Police double standards?
Discussion
I have seen a lot of the "traffic cop" style tv programmes recently and frequently see officers preaching about speed and safety. However they come down very hard on minor speed transgressions etc. and make out as if it is some heinous crime.
How can they justify travelling at 120/130 mph on the motorway when they are responding to "stolen car makers" and other not serious crimes? They preach that if you're doing 80/90 mph etc. That there is no way you can stop blah blah blah. But realistically, what is a policeman going to do when someone pulls in front of him at 120mph that you or I can't do? In reality most if them are middle age and hardly in their "prime." Ive seen videos of them persuing in urban environments well above the speed limit. What about if a pedestrian runs in the road then?
I understand the police have a job to do, but how can you make out as if going over the limit is so bad and potentially jail people for speeds which they do themselves frequentlly? Shouldn't a member of the public be able to do these high speed courses which allows them to drive above the limit?
The fact that the police don't crash so often at these high speeds in my opinion is not down to their training, but that they drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions which im sure many of us do on here too.
How can they justify travelling at 120/130 mph on the motorway when they are responding to "stolen car makers" and other not serious crimes? They preach that if you're doing 80/90 mph etc. That there is no way you can stop blah blah blah. But realistically, what is a policeman going to do when someone pulls in front of him at 120mph that you or I can't do? In reality most if them are middle age and hardly in their "prime." Ive seen videos of them persuing in urban environments well above the speed limit. What about if a pedestrian runs in the road then?
I understand the police have a job to do, but how can you make out as if going over the limit is so bad and potentially jail people for speeds which they do themselves frequentlly? Shouldn't a member of the public be able to do these high speed courses which allows them to drive above the limit?
The fact that the police don't crash so often at these high speeds in my opinion is not down to their training, but that they drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions which im sure many of us do on here too.
Stolen cars not serious for you then?
I would disagree with your assumption about training. I think anyone who has done any would agree that it improves your planning and makes you consider what is appropriate a bit better.
It does make me cringe a bit when I hear certain stock phrases being trotted out. Speeding needs to be enforced but it is not a huge problem in the vast majority of circumstances.
I would disagree with your assumption about training. I think anyone who has done any would agree that it improves your planning and makes you consider what is appropriate a bit better.
It does make me cringe a bit when I hear certain stock phrases being trotted out. Speeding needs to be enforced but it is not a huge problem in the vast majority of circumstances.
no doubt they will harp on about their 'advanced driver training' that they all have to do before becoming a pursuit driver. If it's anything like the preparation that a firearms officer undergoes, it will be all about policy and procedure as opposed to basic skills - i shoot more every week of the year than a firearms officer shoots all year.
Frix said:
Stolen cars not serious for you then?
I would disagree with your assumption about training. I think anyone who has done any would agree that it improves your planning and makes you consider what is appropriate a bit better.
It does make me cringe a bit when I hear certain stock phrases being trotted out. Speeding needs to be enforced but it is not a huge problem in the vast majority of circumstances.
Im not saying a stolen car isn't important. I had one stolen myself. The point I am making is that they will happily put someone in jail for doing over 100mph because its so "dangerous" but chasing someone for stealing a car (which usually does not involve anyone being seriously injured) is worthwhile to risk the publics safetyI would disagree with your assumption about training. I think anyone who has done any would agree that it improves your planning and makes you consider what is appropriate a bit better.
It does make me cringe a bit when I hear certain stock phrases being trotted out. Speeding needs to be enforced but it is not a huge problem in the vast majority of circumstances.
JulianHJ said:
For the ladies and gents driving high performance cars, it's months of intense, rigorous and hard-to-pass training followed by years of experience. They're not immune to prosecution, so if they mess up, they risk a dangerous driving charge and the end of their career.
But in the real world the police look out for themselves. How many of them get convicted for speeding when not on emergency calls? I cant remember the data but its very low. The fact is if we drove like them (even on non emergencies) we would be prosecuted and most likely they would be let off. Just like the police officer who did 159mph "testing" his car. I thought this was why they trained off the road. We are told its only "x" amount of minutes saved travelling at 70 instead of 80. But realistically which police officer needs to travel at 159mph and how on earth can they get away with it in this country? It is complete abuse of authority. They treat the roads like their own personal racetrack, and yet preach to the publichttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/4559...
JulianHJ said:
For the ladies and gents driving high performance cars, it's months of intense, rigorous and hard-to-pass training followed by years of experience. They're not immune to prosecution, so if they mess up, they risk a dangerous driving charge and the end of their career.
Trained? Certainly. Its their keeness to get up to speed at every opportunity that appears to be concerning the OP, alough I am not aligning myself with him.I was acquainted with a SY traffic officer a few years ago, when stolen car chases were still a regular evening occurance, and it was for this that he had moved to traffic.
He was made up when Volvo 850 T5s replaced the older Senators.
As I'm sure I've said on other threads:
Young copper pulled me over in my brand new S3 some years back (I was only mid twenties myself), after deliberately trying to get a reaction by leaning in and rubbing the steering wheel and saying "ohhh nice" he said; "thought you were going to put your foot down back there, we don't mind a little race".
I just sat there thinking what and absolute plonker.
Young copper pulled me over in my brand new S3 some years back (I was only mid twenties myself), after deliberately trying to get a reaction by leaning in and rubbing the steering wheel and saying "ohhh nice" he said; "thought you were going to put your foot down back there, we don't mind a little race".
I just sat there thinking what and absolute plonker.
Carcharodon said:
Im not saying a stolen car isn't important. I had one stolen myself. The point I am making is that they will happily put someone in jail for doing over 100mph because its so "dangerous" but chasing someone for stealing a car (which usually does not involve anyone being seriously injured) is worthwhile to risk the publics safety
I think you are confusing the roles of the police and CPS and the difference between speeding and dangerous/careless. It's been done to death on here and never gets any more interesting. Very simply there is not a double standard, I know of a good number of police officers who have had points from speeding in "job" cars. There is no exemption for dangerous/careless. Some recent CPS guidance has helped officers a little bit but the standard of proof is the same for police/non-police. I don't know how many people you think have been jailed for going over 100?I know a chap who was prosecuted along with another colleague for driving on blue lights to the reported location of a wanted person. They were in diesel Focuses, another officer saw them passing and called up on the radio to ask if they'd missed an emergency call - it went from there. There were convicted of careless driving I think. Each breach of the law has to be justified, and it's very much the case to my knowledge that errors made by officers are dealt with more seriously than if it were a member of public, because higher standards are expected.
Yes. They wont let you taser old blind men with white sticks (they do). They wont let you shoot old inebriates carrying chair legs under their arms (they do). They wont let you 'test' your car at 160mph (they do). They dont allow you to get away with dangerous driving and massive urban accidents (they let Paul Fletcher) etc.
Greg_D said:
no doubt they will harp on about their 'advanced driver training' that they all have to do before becoming a pursuit driver. If it's anything like the preparation that a firearms officer undergoes, it will be all about policy and procedure as opposed to basic skills - i shoot more every week of the year than a firearms officer shoots all year.
I have been on airfields where they start to practice TPAC and other things - beleive me when I say they are trained VERY wellYou need to watch the episode of Police Traffic Motorway Camera Cops where a biker gets stopped for doing three figures on a DCW.....
Plod: "What would happen if someone pulled out in front of you doing that speed? Don't you realise how dangerous it is?
Biker: "Exactly the same as would happen to you, while you were pursuing me, officer, so it can't be that dangerous, can it?"
Cue stoney silence form both parties.
Plod: "What would happen if someone pulled out in front of you doing that speed? Don't you realise how dangerous it is?
Biker: "Exactly the same as would happen to you, while you were pursuing me, officer, so it can't be that dangerous, can it?"
Cue stoney silence form both parties.
GC8 said:
Yes. They wont let you taser old blind men with white sticks (they do). They wont let you shoot old inebriates carrying chair legs under their arms (they do). They wont let you 'test' your car at 160mph (they do). They dont allow you to get away with dangerous driving and massive urban accidents (they let Paul Fletcher) etc.
And where they do any of those things they are held to account (under the law & discipline procedures) for them.Believe me there are no double standards when it comes to police driving. Every vehicle in my force has a black box recording everything you do in the car. Any complaint by public, accident regardless of fault or even a vicinity only ( accident that happened just because a police vehicle was present, ie someone moving out of your way hits another mop) results in the black box being downloaded. Based on the results of this you could face internal discipline, or if it shows something possibly criminal, speeding, dangerous etc you are likely to be summonsed to court. This does happen quite regularly. This has a drastic reaction on how you drive the car as you know everything is being monitored
I totally agree with your post about speed in regards to driving to the conditions. It is all about driving appropriately. I have spent 6 weeks intensive driving training, driving every day, 3 further driving tests which unless you have done them, you can not explain in any way how hard and stressfull they are and regular check tests to get to where I am now, level 1 driver, which is a pursuit driver in lay and terms. While some of the course is aimed at improving how you drive, the thread throughout all 6 weeks is driving appropriately to the conditions. It improves your observation skills no end and makes a huge differance.
Im not sure what you would prefer or your solution would be? Would you prefer they set a limit that we can not exceed? Or just that if we catch people speeding we don't warn them about the dangers? To complicate things further for police driving, there was a advanced police driver prosecuted two years ago for dangerous driving. The reason being, he was involved in a pursuit of a stolen car that ended crashing into a train level crossing. He was prosecuted because just by pursuing the car his driving would fall below the standards of other drivers and likely to be dangerous. Even despite the fact that nobody complained that his driving was dangerours, it was quite a lenghty pursuit, he hit nothing, just because the criminal crashed!! Police have no exemption for dangerous driving, and as such any pursuit could leave the police driver liable for prosecution. In this case it went to crown court and whether you agree with it or not the jury used common sense and found the bib not guilty.
Just to finish, the message that speed kills etc all though enforced and ill be honest spouted out by officers it is generally not the feeling by police drivers, especially advanced ones. It's an EU and government message. As you can observe from my above post, we know its all about driving to the conditions. What might be safe to drive at even 70mph one day could be dangerous the next. Maybe the reason i have never issued one speeding ticket yet!!!
I totally agree with your post about speed in regards to driving to the conditions. It is all about driving appropriately. I have spent 6 weeks intensive driving training, driving every day, 3 further driving tests which unless you have done them, you can not explain in any way how hard and stressfull they are and regular check tests to get to where I am now, level 1 driver, which is a pursuit driver in lay and terms. While some of the course is aimed at improving how you drive, the thread throughout all 6 weeks is driving appropriately to the conditions. It improves your observation skills no end and makes a huge differance.
Im not sure what you would prefer or your solution would be? Would you prefer they set a limit that we can not exceed? Or just that if we catch people speeding we don't warn them about the dangers? To complicate things further for police driving, there was a advanced police driver prosecuted two years ago for dangerous driving. The reason being, he was involved in a pursuit of a stolen car that ended crashing into a train level crossing. He was prosecuted because just by pursuing the car his driving would fall below the standards of other drivers and likely to be dangerous. Even despite the fact that nobody complained that his driving was dangerours, it was quite a lenghty pursuit, he hit nothing, just because the criminal crashed!! Police have no exemption for dangerous driving, and as such any pursuit could leave the police driver liable for prosecution. In this case it went to crown court and whether you agree with it or not the jury used common sense and found the bib not guilty.
Just to finish, the message that speed kills etc all though enforced and ill be honest spouted out by officers it is generally not the feeling by police drivers, especially advanced ones. It's an EU and government message. As you can observe from my above post, we know its all about driving to the conditions. What might be safe to drive at even 70mph one day could be dangerous the next. Maybe the reason i have never issued one speeding ticket yet!!!
http://www.lancashirepolfed.org.uk/pursuit2.pdf
Just for those to have a read the case was R v HOLDEN. The link above is to a federation report about the incident. All though obviously biased towards the officers it makes interesting reading. Of note, I had one detail wrong, it was only a 4 minute pursuit, not a lengthy one! But of a bigger note and one that proves just how much more likely we are to face prosecution, even the operator of the police vehicle was prosecuted!! Work that one out.
Just for those to have a read the case was R v HOLDEN. The link above is to a federation report about the incident. All though obviously biased towards the officers it makes interesting reading. Of note, I had one detail wrong, it was only a 4 minute pursuit, not a lengthy one! But of a bigger note and one that proves just how much more likely we are to face prosecution, even the operator of the police vehicle was prosecuted!! Work that one out.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff