Question to the forum cops
Discussion
There has been a couple of threads a where situation is described in which 99% of people would think the cop in question was being a bit overzealous (read a plonker).
But the cops on this forum tended to keep schtumm or try to defend/justify the actions.
So Guys, are you being monitored?
But the cops on this forum tended to keep schtumm or try to defend/justify the actions.
So Guys, are you being monitored?
Who knows? Probably yes! (to being monitored as PH is open to everyone and anyone)
The problem with being on the other side of the fence means that you tend to get a bit of a different spin on what has actually happened. Like most things in life it is difficult to get a realistic picture of something if you don't get both sides of the story or witness the event.
It is inevitable that you will get some interactions between people in situations where conflict is or has arisen which are over zealous on occasions depending on the mood of both people involved.
Being stopped by a police officer is usually because of a misdemeanour of some kind. This immediately is a situation where conflict happens. Police officers are no different to other people when emotions are running at very high levels even though they are trained to dela with conflict resolution through a model. Depending on the personalities involved at a particular time can be the difference between a positive or negative outcome. Unfortunately on PH we only ever get the negative outcome from the person who feels he/she is being hard done by.
Personally, when I read these sorts of reports and I think I can see a different spin on it, I will offer an explanation threough experience of similar interactions. Sometimes I read them I and I just can't be bothered as there is no point trying without getting a slating. Sometimes I would agree that there has been overzealous conduct by the Police and sometimes I have offered personal help to those in that situation.
I hope that helps.
The problem with being on the other side of the fence means that you tend to get a bit of a different spin on what has actually happened. Like most things in life it is difficult to get a realistic picture of something if you don't get both sides of the story or witness the event.
It is inevitable that you will get some interactions between people in situations where conflict is or has arisen which are over zealous on occasions depending on the mood of both people involved.
Being stopped by a police officer is usually because of a misdemeanour of some kind. This immediately is a situation where conflict happens. Police officers are no different to other people when emotions are running at very high levels even though they are trained to dela with conflict resolution through a model. Depending on the personalities involved at a particular time can be the difference between a positive or negative outcome. Unfortunately on PH we only ever get the negative outcome from the person who feels he/she is being hard done by.
Personally, when I read these sorts of reports and I think I can see a different spin on it, I will offer an explanation threough experience of similar interactions. Sometimes I read them I and I just can't be bothered as there is no point trying without getting a slating. Sometimes I would agree that there has been overzealous conduct by the Police and sometimes I have offered personal help to those in that situation.
I hope that helps.
s2art said:
There has been a couple of threads a where situation is described in which 99% of people would think the cop in question was being a bit overzealous (read a plonker).
But the cops on this forum tended to keep schtumm or try to defend/justify the actions.
So Guys, are you being monitored?
No we are not being monitored.
I like most others on here give examples of real life experiences andour own opinions.
These are not always the 'towing the party line' point of view as you would know by reading the various threads.
Its sometimes extremely difficult to get a point across to whoever without sounding, for want of a better word, 'pompous' because we more than likely have had first hand experience of a particular problem or incident.
I would hope that the basic advice would be the same but the interesting thing about it is that we are all different people and sometimes push our own particular viewpoint across on how we would deal with a particular problem.(Something that you dont get from a Camera!)
I personally dont mind answering questions on any topic, however, it must be born in mind that iam a Traffic Cop and when i read the same old topics about Speed Cameras and speed in general then it does make me whince. Obviously not too much or i wouldnt contribute to this worthwhile site.
On a personal note im pleased that Willcrash is on here and hes been given the reception that he has.
This shows that most of us at ground level are trying our best and with the best intentions but that some of the time are hands are tied. This does not mean that we necessarily agree with the way that a particular problem is being dealt with........the bottom line is that its our job and our families depend on us. This does not however, stop us having a viewpoint which incidently is shared with most of the regular participants to this site.
I was travelling home along the A4 near Heathrow.
A 50 mph restriction is in place. I was in lane 2, when a police vehicle came up behind me with the blue lights flashing.
I moved into lane 1 at the first opportunity, and was surprised they did the same.
I was stopped, and the 2 officers claimed I was travelling over 20 mph above the spped limit.
This was utter bollox, and simply an excuse for a random stop. I can understand them stopping people on the roads around H'row, but why they felt it necessary to lie about the reason is beyond me.
After checking all of my documents, I was allowed to proceed onmy way - What annoyed me was one of them adding the comment "Do watch your speed, on the way home."
Why?
A 50 mph restriction is in place. I was in lane 2, when a police vehicle came up behind me with the blue lights flashing.
I moved into lane 1 at the first opportunity, and was surprised they did the same.
I was stopped, and the 2 officers claimed I was travelling over 20 mph above the spped limit.
This was utter bollox, and simply an excuse for a random stop. I can understand them stopping people on the roads around H'row, but why they felt it necessary to lie about the reason is beyond me.
After checking all of my documents, I was allowed to proceed onmy way - What annoyed me was one of them adding the comment "Do watch your speed, on the way home."
Why?
-bacchus- said:
I was travelling home along the A4 near Heathrow.
A 50 mph restriction is in place. I was in lane 2, when a police vehicle came up behind me with the blue lights flashing.
I moved into lane 1 at the first opportunity, and was surprised they did the same.
I was stopped, and the 2 officers claimed I was travelling over 20 mph above the spped limit.
This was utter bollox, and simply an excuse for a random stop. I can understand them stopping people on the roads around H'row, but why they felt it necessary to lie about the reason is beyond me.
After checking all of my documents, I was allowed to proceed onmy way - What annoyed me was one of them adding the comment "Do watch your speed, on the way home."
Why?
What you dont know is that a car fitting your descrption was involved in a massive bank raid involving firearms and attempted murder of a policeman.... for example....
You just dont know and yes it sounds like it was an excuse to do a check on you. But it is for a good reason and as nothing came of it then fine...
Why lie?
I was stopped in Central London at 4am.
They were just checking what I was doing.
They told me that - I accepted it.
I would have accepted - A vehicle similar to yours....
I was pissed off at being falsely accused of something.
I did not exceed 55mph, never mind the claimed 75- 80mph
I was stopped in Central London at 4am.
They were just checking what I was doing.
They told me that - I accepted it.
I would have accepted - A vehicle similar to yours....
I was pissed off at being falsely accused of something.
I did not exceed 55mph, never mind the claimed 75- 80mph
-bacchus- said:
Why lie?
I was stopped in Central London at 4am.
They were just checking what I was doing.
They told me that - I accepted it.
I would have accepted - A vehicle similar to yours....
I was pissed off at being falsely accused of something.
I did not exceed 55mph, never mind the claimed 75- 80mph
Police cannot just stop you without a reason!
Unless The Terrorism Act applies and authorisation is in force under that legislation (and at the moment it does around the Heathrow area), then they would have to use another excuse to stop you and ask for your driving licence.
If you were near Heathrow, then they did not need a reason to stop you other than you were where you were.
And you have admitted travelling at 55mph which is a 10% breach of the law at that time
1 : I shot you first! 
I've admitted travelling at 55mph - on this forum.
Not at the time.
A more justifiable reason is I was at times to close to the car(s) in front of me. But for them to stand there and tell me I was doing 75 - 80, just pissed me off.
As they had no intention of booking me, and once I'd provided them sufficient detail as to who I was and why I was there. They let me go.
But the friendly off the cuff remark "mind your speed on the way home" was annoying.
I've been stopped for changing lanes too often.
I've been stopped "we saw from your licence plate you're not from around here."
I have been stopped for speeding on many occasions, and accepted it.
I don't mind being stopped when I'm in the wrong....And on the whole I have been relatively lucky, and found the police repsonse to be favourable. And the individual officers amicable.
But officers like these two, will do nothing to improve the image of BiB in general, like the Brunstrom just not as publicly.
Edited for humour -
I've just remembered an incident with D&C where a friend was stopped because his indicator lights were flashing too slowly!!
>> Edited by -bacchus- on Friday 1st August 16:55
Not at the time.
A more justifiable reason is I was at times to close to the car(s) in front of me. But for them to stand there and tell me I was doing 75 - 80, just pissed me off.
As they had no intention of booking me, and once I'd provided them sufficient detail as to who I was and why I was there. They let me go.
But the friendly off the cuff remark "mind your speed on the way home" was annoying.
I've been stopped for changing lanes too often.
I've been stopped "we saw from your licence plate you're not from around here."
I have been stopped for speeding on many occasions, and accepted it.
I don't mind being stopped when I'm in the wrong....And on the whole I have been relatively lucky, and found the police repsonse to be favourable. And the individual officers amicable.
But officers like these two, will do nothing to improve the image of BiB in general, like the Brunstrom just not as publicly.
Edited for humour -
I've just remembered an incident with D&C where a friend was stopped because his indicator lights were flashing too slowly!!
>> Edited by -bacchus- on Friday 1st August 16:55
A couple of the threads I was referring to were nothing to do with traffic offences.
One (a couple of weeks ago I think) was to do with a child taking a piss in a layby leading to the father being accused of being a bad parent. And on the same topic! Shnozz being collared for the same crime at midnight, out in the sticks, while hiding in some bushes.
One (a couple of weeks ago I think) was to do with a child taking a piss in a layby leading to the father being accused of being a bad parent. And on the same topic! Shnozz being collared for the same crime at midnight, out in the sticks, while hiding in some bushes.
My guess is that the police officers who post here will be minded to support their colleagues whether they know them or not because they will have similar training and experiences and therefore know what its like from the other side of the fence.
Therefore they can offer an explanation as to why Officers may have acted like they did, and indeed partially defend them because they have experienced it. Those of us who are not officers will usually have only experinced it from one side. We haven't been out there scraping bodies off the road one minute, dealing with someone who has locked themsleves out the next etc. With the stresses of the job its not suprising that on occasions a police officer mat not be as polite and considerate as we like.
Take for example the officer that accussed someone of driving at 20 mph above the speed limit. It may be that in the past he has given the correct reason for stopping people only to get a torrent of abuse. Therefore has decided to adopt a slightly different policy.
Therefore they can offer an explanation as to why Officers may have acted like they did, and indeed partially defend them because they have experienced it. Those of us who are not officers will usually have only experinced it from one side. We haven't been out there scraping bodies off the road one minute, dealing with someone who has locked themsleves out the next etc. With the stresses of the job its not suprising that on occasions a police officer mat not be as polite and considerate as we like.
Take for example the officer that accussed someone of driving at 20 mph above the speed limit. It may be that in the past he has given the correct reason for stopping people only to get a torrent of abuse. Therefore has decided to adopt a slightly different policy.
s2art said:
A couple of the threads I was referring to were nothing to do with traffic offences.
One (a couple of weeks ago I think) was to do with a child taking a piss in a layby leading to the father being accused of being a bad parent.
If you read through i, I gave quite an indepth explanation as to why. I haven't looked at the thread since but seem to remember stating the officer was wrong to suggest that the parents were bad parents even if he thought they were. The circumstances of the danger they put themsleves in or the reasons why the act could be construed as not in the best possible taste, were I think, adequately catered for! (even if you don't agree with them, that is what it seemed like from my perspective)
madcop said:
The circumstances of the danger they put themsleves in or the reasons why the act could be construed as not in the best possible taste, were I think, adequately catered for! (even if you don't agree with them, that is what it seemed like from my perspective)
And that is exactly why your views are likely to be different from non-police officers. We don't have the same perceptive to necessarilly realise the risk and consequences etc.
And certainly don't have the experence of clearing up the aftermath when it all goes pear shaped.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff