140mph convoy on M74
Discussion
EU_Foreigner said:
I specifically left out the Serious collisions, commercial vehicles etc from your quote as I have no problem with resources for that. I do have problems with allocating resources for traffic offences and yes, I do think that roads self police anyway. If the roads are busy, it is difficult to achieve the maximum limit on it, and if they are empty, it does not matter than any way. Keep the automated cameras in relevant areas as an observant driver can spot them anyway which means that they would have spotted other risks as well.
So no drink/drug drive enforcement, No insurance enforcement, No vehicle condition enforcement etc for private vehicles?Only for trucks?
Serious collisions only investigated so that the Coroner can understand why/how somebody died, no justice from it?
vonhosen said:
The Selfish Gene said:
My burglarised house they did nothing - no door to door
No officer attended the scene?Made no assessment for scene of crime investigation?
You know for sure no door to door at all?
The Selfish Gene said:
The lead they had when the guy threatened to shoot me was his number plate, within one minute of him speeding away and a description
What sort of weapon were you threatened with?Rifle?
Pistol?
Shotgun?
What was the feedback with regards to why no actions taken?
I've been in that position, but I understand why they couldn't prosecute in that situation, despite somebody not only threatening but actually trying to kill me.
The Selfish Gene said:
as you know the Motorbike, they knew which building it was in - just not exactly which flat.
Yes we know about that one, the tracker company couldn't provide sufficient information to successfully apply for a warrant.
k about with quoting - so apologies for that.1. Burglary - yes 100% sure - as I live in a very 'local' place and I know the head of the neighbourhood watch, and nothing was done, at all. Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
2. Shooter loser - it was a pistol, they said they didn't have enough evidence and never found the guy. Could have been a fake plate I suppose (had a baby on board sticker in back of car so seems unlikely). Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
3. Stolen motorbike - the tracker company gave exactly enough evidence. It was within 5 feet. The police couldn't get a warrant because it was a choice of two flats. Next door. Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
No matter which way you spin it - 140mph on a motorway in this case was a victimless crime. Yet the police people are going way beyond what they do for other crimes.
That is a fact. It's why a lot of people on the forum are reacting to it.
The Selfish Gene said:
can't be arsed to fk about with quoting - so apologies for that.
1. Burglary - yes 100% sure - as I live in a very 'local' place and I know the head of the neighbourhood watch, and nothing was done, at all. Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
2. Shooter loser - it was a pistol, they said they didn't have enough evidence and never found the guy. Could have been a fake place I suppose (had a baby on board sticker in back of car so seems unlikely). Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
3. Stolen motorbike - the tracker company gave exactly enough evidence. It was within 5 feet. The police couldn't get a warrant because it was a choice of two flats. Next door. Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
No matter which way you spin it - 140mph on a motorway in this case was a victimless crime. Yet the police people are going way beyond what they do for other crimes.
That is a fact. It's why a lot of people on the forum are reacting to it.
1. No Police attendance at all?k about with quoting - so apologies for that.1. Burglary - yes 100% sure - as I live in a very 'local' place and I know the head of the neighbourhood watch, and nothing was done, at all. Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
2. Shooter loser - it was a pistol, they said they didn't have enough evidence and never found the guy. Could have been a fake place I suppose (had a baby on board sticker in back of car so seems unlikely). Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
3. Stolen motorbike - the tracker company gave exactly enough evidence. It was within 5 feet. The police couldn't get a warrant because it was a choice of two flats. Next door. Certainly not a public request for any CCTV or in car footage.
No matter which way you spin it - 140mph on a motorway in this case was a victimless crime. Yet the police people are going way beyond what they do for other crimes.
That is a fact. It's why a lot of people on the forum are reacting to it.
You'd have to have spoken to all local residents to know, not a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator.
2. No local newspaper at all?
3. We've been through this, one of two flats isn't sufficient, they couldn't provide sufficient to get a warrant.
4. They haven't gone way beyond, they've stuck post on social media asking if there are witnesses following an event that would have naturally been witnessed by a large number of people & stand out in people's memory.
vonhosen said:
1. No Police attendance at all?
You'd have to have spoken to all local residents to know, not a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator.
2. No local newspaper at all?
3. We've been through this, one of two flats isn't sufficient, they couldn't provide sufficient to get a warrant.
1. no sorry, the police attended at the time. There was no follow up, no knocking on doors. Nothing. (apart from the letter with the victim support number) no public checking for footage for CCTV or dashcamYou'd have to have spoken to all local residents to know, not a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator.
2. No local newspaper at all?
3. We've been through this, one of two flats isn't sufficient, they couldn't provide sufficient to get a warrant.
2. local newspaper? definitely not. Just another victim support letter. no public checking for footage for CCTV or dashcam
3. One of two flats isn't sufficient - let's ignore the fact that's the easiest thing in the world for a thief to use to their advantage, there was still no public checking for footage for CCTV or dashcam
Let's not try and dilute my point in relation to this thread.
The police did literally the bare minimum and didn't remotely try to solve the three crimes (in 6 months) I've mentioned.
They did not, at any time, go public and request the general public supply any footage. IN three crimes which very much had a victim.
The 140mph incident didn't have any victims. The police response is embarrassing.
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
The Selfish Gene said:
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
vonhosen said:
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.
Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
Why not re-allocate some Roads Policing officers to Burglary/Robbery teams?Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
Strudul said:
vonhosen said:
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.
Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
Why not re-allocate some Roads Policing officers to Burglary/Robbery teams?Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
That said, numbers have been cut to the bone in Roads Policing (which is why you see people saying all the time they now don't see Police cars on arterial routes etc) by not replacing those that leave through natural wastage, whilst those numbers have gone elsewhere.
vonhosen said:
The Selfish Gene said:
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
The Selfish Gene said:
vonhosen said:
The Selfish Gene said:
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
EU_Foreigner said:
Any resource time spent on speed related investigations is wasting time that could have been spent on real crimes. More lives are affected by real crime than speeding.
The offence was Dangerous Driving (although speed is clearly part of that).What do you mean by "real crime" ?
Do you think that the only people affected by fatal and serious injury collisions (or even slight injury collisions) are the people directly involved in the incidents ?
Clue; they're not. Family, friends, doctors, nurses, ambulance staff, firefighters, police officers, local authorities, employers, carers, ... This could be a big list, feel free to add to it ...
If someone is killed or seriously injured on the roads the effects don't just stop when those involved are carted off to hospital, the vehicles are recovered and the debris is swept up.
The effects for many last a lifetime.
Enforcement and prosecution of offenders who choose to behave like muppets is fine.
Most people who are victims of low level crime get over it.
Those who lose loved ones or who have to care for loved ones who suffer life changing injuries on the roads very often do not.
vonhosen said:
The Selfish Gene said:
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
Red 4 said:
EU_Foreigner said:
Any resource time spent on speed related investigations is wasting time that could have been spent on real crimes. More lives are affected by real crime than speeding.
The offence was Dangerous Driving (although speed is clearly part of that).What do you mean by "real crime" ?
Do you think that the only people affected by fatal and serious injury collisions (or even slight injury collisions) are the people directly involved in the incidents ?
Clue; they're not. Family, friends, doctors, nurses, ambulance staff, firefighters, police officers, local authorities, employers, carers, ... This could be a big list, feel free to add to it ...
If someone is killed or seriously injured on the roads the effects don't just stop when those involved are carted off to hospital, the vehicles are recovered and the debris is swept up.
The effects for many last a lifetime.
Enforcement and prosecution of offenders who choose to behave like muppets is fine.
Most people who are victims of low level crime get over it.
Those who lose loved ones or who have to care for loved ones who suffer life changing injuries on the roads very often do not.
I would expect that if the resource funds were allocated to real crime police that for example the number of attacks on shop keepers might go down. Those victims don't consider it a low level crime and those that have been stabbed certainly don't.
It is whether your view is that lack of enforcement leads to a wild west on the road or not, which I don't think will be the case. But increase in crime fighting resources might actually reduce the overall pain that crime causes and most certainly would increase the positive way the general public would view the police force.
JNW1 said:
vonhosen said:
The Selfish Gene said:
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
Roads Policing officers are responsible for investigating Roads Policing matters.Burglary/Robbery teams investigate Burglary/Robbery matters.
Each will invest resources where they believe they can get results within their own field.
Look at the Policing plans & see how little they refer to traffic matters.
JNW1 said:
Which begs a question as to whether the distribution of Police resources is correct? Feels like the Roads Policing teams are able to pursue at least some offences quite vigorously and extensively while the Burglary/Robbery teams often don't seem to be able to get past first base; therefore, should some of the former be redeployed (and if necessary retrained) to the latter? I suspect The Selfish Gene's not alone in thinking the authorities don't always have their priorities quite right.....
The numbers involved would make little impact and someone needs to be around to do the "Must do" tasks. This needs a critical mass of trained roads traffic police. A serious RTA needs a lot of resources, likewise, escorts, pursuit management major events. Most major incidents (Often real crime) cause traffic chaos, so again they are gainfully employed. Now when not being used for that, it makes sense to use their skills for other things. However they still need to be available at short notice so that limits what they can be assigned to. I am not a huge fan of enforcing the speed limit, but Roads policing do way more than that and are pretty much the only ones trying to deal with dangerous driving and vehicles. Let's put things into perspective, you are far more likely to get injured, killed in an RTA than by "Real" crime. If resources followed risk than nearly all of the policing budget would be traffic.
Edited by Graveworm on Monday 13th August 19:09
EU_Foreigner said:
Do you assume that by removing enforcement like it is now, that the death rate would go up significantly? Those are caused by inappropriate speed if speed was an issue at all in the accident. Enforcement does not stop joy riders or excessive speeding anyway but it only catches those that do 36 in a 30 for example.
I would expect that if the resource funds were allocated to real crime police that for example the number of attacks on shop keepers might go down. Those victims don't consider it a low level crime and those that have been stabbed certainly don't.
It is whether your view is that lack of enforcement leads to a wild west on the road or not, which I don't think will be the case. But increase in crime fighting resources might actually reduce the overall pain that crime causes and most certainly would increase the positive way the general public would view the police force.
There isn't much speed enforcement done by Roads Policing Units these days but you were inferring that police should concentrate on "real crime" because that affects more people.I would expect that if the resource funds were allocated to real crime police that for example the number of attacks on shop keepers might go down. Those victims don't consider it a low level crime and those that have been stabbed certainly don't.
It is whether your view is that lack of enforcement leads to a wild west on the road or not, which I don't think will be the case. But increase in crime fighting resources might actually reduce the overall pain that crime causes and most certainly would increase the positive way the general public would view the police force.
I was merely pointing out the number of people that are affected both directly and indirectly if someone is killed or seriously injured on the roads.
Obviously, family and friends will be affected the most - emotionally, practically and financially.
People often see speeding ( and other driving offences) as victimless crimes - which they are until it goes wrong.
The aftermath though, when it goes wrong, can be absolutely horrendous.
As for the rest of your post, in short, it is not always "criminals" that cause collisions so I don't see what effect targeting car thieves would have on casualty stats.
Having said that, every cop loves to lock up car thieves, so they are targeted anyway (and it is often Roads Policing who do the ops).
I see your point about perception.
It's nothing new. The police have always been accused of picking easy targets.
The reality is it is not true.
Roads policing has been decimated in recent years.
Edited by Red 4 on Monday 13th August 19:23
Red 4 said:
There isn't much speed enforcement done by Roads Policing Units these days but you were inferring that police should concentrate on "real crime" because that affects more people.
I was merely pointing out the number of people that are affected both directly and indirectly if someone is killed or seriously injured on the roads.
Obviously, family and friends will be affected the most - emotionally, practically and financially.
...
Roads policing has been decimated in recent years.
I very much welcome that road policing has become decimated in recent years - it has become almost entirely speed focused, and not focused around poor driving. It doesn't take any account of danger and risk to life whatsoever.I was merely pointing out the number of people that are affected both directly and indirectly if someone is killed or seriously injured on the roads.
Obviously, family and friends will be affected the most - emotionally, practically and financially.
...
Roads policing has been decimated in recent years.
I still witness police 4x4s sitting on bridges on the M6 when it's completely empty zapping people daring to do 90 on a dry road. Until I see these die I will support further decimation of police funding. The less money in the system for such things, the better.
The Selfish Gene said:
vonhosen said:
1. No Police attendance at all?
You'd have to have spoken to all local residents to know, not a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator.
2. No local newspaper at all?
3. We've been through this, one of two flats isn't sufficient, they couldn't provide sufficient to get a warrant.
1. no sorry, the police attended at the time. There was no follow up, no knocking on doors. Nothing. (apart from the letter with the victim support number) no public checking for footage for CCTV or dashcamYou'd have to have spoken to all local residents to know, not a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator.
2. No local newspaper at all?
3. We've been through this, one of two flats isn't sufficient, they couldn't provide sufficient to get a warrant.
2. local newspaper? definitely not. Just another victim support letter. no public checking for footage for CCTV or dashcam
3. One of two flats isn't sufficient - let's ignore the fact that's the easiest thing in the world for a thief to use to their advantage, there was still no public checking for footage for CCTV or dashcam
Let's not try and dilute my point in relation to this thread.
The police did literally the bare minimum and didn't remotely try to solve the three crimes (in 6 months) I've mentioned.
They did not, at any time, go public and request the general public supply any footage. IN three crimes which very much had a victim.
The 140mph incident didn't have any victims. The police response is embarrassing.
I like many others would rather they focus their energies on tangible crime with victims. Like my good self (and many others) can easily show examples of.
I was once pulled over at 2am for doing 85 on an empty dual-carriageway. Meanwhile, a good friend's home was broken into that same night about 5 miles from where I was pulled over. However, when he spoke to Police "no units were able to attend".
Traffic officers have to serve as Constables for a number of years before transferring over to Road Policing, so there's no reason why resources could be better allocated to more serious (proper) crimes with victims. And there's no reason why the cops that pulled me over couldn't attend a burglary.
Vonhosen - do you work for the Police?
Edited by TobyTR on Tuesday 14th August 00:17
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff