Whose fault?? Part II
Discussion
I couldn't resist posting this after reading the "whose fault" thread. Just to make all you Joe Public type dudes aware that we aren't protected in any way 
In 1993 (5 years in the job) I got done for 1. Failing to stop at a ped crossing red light 2. Failing to accord precedence at a ped crossing and 3. Overtaking within zigzags at ped crossing, while on my way to a shout.
I had the blue lights on (but no sirens - in those days whenever frontline asked for them traffic got all huffy with us
)
I saw the lights were red, saw the queue of traffic stopped and saw an old dear on the crossing. I slowed to 5 mph, went into first, saw her see me and stop, and drove on thru.
A string of hideous coincidences followed
The guy at the front of the queue happened to be an ex DI who had been required to resign for dipping into POTF (no axe to grind there then)
He complained, I was interviewed by a really sheepish looking Sgt from traffic (not even worthy of C & D it seems!!) and reported for the offences above.
The rest is history. 4 points and £150 at Bmth Mags, Stafford Road, Court number 6.
The best thing about the whole episode was the fact that I was appearing in the same builing at a different court on the same morning as a witness and consequently had to appear in the dock in uniform!
When word of this got out the gallery suddenly filled up with about 25 beaming scrotes (and a few of me mates in the back growling "hang him" during the 'journments)
Bloody fun day out as I recall
I may have an attitude problem, but they started it.
In 1993 (5 years in the job) I got done for 1. Failing to stop at a ped crossing red light 2. Failing to accord precedence at a ped crossing and 3. Overtaking within zigzags at ped crossing, while on my way to a shout.
I had the blue lights on (but no sirens - in those days whenever frontline asked for them traffic got all huffy with us
) I saw the lights were red, saw the queue of traffic stopped and saw an old dear on the crossing. I slowed to 5 mph, went into first, saw her see me and stop, and drove on thru.
A string of hideous coincidences followed
The guy at the front of the queue happened to be an ex DI who had been required to resign for dipping into POTF (no axe to grind there then
) He complained, I was interviewed by a really sheepish looking Sgt from traffic (not even worthy of C & D it seems!!) and reported for the offences above.
The rest is history. 4 points and £150 at Bmth Mags, Stafford Road, Court number 6.
The best thing about the whole episode was the fact that I was appearing in the same builing at a different court on the same morning as a witness and consequently had to appear in the dock in uniform!
When word of this got out the gallery suddenly filled up with about 25 beaming scrotes (and a few of me mates in the back growling "hang him" during the 'journments)
Bloody fun day out as I recall
I may have an attitude problem, but they started it.
A typical example of how we (the police) can never win...If we drive to the letter of the law and arrive at the 999 job late, we're a shower of s.h.i.t. and useless. If we put our foot down and break some laws, we get done...
No wonder some Bib say 'bollox' to it all and do everything to the letter of the law and sod who it upsets..
Street
No wonder some Bib say 'bollox' to it all and do everything to the letter of the law and sod who it upsets..
Street
The laws of the land allows emergency vehicles to break road traffic laws if to adhere to them would hinder/hamper the progress of the vehicle.
If you were tied the floor just about to be impaled on a large snooker cue, would you really want the Bib to be keeping to the 30mph speed limit and queueing in traffic?
No, me neither....
Street
If you were tied the floor just about to be impaled on a large snooker cue, would you really want the Bib to be keeping to the 30mph speed limit and queueing in traffic?
No, me neither....
Street
plotloss said:
Thats not the point, we have a set of rules for EVERYONE.
I just cant stand the we're right because we wear a uniform mentality thats all too prevalent in the Police these days.
It's exactly the point. Are you suggesting that emergency service should be required to stick to speed limits all the time, sod the consequences?
plotloss said:
Thats not the point, we have a set of rules for EVERYONE.
I just cant stand the we're right because we wear a uniform mentality thats all too prevalent in the Police these days.
There are lots of things in life one can't stand...you just have to put up with them....
In reality, the police of yesteryear were more of the mindset, we're the uniform and we're right. Christ, the people who are being recruited nowadays are more likely to be trainee social workers, political correct nutters or human rights/civil liberties enthusiasts....
I know one thing...the public better become more aware of personal security and self defence as the 5'1" tall, 9 stone police officer isn't going to be much good for you.....
Street
The point is that if we are to maintain a semblance of order on the road system of this country then there has to be clear guidance on all sides.
The police have to treat red lights as a give way, thats the law.
They are not allowed to go careering through them without a care in the world.
Either change the law to allow them to do what they like and publicise that fact or hold them accountable when they break the law.
Its simple, but it just cant be both ways, its just not on.
The police have to treat red lights as a give way, thats the law.
They are not allowed to go careering through them without a care in the world.
Either change the law to allow them to do what they like and publicise that fact or hold them accountable when they break the law.
Its simple, but it just cant be both ways, its just not on.
A law was evidently broken, otherwise Madant would have no case to answer.
The careering comment was not pointed at Madants case, it was just exemplifying what can happen.
Nowhere was I saying that they shouldnt be allowed, I am just suggesting that the law surrounding movements of coppers responding to an emergency or otherwise is unclear and is actually in more cases than not against the officers favour.
Whilst this law is there it should be upheld, that is not the fault of the officer, nor the fault of the public it is the law and if they are to be expected to uphold the law then by that same token they should be held accountable by it.
The careering comment was not pointed at Madants case, it was just exemplifying what can happen.
Nowhere was I saying that they shouldnt be allowed, I am just suggesting that the law surrounding movements of coppers responding to an emergency or otherwise is unclear and is actually in more cases than not against the officers favour.
Whilst this law is there it should be upheld, that is not the fault of the officer, nor the fault of the public it is the law and if they are to be expected to uphold the law then by that same token they should be held accountable by it.
plotloss said:
Thats not the point, we have a set of rules for EVERYONE.
I just cant stand the we're right because we wear a uniform mentality thats all too prevalent in the Police these days.
Sadly, I have to agree with you plotless. Because of this type of attitude which is cascading from our leaders, I will no longer drive under blue lights at above the speed limit. Therefore there is no point in putting them on. I am a resource that is in great demand and there are very few of us on duty at any one time. My response times are now hugely extended.
If thats what everyone wants then I am happy to oblige and I will not risk prosecution because someone like you decides they are unhappy with a manouvre that they do not understand and decides to report me.
We have just had a directive that we will not use any mobile phone system whether hard wired/handsfree into the vehicle or not whilst the vehicle is in motion if you are driving.
This is in conjunction with the use of any key pad operated communication system. That nicely puts the use of the new Airwaves sets out of availability by single crewed Police units while in motion
Many moblie units are now single crewed as it gives the appearance of more uniformed presence on the streets!
They followed this up with a warning that whilst on duty (and that includes travelling to and from work in your own car) and you happen to be involved in an RTA, your radio, supplied phone and personal phone will be seized and interrogated for evidence of use at the time of the RTA. If you are found to be using a communication system at that time, that will be evidence to support a charge of dangerous driving against you.
Suits me fine then
1. I cant use the radio when the car is in motion.
2. I leave my telephones at home so they will not be taken from me should someone run into me.
3. I cannot be contacted whilst on duty unless I happen to be out of my Police vehicle
Plotless, Are you by any cahnce a Police Policy advisor?
>> Edited by gone on Friday 23 July 12:13
Surely that is the fault of having to patrol on your own rather than with another officer who could respond to requests on the radio?
Change the law, fill your boots do what you want.
I'm quite happy with that.
Until that time comes however then you should abide by the preposterous laws that the rest of us have to live under and rightly so, for you are only a member of the public yourself.
Change the law, fill your boots do what you want.
I'm quite happy with that.
Until that time comes however then you should abide by the preposterous laws that the rest of us have to live under and rightly so, for you are only a member of the public yourself.
Streetcop said:
I know one thing...the public better become more aware of personal security and self defence as the 5'1" tall, 9 stone police officer isn't going to be much good for you.....
Street
Surely you jest? Lay a hand on a scrote and find yourself hauled up in court for assault?
Gone..
Although I don't employ the same rules as yourself, (I know which one of us is more sensible and it's not me..), I must
to your way of thinking...
The comments from Plotless and the original thread example lead officers down the path which you describe. The public who originally complain about police driving etc are the first to be heard in complaints about response times. You can't win..
Street
Although I don't employ the same rules as yourself, (I know which one of us is more sensible and it's not me..), I must
to your way of thinking... The comments from Plotless and the original thread example lead officers down the path which you describe. The public who originally complain about police driving etc are the first to be heard in complaints about response times. You can't win..
Street
plotloss said:
......for you are only a member of the public yourself.
Correct, a member of the public who has to live life by a strict code of discipline whilst being paid to do a job. That includes restrictions on private lfe which are punishable by court marshall if breached.
I have no problem with 'you are only citizens' because we are. If we are not different in any way, then treat us like everyone else too!
Policy is that there shhould be as many marked units on patrol as possible. There are certain health and safety implicatiions attached to that but these are conveneiently forgotton in the quest to deliver a service that cannot cope with the demands that are put on it! Double crew everyone and the amount of jobs covered per working day will plummet!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff