What can you say?
Discussion
I saw a couple of BiB units tonight on a road near Bexley keeping an eye out for errant speeders.
One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
Bibs_LEF said:
I saw a couple of BiB units tonight on a road near Bexley keeping an eye out for errant speeders.
One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
Was there actual danger of physical injury that would amount to an offence of dangerous position ?One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
(Yellow lines don't signify it being a dangerous position & I doubt a bus stop has been placed in a 'de facto' dangerous position either.)
You can ask, but they don't have to answer directly.
I would imagine if you asked they'll say it's not a dangerous position & the justification for them prosecuting people speeding there is because people are speeding in that particular area.
Beyond that they aren't going to stand there arguing the toss with you, they'll direct you to the nearest Police station if you'd like to take it any further beyond their brief explanation.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 29th January 06:55
vonhosen said:
Bibs_LEF said:
I saw a couple of BiB units tonight on a road near Bexley keeping an eye out for errant speeders.
One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
Was there actual danger of physical injury that would amount to an offence of dangerous position ?One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
(Yellow lines don't signify it being a dangerous position & I doubt a bus stop has been placed in a 'de facto' dangerous position either.)
You can ask, but they don't have to answer directly.
I would imagine if you asked they'll say it's not a dangerous position & the justification for them prosecuting people speeding there is because people are speeding in that particular area.
Beyond that they aren't going to stand there arguing the toss with you, they'll direct you to the nearest Police station if you'd like to take it any further beyond their brief explanation.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 29th January 06:55
vonhosen said:
...is because people are speeding in that particular area.
People are speeding in every particular area Von, unrealistic speed limits guarantee that. I think the real problem is that they were (once again) parked somewhere where johnny public would be ticketed. Similar examples of police hypocracy are seen time and again and does nothing to reverse the decline in respect the public have for our Boys in Blue.
SM
Thanks for the replies.
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
I really wanted to ask if there had ever been the recommended number of fatalities (or is it accidents) or if they were just there because it's a 'good spot' to catch people speeding as in my impression it's the latter. I would have thought that the BiB, as public servants, and not on a 'confidential' case might be obliged to justify their actions to a member of the public but I would imagine that instead of that I'd open up a whole world of grief for me.
As an aside, I would have thought that nowadays with ANPR they would have got more convictions from no tax/insurance/MOT than just standing there with the LTi making money and increasing insurance company profits. To say that speeders will get done for these offences too is stereotyping those who speed as guilty of other offences which I don't think is the case from my personal experience.
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
I really wanted to ask if there had ever been the recommended number of fatalities (or is it accidents) or if they were just there because it's a 'good spot' to catch people speeding as in my impression it's the latter. I would have thought that the BiB, as public servants, and not on a 'confidential' case might be obliged to justify their actions to a member of the public but I would imagine that instead of that I'd open up a whole world of grief for me.
As an aside, I would have thought that nowadays with ANPR they would have got more convictions from no tax/insurance/MOT than just standing there with the LTi making money and increasing insurance company profits. To say that speeders will get done for these offences too is stereotyping those who speed as guilty of other offences which I don't think is the case from my personal experience.
Bibs_LEF said:
Thanks for the replies.
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
I really wanted to ask if there had ever been the recommended number of fatalities (or is it accidents) or if they were just there because it's a 'good spot' to catch people speeding as in my impression it's the latter. I would have thought that the BiB, as public servants, and not on a 'confidential' case might be obliged to justify their actions to a member of the public but I would imagine that instead of that I'd open up a whole world of grief for me.
As an aside, I would have thought that nowadays with ANPR they would have got more convictions from no tax/insurance/MOT than just standing there with the LTi making money and increasing insurance company profits. To say that speeders will get done for these offences too is stereotyping those who speed as guilty of other offences which I don't think is the case from my personal experience.
Perhaps they have not met their monthly target yet? Only three days to go!They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
I really wanted to ask if there had ever been the recommended number of fatalities (or is it accidents) or if they were just there because it's a 'good spot' to catch people speeding as in my impression it's the latter. I would have thought that the BiB, as public servants, and not on a 'confidential' case might be obliged to justify their actions to a member of the public but I would imagine that instead of that I'd open up a whole world of grief for me.
As an aside, I would have thought that nowadays with ANPR they would have got more convictions from no tax/insurance/MOT than just standing there with the LTi making money and increasing insurance company profits. To say that speeders will get done for these offences too is stereotyping those who speed as guilty of other offences which I don't think is the case from my personal experience.
You would most likely see the ANPR after that at the start of the month to catch those not updating their tax disks within hours of the start of the new month.
This sort of thing really annoys me it is either hypocrisy or laziness at its worst.
Once where I live a police car parked IN A ROUNDABOUT... yes thats right he was parked in the stripes of a roundabout painted to stop traffic driving on them and giving traffic a better view when joining. They were within the roundabout in such a position that cars entering and looking right instead of seeing what was coming round from the right saw a cop car blocking their view and inside a cop on a speed gun.
They also illegally park at junctions and somehow manage to have their cars pointing the wrong way down a one way street all in the name of pointing their speed guns from the cozy confines of thier heated car.
What does this do for police public relations.. not much when you see someone in supposed authority setting a bad axample creating an akward situation to catch someone commiting a predominately victimless crime.
I actually stopped and spoke to the 'stopper' further down the road and told him how stupid it was to be parked within a roundabout and to tell his colleague to shift.
The stopper didn't offer an argument back and said he would go and have a word with his colleague... which he didn't as he promptly set off up the road in the oppossite direction of the roundabout.
Once where I live a police car parked IN A ROUNDABOUT... yes thats right he was parked in the stripes of a roundabout painted to stop traffic driving on them and giving traffic a better view when joining. They were within the roundabout in such a position that cars entering and looking right instead of seeing what was coming round from the right saw a cop car blocking their view and inside a cop on a speed gun.
They also illegally park at junctions and somehow manage to have their cars pointing the wrong way down a one way street all in the name of pointing their speed guns from the cozy confines of thier heated car.
What does this do for police public relations.. not much when you see someone in supposed authority setting a bad axample creating an akward situation to catch someone commiting a predominately victimless crime.
I actually stopped and spoke to the 'stopper' further down the road and told him how stupid it was to be parked within a roundabout and to tell his colleague to shift.
The stopper didn't offer an argument back and said he would go and have a word with his colleague... which he didn't as he promptly set off up the road in the oppossite direction of the roundabout.
JustinP1 said:
Bibs_LEF said:
Thanks for the replies.
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
I really wanted to ask if there had ever been the recommended number of fatalities (or is it accidents) or if they were just there because it's a 'good spot' to catch people speeding as in my impression it's the latter. I would have thought that the BiB, as public servants, and not on a 'confidential' case might be obliged to justify their actions to a member of the public but I would imagine that instead of that I'd open up a whole world of grief for me.
As an aside, I would have thought that nowadays with ANPR they would have got more convictions from no tax/insurance/MOT than just standing there with the LTi making money and increasing insurance company profits. To say that speeders will get done for these offences too is stereotyping those who speed as guilty of other offences which I don't think is the case from my personal experience.
Perhaps they have not met their monthly target yet? Only three days to go!They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
I really wanted to ask if there had ever been the recommended number of fatalities (or is it accidents) or if they were just there because it's a 'good spot' to catch people speeding as in my impression it's the latter. I would have thought that the BiB, as public servants, and not on a 'confidential' case might be obliged to justify their actions to a member of the public but I would imagine that instead of that I'd open up a whole world of grief for me.
As an aside, I would have thought that nowadays with ANPR they would have got more convictions from no tax/insurance/MOT than just standing there with the LTi making money and increasing insurance company profits. To say that speeders will get done for these offences too is stereotyping those who speed as guilty of other offences which I don't think is the case from my personal experience.
You would most likely see the ANPR after that at the start of the month to catch those not updating their tax disks within hours of the start of the new month.
[quote]
Always remember one BIB who stopped a Artic flatbed on a blind bend. The Lay-by 50 yards up the road was empty as well. To compound the error He was in front of the vehicle.
They were holding an LTi 20/20, I guess they weren't stopping burglars.
I didn't say that I'd call them a servant, however bearing in mind your funding you are indeed a civil servant. You police by consent, that's the reason we have a police force, as we want one. We pay for it too.
ETA you can keep your s67, I said I was gonna park up the road and walk up, however my cars are spot on legal, there would be little if anything you could find wrong. If you wanted to s65 search, that's a different matter and I would flee on foot!
I didn't say that I'd call them a servant, however bearing in mind your funding you are indeed a civil servant. You police by consent, that's the reason we have a police force, as we want one. We pay for it too.
ETA you can keep your s67, I said I was gonna park up the road and walk up, however my cars are spot on legal, there would be little if anything you could find wrong. If you wanted to s65 search, that's a different matter and I would flee on foot!
Edited by Bibs_LEF on Tuesday 29th January 14:44
Why the hang up with the word 'servant'
A servant is someone who serves...
So your OH got upset at being called a servant before she 'served' the food.
I was in the army I 'served' my country.
You as a policeman 'serve' your community you with to build relationships with.
They don't proffer a service to you so they are not your servants . They do however finance your service and this seems to be a big 'shoulder' chip unfortunately.
The police were invented to 'serve' the communities maybe the fact that the police get uppity when this fact is mentioned proves that they have started to lose their way and have lost sight of their raison d'etre.
A servant is someone who serves...
So your OH got upset at being called a servant before she 'served' the food.
I was in the army I 'served' my country.
You as a policeman 'serve' your community you with to build relationships with.
They don't proffer a service to you so they are not your servants . They do however finance your service and this seems to be a big 'shoulder' chip unfortunately.
The police were invented to 'serve' the communities maybe the fact that the police get uppity when this fact is mentioned proves that they have started to lose their way and have lost sight of their raison d'etre.
fatboy b said:
vonhosen said:
Bibs_LEF said:
I saw a couple of BiB units tonight on a road near Bexley keeping an eye out for errant speeders.
One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
Was there actual danger of physical injury that would amount to an offence of dangerous position ?One lot were in a bus stop, the other's were on double yellows.
I know they are doing their bit to crack down on illegal drivers and good on them, but if I were to stop my car (somewhere safe) and approach them could I ask why they are there, why are they parked in dangerous spots and what justification they have for their work in that particular area?
Would they just send me away with a flea in my ear or do they have to justify what they are up to, what with them being public servants and all that?
(Yellow lines don't signify it being a dangerous position & I doubt a bus stop has been placed in a 'de facto' dangerous position either.)
You can ask, but they don't have to answer directly.
I would imagine if you asked they'll say it's not a dangerous position & the justification for them prosecuting people speeding there is because people are speeding in that particular area.
Beyond that they aren't going to stand there arguing the toss with you, they'll direct you to the nearest Police station if you'd like to take it any further beyond their brief explanation.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 29th January 06:55
supermono said:
vonhosen said:
...is because people are speeding in that particular area.
People are speeding in every particular area Von, unrealistic speed limits guarantee that. I think the real problem is that they were (once again) parked somewhere where johnny public would be ticketed. Similar examples of police hypocracy are seen time and again and does nothing to reverse the decline in respect the public have for our Boys in Blue.
SM
[quote=Bibs_LEF]Thanks for the replies.
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
quote]
Was this on the North Cray Road?
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
quote]
Was this on the North Cray Road?
JamesFiesta said:
Tax won't show on PNC,
No tax is a marker on PNC and has been for many years. In fact many years before insurance and MOT markers were put on the PNC record for each vehicleJamesFiesta said:
the system ANPR reads ;-) it's the DVLA that run prosecutions for tax anyway.
ANPR data includes no tax and vehicles going through an ANPR check are pinged by the system. The information then sent to the stopping officers. Officers then pull the vehicle over and examine it for other offences. Tax offences are then reported by police on behalf of the DVLA who then instigate the prosecution. Police act as agents for the DVLA in these cases.Edited by Mg6b on Tuesday 29th January 22:19
excel789 said:
Bibs_LEF said:
Thanks for the replies.
They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
quote]
Was this on the North Cray Road?
The description fits and I don't know many other D/Cs close to Bexley. Can't be the A2 as that's 3 lanes. They were on a 40mph dual carriageway in NW Kent which is about 3 miles long and far from being dangerous (it used to be a 50, is a wide and well lit road) it seems more of a honey trap as at 9pm it was fairly empty and 40 feels like walking. I'm just glad I wasn't in my Esprit!
quote]
Was this on the North Cray Road?
No-one going to confirm or deny that ANPR uses a "recently downloaded" database and not live data? I can only presume this is the case, as nobody ever denies it 
.
With regard to the servant "thing" above, I recently had to report being the victim of a hit and run in a car park (at the weekend) and then later produce my car's MoT (today - I can only fit so much paper in my wallet!) - I was more than happy to be called "Sir" (in the nicest possible way
) on both occasions. The Police are our servants - but it's two way traffic and there has to be mutual respect (which often gets lost by the punter at the roadside or late at night on the streets) for this to be recognised.
. With regard to the servant "thing" above, I recently had to report being the victim of a hit and run in a car park (at the weekend) and then later produce my car's MoT (today - I can only fit so much paper in my wallet!) - I was more than happy to be called "Sir" (in the nicest possible way
) on both occasions. The Police are our servants - but it's two way traffic and there has to be mutual respect (which often gets lost by the punter at the roadside or late at night on the streets) for this to be recognised.Mg6b said:
JamesFiesta said:
Tax won't show on PNC,
No tax is a marker on PNC and has been for many years. In fact many years before insurance and MOT markers were put on the PNC record for each vehicleJamesFiesta said:
the system ANPR reads ;-) it's the DVLA that run prosecutions for tax anyway.
ANPR data includes no tax and vehicles going through an ANPR check are pinged by the system. The information then sent to the stopping officers. Officers then pull the vehicle over and examine it for other offences. Tax offences are then reported by police on behalf of the DVLA who then instigate the prosecution. Police act as agents for the DVLA in these cases.Edited by Mg6b on Tuesday 29th January 22:19
I am aware of the process re: DVLA and the Police's role in completing statements for untaxed vehicles, I think i may have put my point across incorrectly.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff