More condescending TV twaddle
Discussion
deeen said:
If this is the road I think it is, out of the last 55 deaths on that road, 52 were bikers.
There's a similar road in N. Yorks. Lots of 'born-again' bikers going off into the scenery because they push their luck. That's the trouble IMHO, whether it's cars or bikes: people push their luck too hard for too long. There's a fair chance that, ignoring the fact that he got pulled, the Elsie driver WOULD have learned from that corner and next time thought twice.
I recall being out on a bike trip with some mates one time: one guy was going across the double whites far too often. He had a mate's girlfriend on the back. When we stopped, he got a roasting from his mates.
The same guy was later killed in a bike incident, in a 30 mph limit, not speeding. Maybe he just didn't think 'what if' before he pulled out to overtake a car and a van. To be fair though, the van driver didn't check his mirror before HE pulled out to overtake the car...
... and as for 'scraping up', we've had this discussion before. It's not the job of a Police officer to scrape anything up, that's why we have undertakers. I used to work for one. I never heard any of them complain.
rustybin said:
BlackStuff said:
The other thing I found strange was that the guy who got all crossed up and ended up sliding over the line got a bollocking, yet the guy who executed a relatively safe overtake got nicked. I agree about his rearward observation, so the copper should have majored on that, which to me was the real problem, rather than the "technical" infringement that he crossed a white line during a relatively safe manoeuvre.
I thought the difference was that the Lotus driver was listening and the biker clearly wasn't. Attitude test failed and so the conversation moved toward the 'what I am going to do you for is...' line.
But the Biker's attitude only went pear-shaped after he'd been given a ticket. Up until then he seemed every bit as remorseful and apologetic as the Elise driver who got away with it.
rustybin said:
I agree the guy came across as a tad smug and 'camera aware' and it would be great if all coppers were of the older and wiser variety but they have to start somewhere.
It just seems like a bit of a bad PR move to nominate a smug and self-aware one for the filming, when one would assume they could just as easily have put forward a charismatic copper instead. It would have painted a much more positive image of what they are trying to do.
rustybin said:
Maybe we are just hankering after our youth when all coppers were 8 foot high, built like brick out-houses and put the fear of God in to us buy looking at us or maybe we have just got taller since our scrumping days?
>> Edited by BlackStuff on Thursday 17th March 11:44
BlackStuff said:Difference of perception perhaps. I thought he came across as having an 'Oh here we go pick on bikers time' attitude from the start. Just shows how subjective these things are. The other differentiator between him and the kid and the Eliseist was that they had both had pretty scary moments that perhaps PC Slighty-Smug thought were probably an education in themselves
But the Biker's attitude only went pear-shaped after he'd been given a ticket. Up until then he seemed every bit as remorseful and apologetic as the Elise driver who got away with it.
blackstuff said:
It just seems like a bit of a bad PR move to nominate a smug and self-aware one for the filming, when one would assume they could just as easily have put forward a charismatic copper instead. It would have painted a much more positive image of what they are trying to do.
blackstuff said:
Maybe we are just hankering after our youth when all coppers were 8 foot high, built like brick out-houses and put the fear of God in to us buy looking at us or maybe we have just got taller since our scrumping days?
Mind how you go son.
The Elise driver, Simon, was engaged in a spirited jaunt with a 999 Ducati just a little earlier to his TV debut. He drives that road a lot and knows it and his car well. I'd say his awareness was at a high level and he was fully prepared for any situation he might encounter because of this. Including correcting a little tail waggle and doing the required "Yessirnosir" routine to an up and coming daytime presenter...er sorry traffic cop. 
Hollywood Wheels said:
und I thought he should have at least removed his chewy as well. Ist not respectful to chew gum when dealing mit MOP.
Whilst on the subject of decorum, have they dropped the requirement for an officer to wear his cap? I heard that several cases were thrown out of court because the officer was 'not in uniform'...
The Lotus driver was extremely lucky to get away scot-free. Imagine if it had been a biker instead of a police car, and the back end of the Elise had come further around - that could well be one dead person.
IMO its the driver of the Elise who should have been heavily punished, the biker was a bit of a twunt, but he didn't really do that much wrong. We all know how easy it is to start enjoying whats ahead of us at the cost of rearward observation.
IMO its the driver of the Elise who should have been heavily punished, the biker was a bit of a twunt, but he didn't really do that much wrong. We all know how easy it is to start enjoying whats ahead of us at the cost of rearward observation.
wedg1e said:Our guidelines are that we wear headgear when out of a vehicle - which I follow, 99% of the time. There are, of course, exceptions. For example, if one was to arrive at the scene of a burning house/car on roof/ other life and death situation, then you'd not be criticised for just jumping out and doing whatever needs to be done.
Whilst on the subject of decorum, have they dropped the requirement for an officer to wear his cap? I heard that several cases were thrown out of court because the officer was 'not in uniform'...
I think the "No hat = not in uniform" is just an urban myth. It could be argued that if an officer had his hat, shirt and epaulettes on, but no equipment belt or yellow coat, he could be "not in uniform"...
I agreed with most points in the program, although like many, I did find the condescending attitude of the bobby in the volvo very irritating.
I also find it incredible that any biker is daft enough to go out without a set of full leathers.
Jeans do not give any protection.
How about the brand new car which broke down and then started to smoke.
If that had been mine, I would have opened the bonnet at the first sign, borrowed a fire extinguisher from the bobbies car and put the damn thing out!
There was no need to wait for the fire engine.
Some people do not seem to live in the real world.
I also find it incredible that any biker is daft enough to go out without a set of full leathers.
Jeans do not give any protection.
How about the brand new car which broke down and then started to smoke.
If that had been mine, I would have opened the bonnet at the first sign, borrowed a fire extinguisher from the bobbies car and put the damn thing out!
There was no need to wait for the fire engine.
Some people do not seem to live in the real world.
gtr-gaz said:
I agreed with most points in the program, although like many, I did find the condescending attitude of the bobby in the volvo very irritating.
I also find it incredible that any biker is daft enough to go out without a set of full leathers.
Jeans do not give any protection.
How about the brand new car which broke down and then started to smoke.
If that had been mine, I would have opened the bonnet at the first sign, borrowed a fire extinguisher from the bobbies car and put the damn thing out!
There was no need to wait for the fire engine.
Some people do not seem to live in the real world.
As I understand it the driver thought the car had merely run out of petrol, so he parked it and set off on foot to find a filling station. The smoke only seemed to become obvious as he was on his way back to the car, by which time the police driver was on the scene. BTW, that police officer had a much better manner than our gum chewing friend, albeit in different circumstances.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
I would rather take my chances with the gum chewing copper than any smug arsehole from the scamerati and their automated tax collection routine.
OK, so he was a bit smug but I thought his calls were spot on. I know if I was the Elise driver I would have thought all my christmases had come at once.
We all ask for more plod on the road using discretion, anbd then when it's shown, it gets moaned about
It's a bollocking FFS
Been a while since I had one, but the whole idea is to make you feel stupid for what you did.
As for the biker in jeans, never mind a lifesaver, he obvioulsy didn't do ANY rear observation if he missed a bloody battenberg on his tail. You just can't afford to take that sort of risk on a bike
OK, so he was a bit smug but I thought his calls were spot on. I know if I was the Elise driver I would have thought all my christmases had come at once.
We all ask for more plod on the road using discretion, anbd then when it's shown, it gets moaned about
It's a bollocking FFS Been a while since I had one, but the whole idea is to make you feel stupid for what you did.
As for the biker in jeans, never mind a lifesaver, he obvioulsy didn't do ANY rear observation if he missed a bloody battenberg on his tail. You just can't afford to take that sort of risk on a bike
I thought the copper was bang on personally. I've been the recipient of a few bollockings from various coppers in various countries (including one for stopping so suddenly in front of a motor cycle policeman that he fell off his bike....) and have learnt from most of the latter ones (did we ever take any notice of anyone when we were aged 18?). The guy in the Elsie had (IMHO) been tanking it when he saw the copper and panicked - I know I've done exactly the same thing myself - and was very lucky to get away with it. The lad in the Saxo had enough of a lesson without a ticket and probably required a change of underwear anyway having neatly deposited himself, his mates and girlfriend in the scenery so a ticket was really not necessary. The biker had most definitely not been looking, had a bit of an attitude from the start and I think got what he deserved. As for the white line thing, how many times as a car driver have you known there was a bike behind, been on a corner and suddenly had a bike shoot close by up the right side of you giving you a bit of a surprise? Other road users don't expect a vehicle to come past on the DWL so may not be paying as much attention. I know we should all be aware of our surroundings at all times when driving but as was pointed out, these bikes have 0-60 in 3s capabilities so can appear from nowhere in very short time. Bikers tend in my experience (and this is not a dig at bikers) to have a view of what is safe that is different from car drivers, then are ready to blame car drivers for the ensuing accident because the car driver didn't see them. So I think the biker got what he deserved... A damn good lecture and a reminder in his wallet.
t!wedg1e said:
The bloke on the bike was a complete prick - no lifesaver, no mirrors, riding in jeans, what a- and as a so-called professional driver he should know better - and I thought the PC gave the teenage showoff some valuable advice.
I thought the bike did have mirrors, I must've missed that. Don't dispute the lifesaver. Many of us do/ have ridden in jeans, so what? Do you wear a crash helmet in your car? You should, because otherwise one day you MIGHT have an accident leading to head injuries...
My main point was that I thought the cop talked down to them all like a schoolteacher.
By 'no mirrors' I meant he didn't use them otherwise he would have seen the bloody great battenburged T5 with lots of pretty lightbars all over it in them and maybe thought twice about overtaking on DWL, regardless of whether he could do so safely or not.
If you ride in jeans and come off under 20 mph then expect to lose some skin. If you ride in jeans and come off over 20 mph then expect to lose most of one or both your legs - and I've 'scraped up' bikers in jeans after RTAs who've gone on to lose legs so don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. In a car, yes, I may suffer head injury (and I've attended a few of those as well) but I'm far less likely to do so due to the 2 tons of steel/headrest/seatbelt/pretensioners/multiple airbags/crumple zone in my car that never used to come as standard on two wheels when I worked at Mobike. It all comes down to levels of risk - very low risk in a car, much higher risk on a bike.
I agree the copper needs to work on his people skills and came across as a bit overbearing...but given a choice would you rather get stopped and spoken to by a condescending copper or get a tax bill for £60 through the post in a week's time?
gone said:
If you don't like condescending twaddle, then either don't watch Police reality programmes and dont't drive like a t
... and maybe if the Police took time to study a person's driving for a period longer than half a microsecond, they may be able to use rather more of that 'discretion' and not throw the book for trivial issues.
wedg1e said:
... and maybe if the Police took time to study a person's driving for a period longer than half a microsecond, they may be able to use rather more of that 'discretion' and not throw the book for trivial issues.
The three issues on that programme were hardly "trivial", and I think you'll find that where relevant, observation WAS used by the coppers.
Can't believe I'm agreeing with gone, but there it is - aside from his "acting" ability, the copper was spot-on in each case...would be nice to see more like him, but with less patronising and less cheesing-for-the-camera.
wedg1e said:
... and maybe if the Police took time to study a person's driving for a period longer than half a microsecond, they may be able to use rather more of that 'discretion' and not throw the book for trivial issues.
There have been numerous threads where people have complained about the behaviour of the police when they have observed people for longer. Comments along the lines of "Why didn't they stop the driver immediately when they saw them speeding instead of following to see if they did anything worse?"
Seems they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Cat said:
... and maybe if the Police took time to study a person's driving for a period longer than half a microsecond, they may be able to use rather more of that 'discretion' and not throw the book for trivial issues.
There have been numerous threads where people have complained about the behaviour of the police when they have observed people for longer. Comments along the lines of "Why didn't they stop the driver immediately when they saw them speeding instead of following to see if they did anything worse?"
Seems they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Yeah, suppose so. Dunno how many times I've muttered "why is there never a Police car around when you need one" when seeing some d!ckpiece loose on the roads....
I can say that after my motorway transgression in the TVR last year, the officer who pulled me said they'd followed me for 7 miles and couldn't fault my driving other than the speed (I saw him and slowed down), so
to him 
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff