unmarked police cars, necessary or just plain sneaky?
Discussion
i saw a thing on tv the other day that really made me think about the motives and methods of unmarked police cars, there was in car footage of one following a mk3 golf gti along a country road, he was obviously totally unaware he was being tailed and was going through 40 zones at 80 and generally hooning, especially dodgy as the road was wet, you would have thought he would have been pulled straight away but he continued to follow him for some time and touched over a ton on the straights, and still didnt pull him, not so long after he lost control on a bend and stuffed it, it later transpired he was over the limit. no other cars were involved, but what if he had ploughed into another car coming the other way and wiped them out?, i dont understand why he wasnt pulled earlier or more to the point if he had been in a marked car in the first place the guy would obviously have seen it and not driven like a lunatic at all, surely a marked car is a visible deterrent in itself and makes a police presence obvious and acts as a preventative measure rather than being in an unmarked car and almost revelling in them speeding just waiting for the offences to rack up which sometimes results in taking action when its too late.
Edited by quad_rings on Thursday 27th July 13:38
I think sometimes having a modern fast car keeping pace behind is a sort of incitement to "see if the old girl can stay in the lead" which can actually lead to the accident if a driver gets carried away with the thrill of it all. I was once pursued by a plain car late at night and ended up doing 70 in a 30 because I was concerned it was some nutter intent on driving me and my motorbike off the road. When they pulled up outside my gate and demanded to know why I hadn't pulled over when they "signalled me to stop" (apparently using a hand signal inside the cab) I asked them how I was supposed to see that at night against a set of headlights, and recommended they get a jam sarnie with blues and twos on if they wanted to do traffic duty.
quad_rings said:
i saw a thing on tv the other day that really made me think about the motives and methods of unmarked police cars, there was in car footage of one following a mk3 golf gti along a country road, he was obviously totally unaware he was being tailed and was going through 40 zones at 80 and generally hooning, especially dodgy as the road was wet, you would have thought he would have been pulled straight away but he continued to follow him for some time and touched over a ton on the straights, and still didnt pull him, not so long after he lost control on a bend and stuffed it, it later transpired he was over the limit. no other cars were involved, but what if he had ploughed into another car coming the other way and wiped them out?, i dont understand why he wasnt pulled earlier or more to the point if he had been in a marked car in the first place the guy would obviously have seen it and not driven like a lunatic at all, surely a marked car is a visible deterrent in itself and makes a police presence obvious and acts as a preventative measure rather than being in an unmarked car and almost revelling in them speeding just waiting for the offences to rack up which sometimes results in taking action when its too late.
Edited by quad_rings on Thursday 27th July 13:38
I would imagine that with drivers like you describe, the officers want as many nails for that coffin lid as they can get. Also, the road may have been a clearway, or simply not safe to stop them. The officer may have thought they would not stop, and he may not have had adequate backup (busy night). Half a dozen reasons why I suppose.
tallbloke said:
I think sometimes having a modern fast car keeping pace behind is a sort of incitement to "see if the old girl can stay in the lead" which can actually lead to the accident if a driver gets carried away with the thrill of it all. I was once pursued by a plain car late at night and ended up doing 70 in a 30 because I was concerned it was some nutter intent on driving me and my motorbike off the road. When they pulled up outside my gate and demanded to know why I hadn't pulled over when they "signalled me to stop" (apparently using a hand signal inside the cab) I asked them how I was supposed to see that at night against a set of headlights, and recommended they get a jam sarnie with blues and twos on if they wanted to do traffic duty.
How did they take that TB..?
Did you get done or not..?
Unmarked cars are fine if the Police officers inside are looking out for dangerous driving. Of course having identified dangerous driving they ought to stop the driver as soon as it is safe to do so and administer a telling off/fine as appropriate. Using unmarked cars to identify drivers transgressing an arbitary speed limit, however, is not on.
Even in the first case you have to wonder whether a marked car wouldn't be better; it might stop people driving like idiots in the first place.
Even in the first case you have to wonder whether a marked car wouldn't be better; it might stop people driving like idiots in the first place.
gorvid said:
tallbloke said:
I think sometimes having a modern fast car keeping pace behind is a sort of incitement to "see if the old girl can stay in the lead" which can actually lead to the accident if a driver gets carried away with the thrill of it all. I was once pursued by a plain car late at night and ended up doing 70 in a 30 because I was concerned it was some nutter intent on driving me and my motorbike off the road. When they pulled up outside my gate and demanded to know why I hadn't pulled over when they "signalled me to stop" (apparently using a hand signal inside the cab) I asked them how I was supposed to see that at night against a set of headlights, and recommended they get a jam sarnie with blues and twos on if they wanted to do traffic duty.
How did they take that TB..?
Did you get done or not..?
I got away with it on that occasion, they were just making themselves look stupid, but I got pulled doing 70 in a 40 on a dual carriageway a few weeks later. Fair cop guv.
It seems that the incident described at the beginning of the thread was the exact reason why there should be unmarked cars, to get these twunts off the rioad. I assume they were waiting for a decent place to stop him instead of provoking him to run in a built-up area, or something similar.
I've only been stopped once by a plain wrapper, and they were polite and showed me my numberplate light wasn't 100%, one bulb out...just wanted a chat and to see if i was sober and undrugged...perhaps being a wrinkly helped!
I've only been stopped once by a plain wrapper, and they were polite and showed me my numberplate light wasn't 100%, one bulb out...just wanted a chat and to see if i was sober and undrugged...perhaps being a wrinkly helped!
jasandjules said:
Unmarked cars are a bonus if they pull over dangerous driving surely.
I would like to see more MLH (Middle Lane Hoggers) get pulled over though, and shown a copy of the highway code.
I would like to see more MLH (Middle Lane Hoggers) get pulled over though, and shown a copy of the highway code.
I agree with this but think much of the MLH syndrom is caused by the highways people adding the occassional 3rd lane to the left rather than the right. The slowest lane should be consistent and the fast lane come and go, but with plenty of notice.
I would suggest there was more to stopping the car in question then the marked car flashing his lights and getting him over. A thing we like to do, in my neck of the woods, is before the car is 'tugged' the helicopter is to take off and get above the vehicle. Then if he decides to fail to stop the helicopter can follow the vehicle as opposed to the plain car or another marked vehicle.
As with most things I would say there is more to it than just then not being bothered to stop the vehicle.
As with most things I would say there is more to it than just then not being bothered to stop the vehicle.
I've driven plain cars, and think they are a good idea. It all depends on circumstances when you stop the offending vehicle. It simply may not be the best area to stop someone, bear it in mind you have to think of the other vehicle, and other road users safety as well. Notwithstanding the fact that the other vehicle may be topped up with nutcases and or have several reports on pnc, firearms markers, violence markers etc etc that would make it unsafe for a solo officer to stop.
With regards to stopping a vehicle in an unmarked car, the ones I have driven have a set of strobes in the front grille which clearly identify it as a police car. Other plain vehicles, eg cid unmarked cars don't have these, so failing to stop is just that, however I would anticipate arrival of a marked car pretty sharpish following a failure to stop.
With regards to stopping a vehicle in an unmarked car, the ones I have driven have a set of strobes in the front grille which clearly identify it as a police car. Other plain vehicles, eg cid unmarked cars don't have these, so failing to stop is just that, however I would anticipate arrival of a marked car pretty sharpish following a failure to stop.
charlieromeo said:
I would suggest there was more to stopping the car in question then the marked car flashing his lights and getting him over. A thing we like to do, in my neck of the woods, is before the car is 'tugged' the helicopter is to take off and get above the vehicle. Then if he decides to fail to stop the helicopter can follow the vehicle as opposed to the plain car or another marked vehicle.
What, so everytime you want to stop a car in your area, you launch the force helicopter (if it's available)? You can't be stopping too many cars, then?
plain cars for traffic duty is pretty pathetic. with liveried cars it, generally, filters out the observant drivers from those caught speeding. which means that you skew the proportion of those caught speeding towards those that were speeding AND unobservant, which few, even here, would seek to defend. plain cars just catch everyone regardless, which just proves the police have little interest in how well you're driving, just how fast, despite individual officers protestations!
francisb said:
plain cars for traffic duty is pretty pathetic. with liveried cars it, generally, filters out the observant drivers from those caught speeding. which means that you skew the proportion of those caught speeding towards those that were speeding AND unobservant, which few, even here, would seek to defend. plain cars just catch everyone regardless, which just proves the police have little interest in how well you're driving, just how fast, despite individual officers protestations!
There is an interest in you driving well all the time though, not just when a marked Police car is around. The unmarked car can enforce against those drivers who only decide to drive safely & by the rules if they can see a marked car around.
vonhosen said:
francisb said:
plain cars for traffic duty is pretty pathetic. with liveried cars it, generally, filters out the observant drivers from those caught speeding. which means that you skew the proportion of those caught speeding towards those that were speeding AND unobservant, which few, even here, would seek to defend. plain cars just catch everyone regardless, which just proves the police have little interest in how well you're driving, just how fast, despite individual officers protestations!
There is an interest in you driving well all the time though, not just when a marked Police car is around.
i agree. the observant driver doesnt become more observant or drive any better when he sees a jam sandwich, he just slows down. i'd go as far to argue that once down below that arbitrary and irrelevant number called a legal limit my, er i mean their, observation and concentration levels drop.
vonhosen said:
The unmarked car can enforce against those drivers who only decide to drive safely & by the rules if they can see a marked car around.
that was my point really. its about enforcing the rules, not promoting safe driving.
and its cheating. you dont let us drive police cars stay out of civvy cars
francisb said:
vonhosen said:
francisb said:
plain cars for traffic duty is pretty pathetic. with liveried cars it, generally, filters out the observant drivers from those caught speeding. which means that you skew the proportion of those caught speeding towards those that were speeding AND unobservant, which few, even here, would seek to defend. plain cars just catch everyone regardless, which just proves the police have little interest in how well you're driving, just how fast, despite individual officers protestations!
There is an interest in you driving well all the time though, not just when a marked Police car is around.
i agree. the observant driver doesnt become more observant or drive any better when he sees a jam sandwich, he just slows down. i'd go as far to argue that once down below that arbitrary and irrelevant number called a legal limit my, er i mean their, observation and concentration levels drop.
vonhosen said:
The unmarked car can enforce against those drivers who only decide to drive safely & by the rules if they can see a marked car around.
that was my point really. its about enforcing the rules, not promoting safe driving.
and its cheating. you dont let us drive police cars stay out of civvy cars
It's a Police car, that's why it's got blue lights in the grill.
Totally fair, above board & by the rules.
I can see the point of unmarked cars - as stated above, people drive about in a wee law-abiding bubble when they see a marked trafpol car - but can be total idiots the rest of the time.
I suppose that if you know that there are also unmarked cars, you don't know which of the cars around you might be police - so maybe the fact that unmarked cars exist, encourages some people to behave a bit better.
I noticed this morning that they have put up signs in the roadworks on the motorway saying "unmarked video cars operating" - speeds through the roadworks were much more sensible than they were last week, funnily enough, when there were people doing twice the 40mph temporary speed limit.
It's not just about speed though - these unmarked cars will also be catching a fair number of the dozy muppets who might "perk up" if they saw marked trafpol...
I suppose that if you know that there are also unmarked cars, you don't know which of the cars around you might be police - so maybe the fact that unmarked cars exist, encourages some people to behave a bit better.
I noticed this morning that they have put up signs in the roadworks on the motorway saying "unmarked video cars operating" - speeds through the roadworks were much more sensible than they were last week, funnily enough, when there were people doing twice the 40mph temporary speed limit.
It's not just about speed though - these unmarked cars will also be catching a fair number of the dozy muppets who might "perk up" if they saw marked trafpol...
An unmarked car is just the best way to see drivers driving in there own manor and enviroment. For instance tailgating, massively over the speed limit, on the phone, reading maps to just name a few!
There are here to stay! You have to be carefull where you stop people due to the fact it is a unmarked car.
There are here to stay! You have to be carefull where you stop people due to the fact it is a unmarked car.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff