84 in a 30 and 150+ mph not dangerous say police
84 in a 30 and 150+ mph not dangerous say police
Author
Discussion

cuneus

Original Poster:

5,963 posts

272 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
From memory on news:

PC from Telford who recorded "honing his driving skills" has charges dismissed by judge

No police experts in court said it was dangerous

catso

16,459 posts

297 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
If we all had his superior training/skills would 150+ be allowed on Motorways then?

I can't see that 84 in a 'true' 30 can ever be right.

Also, last time I was caught speeding no-one suggested it was dangerous but I still got 'done'.

If speeding was only ever punished when dangerous I think we'd all be happy with that.



>> Edited by catso on Wednesday 18th May 13:14

pgm

2,168 posts

279 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
this might seem bad, but really, i would prefer if the guys were alowed to practice/hone their skills if no other risk.

I dont like what is going on at the moment with the police, but they are only doing what the government tells them.

And it would be hypocritical of me to complain of him doing 160mph on the roads of this country

edited to say i didnt see the 84 in a 30 bit - excessive by anyones standards that one

>> Edited by pgm on Wednesday 18th May 13:19

s2art

18,942 posts

283 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
pgm said:
this might seem bad, but really, i would prefer if the guys were alowed to practice/hone their skills if no other risk.

I dont like what is going on at the moment with the police, but they are only doing what the government tells them.

And it would be hypocritical of me to complain of him doing 160mph on the roads of this country

edited to say i didnt see the 84 in a 30 bit - excessive by anyones standards that one

>> Edited by pgm on Wednesday 18th May 13:19


And if that 30 used to be a 60? 84 might have been excessive, might have been fine, just depends on the circumstances.

pgm

2,168 posts

279 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
sure it does - if it was a previous 60, of which we have a few in oxfordshire then i think its fine, but i dont have the full details

Martin_S

9,939 posts

275 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
s2art said:

pgm said:
this might seem bad, but really, i would prefer if the guys were alowed to practice/hone their skills if no other risk.

I dont like what is going on at the moment with the police, but they are only doing what the government tells them.

And it would be hypocritical of me to complain of him doing 160mph on the roads of this country

edited to say i didnt see the 84 in a 30 bit - excessive by anyones standards that one

>> Edited by pgm on Wednesday 18th May 13:19



And if that 30 used to be a 60? 84 might have been excessive, might have been fine, just depends on the circumstances.


...but whether it was fine or notfrom a safety point of view, the excuse of 'honing his skills' is no longer valid.

There are plenty of NSL country roads which are equally capabable of challenging one's driving skills, so why choose a 30 zone to exercise such speed? 54mph over the limit should have been a ban, period.

autismuk

1,529 posts

270 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
Why not make it official and have laws that say the Police can do whatever they like !

Sorry, this is just pathetic. Would anyone else get away with this kind of thing ?

I cannot believe that in any circumstanced doing 159 mph is safe, nor do I believe that Police encourage any Officer to drive anywhere near that speed.

Police are not physically different to anyone else however good their training (and this suggests their training is rubbish) and that simply does not allow time to react.

Graham B

1,367 posts

313 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
Here's a link to the story on the BBC site...

here

Cheers,
Graham

autismuk

1,529 posts

270 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
Perhaps one of our BiB could enlighten us as to the likely penalty for someone who wasn't a copper for doing 84 in 30 and/or 159 in 70.

3 year ban ? Massive fine ? Jail ?

Mad Dave

7,158 posts

293 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
A biker received a 2 month jail sentence last year for riding at 157mph. Granted, he was overtaking a truck at the time on a dual carriageway but even so, jailtime is ludicrous.

I also agree with the comment here about 84 in a 30 negating the 'honing skills' argument.

scoule

299 posts

314 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
I'm struggling with this one ... maybe 159mph on an empty motorway is safe, but then why do they give us 3 points, £60 fine and f**k our insurance premiums for years for 90 mph on an empty motorway when driving in a safe, sensible manner.

I wonder how the public could get a copy of the video, is that possible? I'd like to see the safe 84mph in a 30mph, just for reference!

Mad Dave

7,158 posts

293 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
I've just read that link and spotted that ROSPA think that 100mph is too dangerous even in emergencies - what utter bullshit. If someone has a gun to my head, I want the Police to get there as soon as humanly possible - if that means travelling at Mach 4 for a couple of miles, fine!

catso

16,459 posts

297 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
autismuk said:


3 year ban ? Massive fine ? Jail ?



My guess is all 3

Flat in Fifth

48,793 posts

281 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
The judge commented that he WAS in control, it is unreasonable to expect plod to chase scrotes without training and the training systems in place are not up to scratch.

Choke on it if you like but Not guilty is Not guilty!

scoule

299 posts

314 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
I wonder how many times the BiBs are going to hear "just honing my driving skills in a new car officer".

Adds a bit of variety to the "when was that laser gun last calibrated" I suppose!

Flat in Fifth

48,793 posts

281 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
Actually after reading that quote from RoSPA I think my membership will be under review come renewal time.

_dobbo_

14,619 posts

278 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
This makes no sense - technically I can understand a not guilty for dangerous driving, even if I don't agree, but how can he be not guilty for speeding? Limit was 30, he was doing 84, that's speeding, on what planet is he not guilty of that offence?


lucozade

2,574 posts

309 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
I'm totally and utterly disgusted that this copper got away with 159mph no matter what the circumstance.

It's hypocritical to find a member of the public guilty of speeding at only 5mph over the 30mph limit yet let a police officer off with 159mph some 89mph over.

I don't care if this guy has had "advanced training" it's still damn right dangerous and he could have caused serious death.

One rule for one one rule for another.

NO RESPECT.

>> Edited by lucozade on Wednesday 18th May 16:00

mindgam3

740 posts

266 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
TO be honest, in the right car with the right training, 160mph on the motorway driven by a copper I wouldn't consider to be that bad...

What I do think is outrageous, is the punishment that a civilian would get for doing this.All the speed campaign croneys are adament that "SPEED KILLS" well, obviously in this case it didn't... if you had the campaigners mentality, the copper would have blown up at about 120mph.

I'm not saying the speed limit should be raised to 160mph, but it does show, under the right circumstances (eg an empty, dry motorway), there's not much wrong with speeds of say 100mph......

Mad Dave

7,158 posts

293 months

Wednesday 18th May 2005
quotequote all
lucozade said:


I don't care if this guy has had "advanced training" it's still damn right dangerous and he could have caused serious death.



Is that different to just plain old normal death?