Things that annoy you beyond reason...(Vol. 6)

[Bobberoo99]

227bhp said:

When you get spotted by a 'panda' car and they don't know how fast you were going, but pull you anyway. Then they say:
"Well I had to do xx mph to catch you up, therefore you must have been speeding!" This is the bit that annoys me. Then:
"Er, no, it doesn't quite work like that, you see..."
"Don't argue otherwise i'll nick you!" Or words to that effect.

Panda car, now there is a phrase you don't see much these days

To offset this, I was stopped doing around 42mph in a 30mph zone on the way into work for an early start (0400) the road was empty and I'd not long stopped and picked up a colleague, I noticed the car gaining, then pacing me so eased off which is when the blues came on, I pulled over and they pulled up alongside me, windows down, a cordial good morning from both cars followed by a nod and smile from the two officers and a "watch your speed mate, I know it's early but be careful!" then they were on their way!!

[glenrobbo]

Bobberoo99 said:

To offset this, I was stopped doing around 42mph in a 30mph zone on the way into work for an early start (0400) the road was empty and I'd not long stopped and picked up a colleague, I noticed the car gaining, then pacing me so eased off which is when the blues came on, I pulled over and they pulled up alongside me, windows down, a cordial good morning from both cars followed by a nod and smile from the two officers and a "watch your speed mate, I know it's early but be careful!" then they were on their way!!

A policeman calling you "Mate"?
Now that is really annoying beyond reason.

[V8mate]

glenrobbo said:

A policeman calling you "Mate"?
Now that is really annoying beyond reason.

Catch part of any TV Police documentary, and they're all at it. Even to people they're arresting. That would seriously piss me off!

[glenrobbo]

V8mate said:

glenrobbo said:

A policeman calling you "Mate"?
Now that is really annoying beyond reason.

Catch part of any TV Police documentary, and they're all at it. Even to people they're arresting. That would seriously piss me off!

They should show a bit of respect to the elderly villains they're arresting.
Old school police would give you an accidental elbow in the teeth.
You knew where you were then.

Nowadays it's all softly softly PC crap.
"Mate". Pah!

[droopsnoot]

V8mate said:

glenrobbo said:

A policeman calling you "Mate"?
Now that is really annoying beyond reason.

Catch part of any TV Police documentary, and they're all at it. Even to people they're arresting. That would seriously piss me off!

And yet, in the earlier "Traffic Cops" and the like, I distinctly recall several occasions where the police picked people up on that, saying "I'm not your mate" if the random person they were interviewing referred to them that way.

Standards are slipping.

[V8mate]

droopsnoot said:

V8mate said:

glenrobbo said:

A policeman calling you "Mate"?
Now that is really annoying beyond reason.

Catch part of any TV Police documentary, and they're all at it. Even to people they're arresting. That would seriously piss me off!

And yet, in the earlier "Traffic Cops" and the like, I distinctly recall several occasions where the police picked people up on that, saying "I'm not your mate" if the random person they were interviewing referred to them that way.

Standards are slipping.

Don't know about slipping, but the Police is certainly riddled by double standards.

[glenrobbo]

V8mate said:

Don't know about slipping, but the Police is certainly riddled by double standards.

Double standards? I think not.

Police forces today are so under-resourced that they are having to make do with half standards.

[Screechmr2]

Calling someone a celebrity because they've been on love island, x factor etc. No, that person is best described as a gameshow contestant or a competition entrant.

[Allan L]

Screechmr2 said:

Calling someone a celebrity because they've been on love island, x factor etc. No, that person is best described as a gameshow contestant or a competition entrant.

or because they are actors, possibly even actors who have been seen on television.
Quite reputable quiz shows seem to need a "celebrity" series when people whom most of us have never heard of are teamed-up to display staggering levels of ignorance in public.

[Bobberoo99]

Screechmr2 said:

Calling someone a celebrity because they've been on love island, x factor etc. No, that person is best described as a gameshow contestant or a competition entrant vacuous waste of oxygen.

FTFY.

[Fastdruid]

Search results that end up on picclick or ebay...but don't actually link to anything you searched for.

The only thing that is related is the preview, as soon as you click on it you get something totally different with what you searched for originally nowhere to be found.

Not sure if this link will work but here goes
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&sxsrf...

None of the results actually contains what was searched for.

[Etypephil]

glenrobbo said:

V8mate said:

Don't know about slipping, but the Police is certainly riddled by double standards.

Double standards? I think not.

Police forces today are so under-resourced that they are having to make do with half standards.

What really annoys me is people who swallow far left propaganda without question. Police forces are far from under resourced, and there are more cops now per head of population than at almost any time:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/23/police...

The problem is that the selection standards have fallen to the point where decent potential recruits are no longer attracted, and that the vast resources they have are squandered on toys instead of patrols and detection.

[MartG]

Etypephil said:

glenrobbo said:

V8mate said:

Don't know about slipping, but the Police is certainly riddled by double standards.

Double standards? I think not.

Police forces today are so under-resourced that they are having to make do with half standards.

What really annoys me is people who swallow far left propaganda without question. Police forces are far from under resourced, and there are more cops now per head of population than at almost any time:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/23/police...

You seem to have missed the bit in the article "The crime levels of 1961 and today are markedly different. In 1961, 806,900 crimes were committed whereas ONS data shows that 5.2 million crimes were recorded this year, a 13 per cent rise from the year before. " - so much fewer officers per crime

[Etypephil]

MartG said:

Etypephil said:

glenrobbo said:

V8mate said:

Don't know about slipping, but the Police is certainly riddled by double standards.

Double standards? I think not.

Police forces today are so under-resourced that they are having to make do with half standards.

What really annoys me is people who swallow far left propaganda without question. Police forces are far from under resourced, and there are more cops now per head of population than at almost any time:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/23/police...

You seem to have missed the bit in the article "The crime levels of 1961 and today are markedly different. In 1961, 806,900 crimes were committed whereas ONS data shows that 5.2 million crimes were recorded this year, a 13 per cent rise from the year before. " - so much fewer officers per crime

Not at all. The crime levels are higher now because the scruffy short fat unfit tattooed morons who pass for cops these days find it easier to sit in their offices, cars and helicopters than to prevent crime by patrolling a beat, and investigating those crimes which actually matter.

[MartG]

Etypephil said:

MartG said:

Etypephil said:

glenrobbo said:

V8mate said:

Don't know about slipping, but the Police is certainly riddled by double standards.

Double standards? I think not.

Police forces today are so under-resourced that they are having to make do with half standards.

What really annoys me is people who swallow far left propaganda without question. Police forces are far from under resourced, and there are more cops now per head of population than at almost any time:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/23/police...

You seem to have missed the bit in the article "The crime levels of 1961 and today are markedly different. In 1961, 806,900 crimes were committed whereas ONS data shows that 5.2 million crimes were recorded this year, a 13 per cent rise from the year before. " - so much fewer officers per crime

Not at all. The crime levels are higher now because the scruffy short fat unfit tattooed morons who pass for cops these days find it easier to sit in their offices, cars and helicopters than to prevent crime by patrolling a beat, and investigating those crimes which actually matter.

You seem to have a very simplistic view indeed of crime and policing

[captain_cynic]

MartG said:

You seem to have a very simplistic view indeed of crime and policing

You're arguing with a guy who thinks it's a "left wing" conspiracy... Sometimes you need to simply accept that some people are idiots and arguing with them will just drag you down to their level where they'll beat you with experience.

[Etypephil]

MartG said:

You seem to have a very simplistic view indeed of crime and policing

Perhaps you can explain why, as police recruitment standards dropped, and visible police presence disappeared, crime rates have risen. There is a parallel on the roads; when there is a marked police car patrolling, courteous legal driving by all can be observed; no lane hogging, no tailgating, no last second dashes from lane # 3 to an exit slip road.
The greatest deterent to any law breaking is the fear of detection, followed by the fear of draconian punishment if caught. If the appearance of a cop can be reasonably expected, even randomly, most will behave.

[Etypephil]

captain_cynic said:

MartG said:

You seem to have a very simplistic view indeed of crime and policing

You're arguing with a guy who thinks it's a "left wing" conspiracy... Sometimes you need to simply accept that some people are idiots and arguing with them will just drag you down to their level where they'll beat you with experience.

"where they'll beat you with experience."

QED.

[V8mate]

MartG said:

You seem to have a very simplistic view indeed of crime and policing

I would agree that the Police are not under-funded. But, whilst they are in part responsible for poorer detection rates, I put an increasing level of blame on the political and judicial system, who have watered down sentencing and the propensity to apply a sentence.

Whereas once, local judges would be feared by name, they are now more often wished for by name, as the scrotes know that they'll be dealt with leniently. This, in a political culture which is on its head with regard to punishing those crimes which the public find most abhorrent/anti-social, has given the Police an ever more indifferent criminal class to deal with.

But they're still not very good at deploying resources.

Given this is a chat forum, I think there'll only ever be brief and simplistic views given though. As, indeed, mine is. Because I'd rather drink my coffee

[Etypephil]

V8mate said:

I would agree that the Police are not under-funded. But, whilst they are in part responsible for poorer detection rates, I put an increasing level of blame on the political and judicial system, who have watered down sentencing and the propensity to apply a sentence.

Whereas once, local judges would be feared by name, they are now more often wished for by name, as the scrotes know that they'll be dealt with leniently. This, in a political culture which is on its head with regard to punishing those crimes which the public find most abhorrent/anti-social, has given the Police an ever more indifferent criminal class to deal with.

But they're still not very good at deploying resources.

Given this is a chat forum, I think there'll only ever be brief and simplistic views given though. As, indeed, mine is. Because I'd rather drink my coffee