pdc.
We agree that under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994, Scedule 2 (3A) a vehicle when it is being used for police purposes is entitled to a Nil Licence (no duty payable). But it would seem a Licence still has to be displayed.
BUT, under Regulation 6, Road vehicles (Reg and Lic) Regs 2002
- where a vehicle licence or NIL licence has been delivered to the Sec of State with an application for a replacement licence
no licence need to be fixed or exhibited on the vehicle
to which the Licence relates until the replacement licence is obtained.
It is significant that you notice the absence at the start of a new month and that others of the Forces Fleet are also not displaying.
It would therefore point to the fact that they are in the process of renewing their Nil licences for number of their vehicles bought in bulk at the same time. They do not commit the offence of failing to exhibit a Licence under Sect 33 V.E. & Reg Act 94.
DVD
|
Ah, but one of them is the vehicle which I reported on 21st July. I was told then, by a Chief Inspector, that it was an oversight.
Does it really take 7 weeks to get a replacement?
Have posted a picture of one of the offending vehicles, parked on a double yellow, at phoenix.myhomeserver.com/onerule.jpg
|
Sorry cannot help any more.
Your beef is now with your local constabulary.
DVD
|
Having just read Sect 33 V.E. & Reg Act 94,
1)
A person is guilty of an offence if?
(a) he uses, or keeps, on a public road a vehicle in respect of which vehicle excise duty is chargeable,
It would appear to only be an offence to not display a licence on a vehicle on which V.E.D is chargeable. As there is no charge to an emergency vehicle I guess that there is no issue here. Why then do most dispaly licences?
Think I will still contact the local rag though, as journalists never let the truth get in the way of a story.
|
Pdc
Read Section 1 of that Act
All vehicles are chargeable but only some are exempt from payment.
Note...and shall be paid on a Licence to be taken out...
Otherwise Old Vehicles (Over 25 y o a) would not be displaying Licences which they do as also exempt from charge.
Bit of loop legislation.
DVD
|
Thank goodness I am a computer programmer, and not someone who has to interpret regulations!
|
I think you really need to get out more. As a Police Officer you are the kind of person we really do like to meet on a daily basis. How do you know that the officer involved hadn't just told mum that little johnny had been killed in a road accident. After dealing with a traumatic incident, it can be very difficult to smile politely when some ill-informed busybody comes banging on your car demanding answers to some irrelavant matter.
|
midlifecrisis, I think that, in this particular case, your comments are little unfair. IMO pdc has a valid point and if you read the previous thread you will note that pdc reports that the chief phoned him to explain about the oversight. The chief did not say that the police car did not have to display a disc.
IMO this is not an anti-police thread. I would like to know why these vehicles do not display a valid disc. After all they are after us if we are not displaying one properly (it fell off in a gust of wind, someone nicked it etc.) They should set a good example.
|
|
|
I think you're being a tiny bit peevish here, MLC.
I'm sure we all appreciate what a difficult job the police do; that is, after all, what they are paid for.
But you're also meant to be exemplars of the laws and behavioural codes you are employed to uphold and enforce. So, much as you might like to behave like an ordinary punter and tell the complainant where to take his observation, you can't.
This isn't the first time, either privately or professionally, I've come across this situation and while it's no reflection of the abilities of the force it does sometimes hint at an inefficient admin system.
Do allow the public their occasional (and understandable) schadenfreude. And don't call it irrelevant. That's the price you pay for being a copper.
|
|
|
midlifecrisis, I hardly think that it is an irrelevant matter. How can the public have respect for the police if they themselves do not adhere to the regulations that they are there to enforce? Is it a case of one rule for them and another for us?
Althought my knowledge on the issue of vehicle licencing is minimal, from what I have read from the links to the regs online, I am hardly ill-informed. Indeed the Chief Inspector who responded to my previous complaint confirmed that they should display valid licence discs.
A very close childhood friend of mine is a police officer of 3 years (Walsall, Green Lane), and through her I have a few more friends now, who also happen to be coppers. I have a great respect for them and from hanging around with them I know just what a difficult, thankless job they have, and I would not want to do it.
That said, I do believe that they have to be whiter than white. I do realise that the fact a police vehicle is not displaying a valid licence is more to do with the admin staff than the police drivers, but the officers themselves should surely see the hypocrisy in driving an apparantly unlicenced vehicle. They are the first people to jump on Joe Public when he doesnt display a disc.
If I had seen a police officer shoplifting, and reported them, would I be a busy-body then, or should I just let it go, because they had probably just told little Johnnys mum they had just scraped him off the road.
A law is a law, and should apply to everyone.
|
According to case law, probably the latter.
If you saw a police officer shoplifting, you should be aware of R v Self [1992]. An employee of a shop made a citizen's arrest on a person who walked out of a store with a bar of chocolate. The 'shoplifter' turned out to be a police officer and the jury believed his story that he had been under a lot of stress and that there was therefore no dishonest intent, necessary to prove the offence of theft.
Further, because no offence had been committed (i.e., no theft, merely a removal of the chocolate bar) there was no power to detain under s.24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The defendant was also charged with an assault while resisting arrest - but there was no assault either as he was in fact not lawfully detained and was therefore within his rights to use force to resist arrest.
That of course doesn't apply to an arrest by a police officer, because a police officer needs only a suspicion of an offence to make an arrest, whereas a citizen must have actually seen a real offence.
Anyway, this thread is now completely off topic.
|
Tell you what, pdc... if it matters that much to you, why don't you write to the Chief Constable of your force, rather than wittering about it on here?
The bottom line is, none of us KNOW why these vehicles aren't displaying a disc - ours do, which seems a bit pointless since they clearly show 'nil' duty (except for CID & other coverts - which show an amount paid that isn't - plenty of room for another conspiracy theory there!)
So... naughty policeman. Or naughty support staff fleet administrator. Or whatever. as a matter of interest, if you HAD a tax disc and it HAD fallen off, I think you'd find that although technically you'd commit the offence of 'failing to display' in these enlightened times you'd not be prosecuted - as long as you could show the disc was valid at the relevant time. So if WE can't be bothered, can you...??!
|
|
I did, yesterday, and I cc'ed the divisional commander in on the letter too.
|
Neil,
You may find in these enlightened times that unless you are at the vehicle with disc in hand when it is not displayed then you may get off.
But if you get a ticket for not displaying then it will end up going to the local courts as the view is you could have been displaying the genuine disc on another vehicle.
Seen it done to a family member where they got a parking ticket for not displaying , the disc had fallen onto the floor due to the hot weather. On return to the car found the ticket , chased after the warden to show tax disc and ticket. Warden replied you could have just taken the disc out of your pocket. Calculating the cost of losing time from work to go to court decided it was cheaper just to pay the ticket and buy a better device for holding disc on windscreen.
|
So, your telling me what I said isn't the case, because a family member decided it wasn't worth finding out whether it was true or not? Well, fair enough I suppose, but I stand by what I said!
Neil
|
pdc,
The Police are screaming out for people like you - an independent witness with investgative skills - why don't you try looking out for some real "crimes" instead, I'm sure your fellow ratepayers and the local constabulary would appreciate you more.
|
PU, I cannot agree with your sarcastic tone here. This is a motoring forum. Over on other threads ten's of thousands of words have been written about speed cameras and other contentious issues regarding motoring law and how it is enforced.
Should those posters who disagree with the authority's position "try looking out for 'real' crimes instead"?
Are you also saying that pdc's observation is irrelevant and should go un-reported, and un-debated? Do you not think police vehicles should conform to the law? And I am sure that pdc as well as everyone else is on the look-out for so-called "real" crimes as well.
FWIW, and IMO, most current and ex- serving officers (e.g. MLC and DVD) add tremendous value to this forum as well as people such as yourself who are expert in law. To me it is what makes the BR so special.
Now, I am really rather surprised and disappointed by some of these views.
|
OK Sarcastic sounding remark withdrawn.
The intention was to draw out a debate behind the questions. If a member of the motoring public was stopped in a fully street legal vehilce,say a pre-74 tax exempt car displaying no VEL (which is the nearest we get to driving around with a free tax disc), this would be the response from many a BRmer if the car was stopped by a pedantic patrol. In principle I agree, free or not the Police cars should be put off the road until the disc appears, GMP's admin must be a bit adrift here and the Officers should have the bottle to refuse to drive them. Pdc - you as a citzen are entitled to report the VEL offences to the LVLO, you'll find witness statements on-line. Go on do it ! See what happens and report back to us.
|
PDC makes an observation about road traffic law which throws up an interesting issue and chooses, quite legitimately,to pursue it.
The response here? He is a 'busybody' who should 'get out more', stop 'wittering', and look out for some "real crimes" instead.
Sounds just like the response of ordinary motorists stopped for speeding when the papers are full of murders. But it's not. It's the response of the law enforcement community to someone gently pointing out that they, too, make mistakes.
Thoroughly unimpressive, guys. Just take it on the chin.
|
Pugugly,
Now I am really going to appear to be a real busy body, but I actually did report a neighbour for dealing drugs from his house last year. He is inside now. Was sensible enough to report him via a friend in Birmingham CID, rather than the local police here in Manchester, to make sure there was no suspision of me being the grass.
|
"Divisional Commander"?? If your force still has divisional commanders, perhaps that explains why they can't get it together with the VEL's. Did you CC the Pope and the Queen as well, just in case the divisionbal Comander treats this with the ... er, respect it deserves? And did you remember to use the GREEN ink??!
|
This is not a conspiracy theory, neil.
Pdc made an interesting observation and was requesting clarification regarding the regulations. He is not ?wittering? here but responding to points made by others.
My 1968 car HAS to display a tax disc which, according to you, is a bit pointless since it clearly shows 'nil' duty.
And, are you honestly saying that no one would be prosecuted "in these enlightened times" for failing to display a disc if the disc was valid at the relevant time?
If my white van [1] was parked on a double yellow line without a tax disc I am sure that action would be taken against me.
[1] e.g. duty exempt 1970 Austin J4
|
|
There is a wider question mark here - perhaps DVD or MLC can elaborate, in law the driver has a responsibility to ensure vehicle are roadworthy, a tragic accident in the Met area a few years ago suggested that this was not the case. Officers are bound by their Force Standing Orders to check vehicles and report faults, maybe - maybe this is part of larger culteral issues of poor managment, individual laziness or a "don't care" attitude when cops take out defective or unlawful vehicles. I agree they should be beyond reporach and in fairness this is what pdc is doing reproaching the GMP Service.
|
I have empathy with Pdc, Mlc and Pu in their responses.
Firstly PU a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition is a different matter and I would hope that a Police driver would refuse to take it out. There is a fault reporting procedure within the service and really this should not happen.
Maybe I am old fashioned but it sticks in my craw that if Police Vehicle documentation is not in order and apparent to the driver then it belittles the Service (or should I say FORCE now)in reporting members of the public for committing the same offence.
Through Military service and the George Dixon years, discipline was instilled in one and the old addage of appearing whiter than white to the public for it is they who make the job a success and pay the wages.
Like anything in society us old uns see the rapid decline in standards, its everywhere, so I suppose why not in the Police Service, which is a shame.
No I am not a Holy Joe. I get ratarzed like anybody else but in private.
DVD
|
The day before I wrote my previous post I had spent 10 minutes pulling the dead body of a young boy out of his car. While doing this I heard screaming about 200 yards down the road, turned out to be the boys parents. While I tried to comfort these parents, some arrogant *****ole (sorry, no other description fits), decided to take offence at the Police car parked on double yellows.(The road was closed) Threatened to report me. I do not see any difference between this attitude and the I'm going to write to the Chief/Constable/Inspector/MP/ Councillor brigade that PU obviously belongs to. If you had seen the Police vehicle driving dangerously, a Police Officer assaulting somebody, a Police Officer stealing, you would have my blessing. In fact I'd write the letter for you. If you want to complain about the abuse of speed cameras, I, along with %99.9 of my colleagues would buy you the stamp.
Making life difficult for an Officer because of an admin oversight. I don't think so.
|
Two simple questions MLC.
1. Would you drive a Police car when you knew it was displaying no or an expired tax ?
2. Do you believe a punter with no tax displayed when he says its "in the post" ?
Oh and by the way no I have never written (off my own bat) to anyone complaining about the Police - I have defended numerous (of all ranks) in Court though, and actually got some of them off.
|
Yeah... why doesn't he just write to the Chief Constable - which he now says he has - and/or the Local Vehicle Licensing Office... and await developments?
I must admit, if I was asked to drive a police vehicle which had no VEL displayed, I wouldn't.
So - result, eh?
Except I wouldn't be coming to YOUR burglary, assault or RTC in it - so the response WILL take longer, because strangely enough we don't have boxes of unused ones in reserve.
I hope you're not in pain while you're waiting.
FFS!
|
At a slight tangent, but I have reported police drivers to their force. I was driving in the outside lane at the 3omph speed limit, inside lane being a bus lane (at a time it was in force), and a police Pug 306 overtook me on the inside. I noted the number and wrote to the Chief Constable to point out the driver was exceeding the speed limit, using a bus lane and overtaking on the inside.
I received a reply from the local inspector saying they had traced the driver and the matter was being dealt with through the internal disciplinary process - asked if I was happy to leave it at that.
I replied that I was, but that a few days later I had seen another patrol car use a bus lane to get across a bridge that is one way (the other way) for cars, in order to deliver documents to the Procurator Fiscal's office (equivalent of CPS in England, I think).
I have no problem with emergency services being allowed to break the law when it involves an emergency, but they have to take responsibility for their own actions. Committing offences when there is no urgency is out of order - but then, maybe this is a sign that they wouldn't bother pulling anyone else for the same thing if there isn't a camera that can detect it.
|
This will be my last post in this thread, as I feel that it has somewhat turned into an us vs them thread, and that was not my intention. I seem to have offended Neil in particular, and
midlifecrisis to some extent. I am surprised that the thread hasn't been closed by the moderators by now, as it no longer seems to be motoring related. However, while I have the chance I will add my final words, which do have little motoring content.
I have been an almost daily visitor to this forum since about April, which for me is remarkable because as a web developer of almost 12 years I have tired of web sites. I find HonestJohns to be very interesting and informative, and I would not want this thread to prejudice anyone against me in the future, which is why I want to clarify where I stand.
Firstly, I am not anti police. As I mentioned, I have a long standing friend who is a police officer and through her I have met some really nice people who are now friends. Having said that, I still feel guilty when sitting in the bar at Green Lane nick ;-) I was also involved with a scheme which Staffs police used to run for 6 weeks in the summer. It was called S.P.A.C.E
(Staffordshire Police And Community Enterprise). Basically it was a scheme which kept kids off the streets during the summer. There were about 20 activities each day, and all of the officers
involved were volunteers putting in time from their rest periods. I was both a participant and then a volunteer helper. That gave me, and others in the community, a high level of respect for the police force.
I think that things have changed since then. From what I read, see, hear and feel personally, the police no longer have the respect that they once had. These days we all too often hear negative stories about the police. Maybe it's the fault of the media for not reporting the good work that is done, but all too often we hear about yet another crack down on motorists, and the rising numbers of burglaries, street crime etc. I also feel it through personal experiences. Recently a neighbour called the police when she saw 3 lads go over a neighbours wall. She told the operator that they had a house brick and were about to smash the window. The operator was more interested in taking Ritas details than sending someone to deal. The lads were in the house for 15 minutes.
The police turned up an hour later. There are 8 police stations within 10 minutes of where we live, and 2 within 4 minutes. Now what impression of the police would that give Joe Bloggs? Or is
it because, as you suggest Neil, that I have taken a vehicle out of service?
I am sensible enough to realise that it is not the fault of the police, but in their funding, and in the courts which seem to let them down. My police woman friend has told me that some weekends they only have 2 police cars available in Walsall due to a lack of trained drivers. I would not do a job where i was constantly under threat of physical violence or verbal abuse, with a large percentage of the population disliking me, and especially not for the wage that it pays.
Neil, I am not anti police. The trouble is, that a lot of people only have contact with the police when it comes to motoring offences, and I think that a large number of people have been victims of crimes which the police have been hopeless at responding to and solving. Tough On Motorists, Soft On Other Forms of Crime is maybe the new slogan that the Government should adopt?
It is because of this attitude, which I know I am not alone in sharing, that I believe that the police should be whiter than white. How can they have any credibility when enforcing a law which they themselves do not adhere to? Twice in the past 5 years I have been stopped for having a defective rear light. What has really annoyed me is that when the police vehicle pulled away it too had a defective light. It just alienates the public when things like that happen.
I started my original thread about VED 7 weeks ago because for the past year I have walked past Bolton nick every morning on my way to work, and it struck me as a ridiculous waste of money that emergency vehicles display licences. Even though the amount due is nil, there is an admin cost involved. Then I happened to spot an unlicenced van and reported it. I felt absolutely awful for doing so when a Chief Inspector called me. He did agree that it would put any officer in an awkward situation if someone the officer had stopped for a motoring offence spotted it.
He told me then that the vehicle would be taxed. 6 weeks down the line it is not, so either he lied to me, or, as I suspect, someone down the line did not follow his instruction. I accept that mistakes happen, and that things get overlooked, but would the general public get away with such an excuse? Now if it was just one untaxed vehicle then maybe I would believe that it was an oversight, but for 6 of them to be parked outside one police station! It seems to me that there is something wrong at that nick, and do you not think that the Chief Constable, and the commander in charge of the relevant division, would want to know that?
Sadly, I seem to now know the running batches of plates that are on GMP vehicles. Some of those outside Bolton nick are 'sister'
vehicles of those I have spotted without a licence, and the Bolton ones have valid VEL, so DVDs mention of Regulation 6, Road vehicles (Reg and Lic) Regs 2002, although possible, doesnt seem likely to me.
Reading back my opening post in this current thread I realise that maybe I shouldn't have said "to my delight I discovered" and "before I start to make mischief", as it does make it sound as though I am out to cause trouble. I was also maybe unfair on the female officer, but I feel that she was rude, as I felt that I was polite in the way that I spoke to her. I do recognise that I dont know what sort of shift she had had, and I know that I myself can be off hand with clients. My gripe isn't with her though, and maybe it was unfair to have mentioned her in my original post.
Towards the end of the thread people have questionned whether police officers should refuse to drive vehicles that are not displaying discs. I know just how difficult a spot you can put
yourself in if you refuse to do something at work, on a principle. It certainly doesn't do your future prospects too much to be a trouble maker. However, I would have hoped that someone at that station would have mentioned it to someone. Maybe they have and have just been ignored. I dont
know.
I still stand my ground on the basic point of this thread, and that is that as daft as it is that emergency vehicles have to display a nil value tax disc, it is the law that they should do so. Police vehicles have no more right than I do to park on double yellows. If you do it and you get caught out, you pay. The price to me is a hit on my wallet. The price to the police is egg on their face.
It's the same with speeding and using bus lanes when not on an apparant emergency. I have matched the speed of speeding police vehicles and then sat with them at red lights for several minutes. No apparant emergency. A few years ago there was an outrage because two officers parked their van in a disabled bay at Asda while they went to shop. You are constantly in the public eye.
I maintain that if the police want to start to claw back respect from the public then they must be within the law, not above it. Do unto others as you would expect them to do to you, rather than do as I say, not what I do.
My issue is with the system, and not with the individual. When given a chance to have a pop at the system, are there many people who would not take it? In the end my letter to the CC underwent several revisions as a result of this discussion, and I hope that he sees is as being constructive rather than just another ill informed busy body having a go at the police. I actually met the Assistant Chief Constable of GMP on the Battle of Britain parade (I am an instructor in the ATC) on Sunday, and he was a very friendly, chatty man, but that was neither the time nor the occasion to take this issue up.
Sorry that this was so unrelated to motoring Mark, but I hope to show the police officers who have taken umbridge with my post that I am not against them. I dont wish to make enemies on the one www forum I enjoy visiting. If any of you wish to take this up with me further, my email address is against my profile.
pdc
|
A long time supporter of the police elsewhere and on this and other forums speaking.
Constantly amazed and impressed at the regular, reliable, calm, measured and considered manner that officers respond to the issues and hostile abuse they face on discussion groups such as the Backroom and in real life.
Today gentlemen, some of you who purport to be in the job, have failed the attitude test. You do know what I mean by that.
Ok we all slip from time to time, let's move it along there please.
|
>The police turned up an hour later.
Maybe manpower was tied up in answering stupid complaints about vehicles having no road fund exemption disks in the window.
|
Or maybe they were busy setting up mobile s************s? Or parking in disabled bays while shopping at Asda? Or stopping OAPs and asking them to take a road side reaction test. Or were they in court arguing that the speed limit they had broken was unenforceable as the signage was wrong. Maybe they were filling in the paper work to prosecute a transplant driver in a marked emergency vehicle? I suppose that they could have been out clamping other vehicles which were in contravention of Sect 33 V.E. & Reg Act 94. A quick google will show that lots of forces take pride in announcing their crack down on such vehicles.
So it's the front line bobby who responds to complaints is it?
|
Aside from being picky with a police car\'s road tax or not, which presumably is simply some level of revenge along the lines of \"they do it to me so I\'ll do it to them\", there is an issue here.
I suspect the Police would be a lot more effective if they were given the support they used to be given. I know that the police are in charge of the CPS and decide who to prosecute and not, I know that they are in charge of the magistrates and decide what penalties should be given, and I know that they are in charge of politicians and decide on speed camearas policy and that all they should really be doing is stopping people breaking those laws that you don\'t agree with, or understanding that its you breaking the driving laws and that\'s ok because you\'re smarter than everyone else.
I realise that you and all your friends, colleagues, acquaintances are truly wonderful people and its only the police that have off days and/or difficult and/or rude people working for them.
The trouble is, they are only human and aside from a few (which I assume rather than know exist) they are trying to do the job in the way they think best. They aren\'t deliberately closing roads after accidents to screw up your lives, they aren\'t stopping drivers simply to much up their day, they really are trying to do a good job.
And have you ever wondered why when you see an american police/criminal car chase that there are 10 police cars involved and frequently the idiot is delibertately run off the road ? Because americans are typically prepared to pay a great deal for their policing, and they (for the most part) believe that criminals deserve what they get.
When I lived abroad I used to say how I liked the UK police and all I heard back was how I knew nothing because I lived abroad and things had changed in the years I\'d been away.
Well, I\'ve been back a year and a bit now, and every experience I have had - from when my car was broken into in Reading, to an accident, to a speeding and to a couple of other incidents - they have been polite, helpful, mature, sensible adults who have done their job in a way I admire.
I haven\'t been beaten by a policeman, I haven\'t had to bribe one, I haven\'t had one pick on me or terrorise me, or anything else I might not like.
All this talk about police and their terrible behaviour is like that worn old story about gettiing stopped for speeding at 31mph in a 30mph zone - makes good and sensational reading, but is actually stuff and nonsense.
So, as far as I am concerned, and I apologise for this badly constructed note which I have bashed out quickly - more power to you all. And IMO, drive your policecar without tax, paint your nose pink for all I care, just keep up the good work and carrying on keeping me and mine safe - because you\'re better than any other police force I have known, and I\'ve known a lot of them.
|
Just to clariy PU's position here.
1. He is a Council Tax paying individual and fully supports the Police - after all they are the main source of income for him. There is a varience in quality and there are good an bad cops. (smae as there are good and bad Doctors/Nurses/Estate Agents, Teachers and er....Solicitors)
2. He has never complained about the behaviour of a Police Officer in a professional context, as a motorist or victim of crime (which he has been)
3. He has complained on behalf of clients. On their instructions.
4. He hates auto speed detection.
5. He also believes that detecting motoring offences be it speed or other offences is a primary role of Police Officers.
6. He also believes that any professional should be fair, ethical
and fair in the work that they do.
|
"So it's the front line bobby who responds to complaints is it?"
Well - could quite possiblly be a uniformed Inspector, who otherwise might be out and about - or organising those who are.
I can't quite decide whether you're a decent bloke who's just barking up the wrong tree, or whether as in your original post you're just determined to make mischief, so although you haven't offended me, I shall not respond further to you.
As to the 'attitude test' referred to elsewhere in the thread, I might be constrained by that at work (and I do not 'purport' - I am!) but I can't see that I should feel constrained by that on here - others aren't, so why should I... I'm not here in an official capacity!
Neil
Neil
|
Ooooooh I love the banter! I have so far managed to restrain my self from biting at this one.However I would like to make three points:
1. I am no lover of the recent proliferation of speed detection devices and also feel they are alienating the public.
2. The Police Service manages despite the beauracracy not because of it.
3. The Police Service has been moulded into something some of the Public deserves not what it wants. (This one is a bit deep but look at some of the thinking behind some of the posts).
Fullchat
|
Don't follow the logic of being against wasting police time, yet against auto speed detection.
Surely auto speed detection frees up time of frontline officers to do other things?
|
|
It dominating Police/public relations with a huge negative effect. It should be farmed out to another agency.
|
Pug... it is, hence the 'Scamera Partnerships' but I agree with you, its still hugely alienating and dominates public perceptions of police.
SR - no, that's not contradictory unless you think it was a constructive use of police time to be sitting doing speeders to the exclusion of far more dangerous offences... on which some, including some police officers would agree with you - but many more would disagree I'd guess including this one. No contradiction at all... we weren't wasting our time doing as little as the cameras are about dangerous and hostile driver behaviours!
|
I don't want to go into much detail about the area I live in but some of my Police friends (yes MLC - friends) tell me that the local Traffic dept is being skimmed for staff. They are now part of ARV teams, doing acting ranks in front line stations, and on ANPR duties (a huge commitment apparantly when done properly) some days they turn out just one car out of a fleet of about ten. An ACPO rank turned up at the local Traffic base recently and demanded to know why there were nine cars in the Car Park - simple said the boss there I've only got two Officers working...
Time to sort it I think.
|
Just thought I'd share this one with the backroom. It is an extract from a letter contributed to the magazine 'Police' which has a page dedicated to the more light hearted moments of the service or in other words where someone has made an utter prat of themselves.
Perhaps wishful thinking but it is a suggestion for an automated answering sevice. "Please select one of the following options"
1. To whine about us not solving a problem that you created - press 1.
2. To inquire wether someone has to die before we'll do something about a problem - press 2.
3. To report an officer for bad manners when in reality they are only trying to keep your neighbourhood safe - press 3.
4. If you would like us to raise your children - press 4.
5. If you would like us to take control of you life due to your chemical or alcohol dependency - press 5.
6. If you would like us to instantly restore order to a situation that took years to deteriorate - press 6.
7. To provide a list of officers you personally know so we will not take enforcement action against you - press 7.
8. To sue us or tell us that you pay our salary and you'll have our badge or to proclaim our careers over - press 8.
9. To whine about a ticket and/or complain about the many other uses of the Police rather than keeping you in order - press 9.
So you see we do have a sense of humour!!!!!!!
Fullchat
|
I have a note from July that says the Parliament Advisory Council for Transport Safety reported a 12% drop in Traffic officers in the last 5 years.
So why doeseverybody think it is more than this?
DVD
|
I've never said I think speeding should be concentrated on TO THE EXCLUSION OF other offences - just that it should be addressed in the same way. Please don't put words in my mouth. If you commit any offence, you should be liable to be caught and punished.
The point is that if detection of one very widespread offence is automated then in theory the officers who would normally be detecting speeders are free to go after what you describe as far more dangerous offences. But that doesn't work because people complain about the cameras and want speeder detection done by real police officers again.
|
|
|
|
