Police ignore Speed limits??
Discussion
While cruising westbound lane 3 on the M4 near Reading at a Satnav indicated 85 leptons on a sunny Sunday morning keeping up with the quite heavy traffic, I noticed the cars behind me scattering and I notice a non-traffic police car (an Astra I think) rapidly approaching from behind me, I slowed slight to 80 leptons and indicated and moved into a gap in lane 2.
The police car was not displaying any warning lights at all.
The police car driven by a lone female officer then goes past me (I swear she was grinning) at at least 95 leptons (My guess in comparison to my 80) and then remains at that speed until it is gone from sight remaining in lane 3 at all time.
The police car had no lights or warning lights on, and remained in lane 3 when lanes 2 and 1 were empty.
If the police car had been displaying warning lights I would have had no issue but as far as I am concerned this was simply a display of "them and us" and someone misusing their powers and setting a bad example to the tax paying public that very quickly got well out of her road.
I also thought the first rule of the road was to keep left?
Or am I wrong and they are allowed to do this?
cheers
Whitey
The police car was not displaying any warning lights at all.
The police car driven by a lone female officer then goes past me (I swear she was grinning) at at least 95 leptons (My guess in comparison to my 80) and then remains at that speed until it is gone from sight remaining in lane 3 at all time.
The police car had no lights or warning lights on, and remained in lane 3 when lanes 2 and 1 were empty.
If the police car had been displaying warning lights I would have had no issue but as far as I am concerned this was simply a display of "them and us" and someone misusing their powers and setting a bad example to the tax paying public that very quickly got well out of her road.
I also thought the first rule of the road was to keep left?
Or am I wrong and they are allowed to do this?
cheers
Whitey
On Monday morning on the M3 there was a Volvo traffic car playing havoc with the traffic by crusing at 70-75. I've never seen free flowing traffic bunch up so quickly and so close together in the outside lane. If he'd have been doing 65 in the inside lane instead, traffic would have flowed much more smoothly and safely.
cue PHBIB to come along saying "ah but they might have been on a shout, they're exempted from the speed limit if so, you don't know and we won't accept that the copper was just flooring it using the power of the police sign on the roof to get to the donut shop on time"
These threads do pop up once every so many months...
These threads do pop up once every so many months...
.........and seemingly laws on using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving.
Witnessed a speeding police car with no warning lights/sirens on at all driving beyond the speed limit whilst tlkaing into his mobile phone. Complained to the local cop shop and was informed that someone would deal with my complaint soon, 4 weeks on still waiting.
Witnessed a speeding police car with no warning lights/sirens on at all driving beyond the speed limit whilst tlkaing into his mobile phone. Complained to the local cop shop and was informed that someone would deal with my complaint soon, 4 weeks on still waiting.
police regularly speed around where i live, there is even a speed camera on a main road and they approach it normally then speed up put their lights on set it off an continue as normal after??? its odd. Also in a 30 zone they insist on following at less than 2 car lengths behind, its stupid because i know i am totally legal ie tax MOT & Insurance but it still puts you off when you drive staring in rear view waiting for the blue lights to appear.
Also does anyone else find it sooooo annoying when a police car is in the inside lane doing 65 on a motorway and everyone panics, bunches up and is too scared to overtake? the level of madness this creates is ridiculas in my view. As for them doing 95 in outside lane, its something we have to live with isnt it????
Also does anyone else find it sooooo annoying when a police car is in the inside lane doing 65 on a motorway and everyone panics, bunches up and is too scared to overtake? the level of madness this creates is ridiculas in my view. As for them doing 95 in outside lane, its something we have to live with isnt it????
At 11.15pm last night on Westerleigh Road (from North Bristol almost parallel to M4 and meets the A46 neat its junction with the M4) I was in a 40 limit and saw the blue flashing lights of a police car at least ½ mile behind me. I left the 40 limit into NSL and then indicated and pulled into the side of the road to allow the police car to pass me before I entered a series of bends. Plod went past, 50 yards out of 40 limit, at laround 80. A mile futher on, in another 40 limit, the police car was sat with just normal lights on across a house drive. As I passed it pulled out behing me, no indication, and followed me for about 600 yards before doing a three point turn and going back the way it had come.
What was that about? Aborted emergency call? But why follow me for 600 yards before the turn around? Honda Civic driven by a slightly greying 60-year-old doesn't really look dodgy does it?
What was that about? Aborted emergency call? But why follow me for 600 yards before the turn around? Honda Civic driven by a slightly greying 60-year-old doesn't really look dodgy does it?
gonzales said:
.........and seemingly laws on using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving.
Witnessed a speeding police car with no warning lights/sirens on at all driving beyond the speed limit whilst tlkaing into his mobile phone. Complained to the local cop shop and was informed that someone would deal with my complaint soon, 4 weeks on still waiting.
Witnessed a speeding police car with no warning lights/sirens on at all driving beyond the speed limit whilst tlkaing into his mobile phone. Complained to the local cop shop and was informed that someone would deal with my complaint soon, 4 weeks on still waiting.
Police radios can look like a mobile these days, and they're exempt.
WildCat said:
Flat in Fifth said:
eccles said:
ok, so plod drives at the limit and traffic bunches up, and people moan.
plod drives over the limit, causing no one any hastle, and people moan.
plod drives over the limit, causing no one any hastle, and people moan.
Ex-bloody-actly
I wasn't having a moan (ok I was), what I was trying to say was that if the traffic car had joined the carriageway and cruised at 65 in the inside lane, people would have felt able to continue past him at 70ish without any bother. Instead he was sat in the middle lane at approx 75 and was bunching everyone back up behind him. Eventually he put the blues and two's on and disappeared into the distance.
Phill
Advanced driving dictates travelling in lane three even if the other two are clear, safest place to be. If the road was clear why would she need blues-and-twos? Use of these is entirely at the drivers discretion, if there's no clear need then why use them?
Would you rather she was doing 69mph in lane one and holding everyone up? Do you know where she was going or why, or how quickly she had to be there? I suspect not....
Hollywood Wheels said:
Advanced driving dictates travelling in lane three even if the other two are clear, safest place to be. If the road was clear why would she need blues-and-twos? Use of these is entirely at the drivers discretion, if there's no clear need then why use them?
Would you rather she was doing 69mph in lane one and holding everyone up? Do you know where she was going or why, or how quickly she had to be there? I suspect not....
Just curious, why is lane 3 the safest place to be, if the other 2 are clear? You are next to a crash barrier, with little or no run off area to your right, (ok 2 lanes to your left). In lane 1 you have the hard shoulder, and often a verge beyond that to your left, and 2 lanes to your right. I would have thought that the safest place to be, on a clear road, would be either lane 1 or 2, due to the amount of space around you, Please explain?
Lane three is safest. There's only one side which danger can come from (the left obviously). The idea is to be against the nearside line of lane three. If the road is curving to the right ahead, then a sneak into lane two for a short period is okay for the increased vision round the bend. The crash barrier cannot be considered a dynamic 'hazard' as such. It's a solid object and smashing into it would defeat the whole purpose of advanced driving!
Hollywood Wheels said:
Lane three is safest. There's only one side which danger can come from (the left obviously). The idea is to be against the nearside line of lane three. If the road is curving to the right ahead, then a sneak into lane two for a short period is okay for the increased vision round the bend. The crash barrier cannot be considered a dynamic 'hazard' as such. It's a solid object and smashing into it would defeat the whole purpose of advanced driving!
Unless of course you have a tyre blowout at speed, in which case you need as much room as possible. And why might that happen I hear you ask, all the crap that there is on the road these days thats why, and anyway, accidents do happen. But I do see the point about knowing where any danger is likely to come from thanks for clearing that up. So if I'm driving down a relatively empty motorway, I would be exhibiting advanced driving skills by remaining in lane 3? (I know what the answer to this is going to be, can't you see that the answer that is about to be forthcoming is the sort of answer that just annoys people?)
Hollywood Wheels said:
Advanced driving dictates travelling in lane three even if the other two are clear, safest place to be. If the road was clear why would she need blues-and-twos? Use of these is entirely at the drivers discretion, if there's no clear need then why use them?
Would you rather she was doing 69mph in lane one and holding everyone up? Do you know where she was going or why, or how quickly she had to be there? I suspect not....
She had not lights on at all, but was simply pushing her way through the traffic. At 10.30am on a sunday morning, the drivers behind me, then I, moved quickly out her way.
If she had used lights, I would have not had an issue. The fact is she did not, and at speed. As a member of the public my immediate reaction is to assume she was abusing her powers.
If she had used the lights to get past the traffic then turned them off and continued at speed on the clearer section ahead, again I would have had no issue.
Hollywood Wheels said:
andmole said:
So if I'm driving down a relatively empty motorway, I would be exhibiting advanced driving skills by remaining in lane 3?
Fill yer boots mate, I'm not Traffic, and couldn't give a stuff!
But a good question none the less. Anyone got a solid answer for us joe public?Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff