Helicop nicked!
Discussion
hemibum said:
Saw a newspaper article yesterday. Thought someone would have posted on it.
A helicopter pilot for (cambridge?) police force was nicked for driving at 110 mph on the motorway.
No. Not in his chopper!
You can always count on me, It's dangerous driving as well because it was 110 in a 40.A helicopter pilot for (cambridge?) police force was nicked for driving at 110 mph on the motorway.
No. Not in his chopper!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6287434...
Oh. Thanks for pointing that out. I'd never have thought it.
Actually I would have thought his job description was to fly his helicopter in support of the police in many roles but never let a chance go by, eh? How many police officers have points on their licence? Meh.
Still wondering if he's a civvie though. Many police pilots are, or used to be.
Actually I would have thought his job description was to fly his helicopter in support of the police in many roles but never let a chance go by, eh? How many police officers have points on their licence? Meh.
Still wondering if he's a civvie though. Many police pilots are, or used to be.
Slowly Slowly said:
It's dangerous driving as well because it was 110 in a 40.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6287434...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6287434...
R_U_LOCAL said:
so what?
there you have it guys, reg says its OK to do 110 in a 40.cheers reg!
Flintstone said:
Not really hemibum but there's an element here who rant and rave at the police at every opportunity.
If yours was a
post rather than a 
then I'll wind my neck in. The other sort of posts are tedious is all.
Flinty , Rant : er, where? Rave: Did I pass comment? Are you guys all so anally retentive that you cannot even allow a simple observation to pass you by without going into immediate damage limitation mode?If yours was a
post rather than a then I'll wind my neck in. The other sort of posts are tedious is all.Check my posts. I don't knock BiB . Do us all a favour and just have a small chuckle at the irony of it all.
I think he was followed by an unmarked police car through the ridiculous 40 zone on the M5, which was several miles long back in Feb this year. It all happened in the early hous of the morning from what I can remember around 2-3am. Perfectly safe with no workers around, 3 lanes of near empty motorway to play with. I would have thought the unmarked officers would have shown some discretion. There was no harm done was there?
Slowly Slowly said:
You can always count on me, It's dangerous driving as well because it was 110 in a 40.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6287434...
Yes, it's sad that that's the only reason it's classed as dangerous driving! Safe driving on an empty motorway is being classed as dangerous because of the speed, even though it was no more dangerous than walking down the stairs in reality. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6287434...
Yet another example of a member of the "authorities" deciding that the fixed limit is unrealistic and that a speed appropriate to the circumstances of the moment is perfectly OK. We've seen plenty of examples of "safety" (revenue) camera van drivers exceeding speed limits; it's all just a game, to control and rake in money while pretending to be righteous - it's clear they don't believe it themselves.
deeps said:
I would have thought the unmarked officers would have shown some discretion. There was no harm done was there?
It's a tricky business showing discretion towards other BiBs & police staff as it can become a big integrity issue and you could end up losing your job over someone who in this case was just taking the mick.Imagine it, BiBs offer 'advice' and later by whatever means this then becomes public knowledge........at the very least we've have Fluffnik calling for the execution of ACPO.
deeps said:
I think he was followed by an unmarked police car through the ridiculous 40 zone on the M5, which was several miles long back in Feb this year. It all happened in the early hous of the morning from what I can remember around 2-3am. Perfectly safe with no workers around, 3 lanes of near empty motorway to play with. I would have thought the unmarked officers would have shown some discretion. There was no harm done was there?
Never let the reality get in the way of a good story, eh?deeps said:
I think he was followed by an unmarked police car through the ridiculous 40 zone on the M5, which was several miles long back in Feb this year. It all happened in the early hous of the morning from what I can remember around 2-3am. Perfectly safe with no workers around, 3 lanes of near empty motorway to play with. I would have thought the unmarked officers would have shown some discretion. There was no harm done was there?
And how do you know there was no workforce around at the time? Majority of works/inspections on works is done at night. Those cones aren't equipped with force fields y'know ;-)deeps said:
I think he was followed by an unmarked police car through the ridiculous 40 zone on the M5, which was several miles long back in Feb this year. It all happened in the early hous of the morning from what I can remember around 2-3am. Perfectly safe with no workers around, 3 lanes of near empty motorway to play with. I would have thought the unmarked officers would have shown some discretion. There was no harm done was there?
Er... he was driving in a coned off bit, which could have all sorts of crap in it...
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff