Police not wearing seat belts

[Purple haze]

Anyone see 'Cops with Cameras' on CH4 last night. Dave and Jim both DC's with the MET very obviously not wearing seat belts. Are they allowed to do this? One law for them and another for us? Comments please

[tigger1]

Yes, they are.

Absolute exemption, if they don't want to, when doing their job.

[herewego]

A lot of us don’t seem to bother either. I happened to do a quick survey, walking home from the shops the other day along a suburban A road. Six drivers without seatbelts out of about 30 cars. Tut tut.

[bite-me]

I don't think you can moan about this

They may need to get out in a hurry

"quick, big mac, large fries"

or ahem, of course to chase a crim !

[julianhj]

Unless I'm sat in the back with a prisoner (who will always have a belt on in my presence) I make sure I'm belted up. It pi$$es me right off when colleagues don't bother, just as I get really annoyed when they break the speed limit when not responding to an urgent job. I've been told in training by a traffic sergeant that he'll happily ticket an officer if that officer doesn't have a very good reason to be doing without, and quite right too. We BIB should be setting the example.

[^Slider^]

Mine only comes off when i need to get out of the car quickly at a job, take it off just before arriving. Or when i have a prisoner in the car.

I cant justify sticking someone on if i dont have a seatbelt on.

[gently bentley]

Road Traffic Act. Police officers do not need to wear seat belts. Our force policy is you will wear one unless you can justify a reason for not wearing one.

You cannot be prosecuted but you can (in my force) be dealt with by the discipline for failing to comply with a force order.

[ATG]

One law for them and another for us? Yes, absolutely, and quite right too. In order to do their job properly from time to time they need to be able to speed, to drive without seatbelts, etc. so the rules reflect this. Different job, different rules. Nothing wrong with that.

[chrispy porker]

same as Taxi drivers.Only when they have a fare of course.

[Bing o]

Are police officers also immune to getting their face smashed in against the windscreen, chest punctured by the steering wheel, or getting thrown out of a car window?

At what point do they wheel out the Kryptonite at Hendon?

[tigger1]

And pregnant women.

[jacko lah]

tigger1 said:

Yes, they are.

Absolute exemption, if they don't want to, when doing their job.

If I was doing the employee/machinery interface risk assessment they'd be wearing a 5 point harness and the cars would have roll cages.

You'd have to be stupid and arrogant to spend your working life in a car and take so little responsibility for your own safety

[Vaux]

tigger1 said:

And pregnant women.

Ehh? I don't think so......

I believe they have to wear one to take the DSA test.

Edited by Vaux on Wednesday 14th March 15:27

[supermono]

Perhaps they were familiarising themselves with the windscreen?

SM

[gently bentley]

As the op's question would appear to have been answered may I suggest the topic is now closed.

[andmole]

julianhj said:

Unless I'm sat in the back with a prisoner (who will always have a belt on in my presence) I make sure I'm belted up. It pi$$es me right off when colleagues don't bother, just as I get really annoyed when they break the speed limit when not responding to an urgent job. I've been told in training by a traffic sergeant that he'll happily ticket an officer if that officer doesn't have a very good reason to be doing without, and quite right too. We BIB should be setting the example.

No need to say anything more

[vonhosen]

julianhj said:

We BIB should be setting the example.

I agree.
Should always be worn unless justifiable for operational necessity.

[Purple haze]

Thanks to the BIB who have responded and cleared my mind on this from the point of what's law. My summary would seem to be that technically BIB can elect not to wear a belt depending on what activity they are involved in but it seems most BIB think that from a PR point of view at least they should be seen to comply with wearing a belt whenver possible.

[andmole]

vonhosen said:

julianhj said:

We BIB should be setting the example.

I agree.
Should always be worn unless justifiable for operational necessity.

I wasn't just referring to seatbelts.

[vonhosen]

andmole said:

vonhosen said:

julianhj said:

We BIB should be setting the example.

I agree.
Should always be worn unless justifiable for operational necessity.

I wasn't just referring to seatbelts.

My response wasn't directed to you, but as it happens I'm not of the opinion that it just refers to seatbelts either.