthy of a ticking off. I have had snow come forward off my roof under braking, the wipers couldnt cope with it, I couldnt see a damn thing, it was bloody stupid of me and I wont be doing it again.

Yep, I reckon you're right. We don't know all the circumstances but I would at least give the BiB some credit for trying to tackle something he thought was a risk. Why would he bother following someone and risking a confrontation if he didn't think it was valid?

But instead of the papers trying to get the facts, it seems that it simply joined the "bash the BiB" club. The trouble with this approach is that it devalues the times when it is justified, eg. speed camera stats distortion, sneaky talivans, ridiculous bus lanes. To whom are our newspapers responsible? Only their shareholders, and that means they print whatever sells, not what is true, reasonable, relevant, important.

[turbobloke]

GreenV8S said:

turbobloke said: Snow blowing from a car's roof is barely visible on a list of possible driving hazards, it would clear from a following car's windscreen instantly / easily and there wouldn't be enough going on to the road to affect grip. Well I disagree, and I guess the policeman did too. A large block of snow landing on the windscreen can blind you for several seconds, and potentially much longer if it is too thick for the wipers to shift.

Where was this, Alaska? You're making stuff up here. Safety totalitarianism, jeez.

Driving behind bus or artic...lumps of snow come off (not ice) and break apart on impact like snow does...ease off the gas, touch the brake for a few secs if needed to warn anyone behind, drop back, relax

Driving behind bus or artic...pieces of ice come off and bounce off the car and windscreen like ice does...ease off the gas, touch the brake pedal a few secs if needde to warn anyone behind, drop back, relax

Next problem - how to avoid the risk of injury from meteorite impacts

I'd say stay home more, but then more peopole die from accidents in the home each year than from road traffic accidents. I'm so glad my mummy told me never to run with scissors.

[turbobloke]

Now, this might well have been worth a word in somebody's ear

SafeSpeed said:

The BBC reports that four cyclists were killed In North Wales after a car lost control on ice. Normally this would just be a terrible tragedy, but if the BBC report is correct, Police attended an accident on the same road an hour earlier, also due to ice. Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign (www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Initial reports suggest that North Wales police had an opportunity to prevent this tragedy but failed to take it. They could have warned traffic, closed the road or called in the gritters. They should know how unpredictable icy road surfaces can be. Did they really know the danger and walk away? Safe Speed demands a full public investigation."

[gcmillwood]

turbobloke said:

GreenV8S said: A large block of snow landing on the windscreen can blind you for several seconds, and potentially much longer if it is too thick for the wipers to shift. Where was this, Alaska? You're making stuff up here. Safety totalitarianism, jeez. Driving behind bus or artic...lumps of snow come off (not ice) and break apart on impact like snow does...ease off the gas, touch the brake for a few secs if needed to warn anyone behind, drop back, relax

I'm with GreenVBS (and the copper from the story). Snow does not always 'break apart on impact'. It might do when it is very dry, but once it has started to melt a bit (for example if it has been sitting on the roof of a car with the heater going inside) it can get quite sticky. If a large enough lump breaks off the vehicle in front of you and splats into your windscreen you are effectively blind until you can get it out of the way.

If you have snow on the roof of your car it also has the potential to blind you when you brake. It doesn't even have to be harsh braking, as with the heater on in the car you start melting the underside of the layer of snow on the roof giving it plenty of lubrication to simply slide forwards and straight down the windscreen. As you are normally only braking in response to some kind of hazard (e.g. junction, parked cars, pedestrian crossing the road) this snow induced blindness is going to occur at the most dangerous possible time.

If there is any depth of snow (and around these parts we had about four inches just before new year) then it is sheer laziness and/or thoughtlessness to not clear the car completely before you drive off.

[turbobloke]

Of course it's possible to conjur up circumstances where some snow might be a problem, as folk are trying hard to do, but what are the chances as described here - nil at most. Sad to see such levels of safety totalitarianism on here. Safety precautions where warranted are fine every time, but in this case there would doubtless be a hunderd and one more dangerous things for PC Plainclothes to attend to in terms of driving hazards, himself for example...

If this guy with a snowy roof had to drive anywhere after the PC's 'helpful' word, he would be a far bigger risk to himself and others as a result of being mentally distracted by the jobsworth he'd just encountered, than any snow coming off his roof would ever be. The human factor in driving isn't amenable to simplistic approaches.

[GreenV8S]

turbobloke said:

Of course it's possible to conjur up circumstances where some snow might be a problem, as folk are trying hard to do, but what are the chances as described here - nil at most.

That's the heart of the matter. You apparently think the chance of it causing a problem is so small that it can be ignored. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that, then.

[turbobloke]

GreenV8S said:

turbobloke said: Of course it's possible to conjur up circumstances where some snow might be a problem, as folk are trying hard to do, but what are the chances as described here - nil at most. That's the heart of the matter. You apparently think the chance of it causing a problem is so small that it can be ignored. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that, then.

Yes, I guess we will. The reason why I would ignore it in this instance is down to those politically incorrect brothers, experience and common sense. Having driven long distances through the winters of 1976 to 1982, when there were drifts several metres high from humberside to the cotswolds, anything other than a motorway involved driving on packed snow or ice, and night time temperatures came close to -20 deg C, I have never, ever, seen a trafpol pull a car to warn the driver about fluffy snow blowing off their roof, including conditions more hazardous than anything we've seen this year. I have driven with snow blowing off another car roof in front of me many times, also seen it from copcars where due to varying weather and traffic conditions, nobody could realistically stop it collecting then getting blown off from time to time. In all these circumstances I've seen marked trafpol police ignore 'snow blowing off roof' more times than I can remember. Would they ignore it so often so consistently if it was such a priority? If in the next 30 years there's a seachange and BiB pull anything with a mill of fluffy snow still on the roof I won't belive it's a risk even then, just lament the ludicrous level of institutionalised safety totalitarianism that will have led to it.

I've also seen literally hundreds of instances, in over 30 years of driving in all conditions with annual mileages of between 25,000 and 35,000 where trafpol have pulled cars for not having a rear light illuminated, for weaving about on the road (dd?), for having a variety of odd objects sticking way out of the boot or a window, after spotting canvas on a rear tyre, etc etc, and all of this is reasonable due to the real and imminent risk. But having a word with a motorist whose car had snow blowing off the roof, in Kent in 2005/6, is not only worthy of the complaint being upheld, but this plain clothes officer ought to charge himself with wasting his own police time.