Maybe he just had his blue lights switched on in the grill and the headlights pulsating to attract people's attention in front of him.
Why would you not put the blues on the roof on? Surely if you're hammering down the motorway at 100 in the line of duty you should be as visible as possible. Particularly if you want people to get out of your way. That, and the fact that everyone behind you will be thinking to themselves "huh, one rule for us, another for them."
Strikes me as a case of "I'm late for my tea and I'm not going to arrest myself" - who guards the guards?
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
|
Probably got one of those new long range rear facing speed cameras!
|
The reality is that they do this because they can. Every job has its ups and downs - perhaps you can photocopy private stuff at work, or surf the web and post here! The Police can exceed the speed limits and get off with (most) traffic offences.
They get the book thrown at them if they get caught (usually as a esult of an accident), but (if somebody wanted to) they could sack me for writing this instead of working.
|
|
: ) You're probably right! I'd much rather be able to drive at a reasonable pace than nick office supplies... although I am glad my job allows me to run my thriving e-bay business!
|
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this police vehicle was fully lit from the front, but not at all from the rear.
The roof lightbar will have functions whereby it can be lit from just the front or just the rear as well as 360 degrees.
On strobe type lightbars there are separate strobes facing front and rear.
On rotating mirror type lightbars there can be a function which oscillates the mirrors from side to side but they don't actually do a full oscillation so only project the light either forwards or backwards.
Of course the flashing headlamps and grille strobes may also have been lit.
All of this without any warning lights showing to the rear, after all once you're past what's in your way, they don't need to see your warning lights. On arrival at the incident turn the rear facing warning lights on.
Alternately, you may see police vehicles stopped on the hard shoulder with lots of lights flashing to the rear but as you pass and look in your mirror no lights are flashing at the front, this is to avoid distracting traffic passing on the opposite carriageway.
Obviously the police car concerned may have just been having a play, they may also have been discreetly trying to catch a speeder up without giving the game away.
PP
|
I have to agree, now motorists are being actively persecuted for minor offences then plod must be shown to be above this.
If a normal motorist can be fined simply for straying a couple of mph above the limit, how can plod justify driving way above the limit with (apparently!) no warning lights?
But I feel its simply (and this is also from personal experience)
thats its 'do as I say, not as I do'
|
Has anyone realised or thought that it might just have been a case of a police officer undergoing training to allow him to take up traffic duties or drive a Panda vehicle?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
>>undergoing training to allow him to take up traffic duties>>
...or her...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
And you think that's acceptable I suppose! I repeat, again, WHERE WERE THE LIGHTS?!! I have read the post about lights on the front, and to be frank, it's highly unlikely isn't it? Surely I would have seen them when I was close to him as he pulled onto the motorway?
|
And you think that's acceptable I suppose!
Whether it is or not, personally I have more important things to worry about than whether a copper is classed as speeding or not just because the blues and two aren't on.
Just get on with your journey and be done with it. Life's too short to worry about it.
|
Well in that case why are you on a discussion forum?
Do you WANT to live in a country where power is abused? I personally don't, so my life most definitely ISN'T too short to worry about it. If someone tells me what to do, then in a democracy (be reminded we still live in one) I am able to discuss it. If you don't want to discuss it, then don't. End of.
|
>>Do you WANT to live in a country where power is abused?>>
This is merely your own, to me at least, rather narrow point of view - we don't have to meekly agree with you.
What proof do you have that power is being abused?
You have seen a police car being driven at speeds above the national limit and have concluded, without any evidence to the contrary, that "power is being abused".
You can't have a debate or a discussion if you rant and rave or contemptuously dismiss other people's opinions or views.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
You get Police traning vehicles razzing up the M58 all the time.
Usually white Vectra V6's or Mondeo V6's. Nothing apart from "POLICE TRAINING" stuck on the boot.
Given you should be looking where you're going and what's coming up behind you regardless of speed, it doesn't bother me. After all, they have to train somewhere.
|
>>And you think that's acceptable I suppose!>>
If you are referring to my post about possible police driver training, then the answer is a resounding yes.
Lights, sirens etc should only be used if a police driver or crew are on an urgent call.
If it was a case of training, then this has to be conducted at the same or even higher levels experienced in an on-road situation, otherwise the standard of training would fall behind what was required.
I know a number of traffic police officers. One of them once told me that whilst undergoing his training he was on the M57 and varying his speed, depending on circumstances, from 60 to 120mph.
To his and the supervisor's surprise, the driver of a following Rover kept pace with them whatever their speed.
Eventually it was decided to pull him over and asked the reason for his driving behaviour. The explanation was because the police car was being driven at such speeds he felt it was okay to do so as well.
Partially ring a bell...:-))
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
Does anyone know definitively whether the police's license to break traffic laws actually applies only when the blue lights are flashing? Or is that only a customary or disciplinary matter?
I can think of a few situations where it might be appropriate for police to exceed limit without lights going, so I'd be surprised if the lights were a legal requirement. If I'm right, then it's a question of whether the discretion was abused in that situation ... and given the ongoing controversy over the number of people killed by speeding police cars, it's something which forces should not only be vigilant about, but be seen to be vigilant.
|
What rankles is the hypocrisy exposed by the double standards.
The theory is that speed limits indicate the maximum safe speed, hence we should be prosecuted above that speed because we thereby cause danger.
Police Officers do indeed need to exceed the limit from time to time. So they have sirens and lights to warn us of the danger that is created, and allow us to take avoiding action.
If Plod keeps speeding without lights, then either:
- they are placing us at risk unnecessarily
or
- the whole theory behind speed limits and vigourous prosecution is just so much tosh and a sizeable proportion of 2 million people have been fined and pointed (sic) pointlessly.
Maybe he was late for his duty rota at the speed trap.
|
Don't some people get wound up into a tizzy over things?
Was anyone killed?
Was anyone maimed?
Were any rare moths wiped from the face of the earth by this evil deed?
No?
Ok, so was this car covered in blue and orange/yellow reflective stickers?
Yes?
Any you have a problem with their speed because......
Oh yes. "it's not fair. I want to do that speed. Wah-wah-wah."
Except you did do that speed. You followed the car for some distance at similar speeds. Now you have no idea what that driver was doing or why, but you saw it as an opportunity to exceed the limit yourself. The swear filter prevents me from pouring my full scorn upon you in the manner you deserve but, as you so rightly pointed out, this is a discussion forum and I'm entitled to my say, so here goes.
Don't be such a prat.
|
You are entitled to your say, and I am entitled to think that the manner in which you said it was immature. The person who posted above you made his point in an adult way, and made it very well, whether you agree with it or not.
I don't, as it happens, have a problem with people driving at high speed; as you point out, I did so myself! What I do have a problem with is being told not to do something by people who don't follow their own rules. Should traffic wardens be allowed to park on double yellow lines?
Quite why you feel I am worthy of having scorn poured on me, or indeed why you want to swear at me is beyond me. You said "it's not fair" and you are quite correct, it ISN'T fair.
If you want to discuss things with me, then feel free. Don't, however, belittle me and put me down. I am an intelligent, well-educated person and am more than capable of holding my own in a discussion.
So yah boo sucks. : )
|
>>So yah boo sucks. : )>>
Which completely voids your previous paragraph.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Which completely voids your previous paragraph.
It's possible he was joking, Stuartli. Obviously the joke wasn't for you, though. ;-)
|
>>Obviously the joke wasn't for you, though. ;-)>>
There's no one who uses Smileys more than I do, but it's usually to take the (often intended) sting out of the tail..:-)))
But then I'm not a highly intelligent, well-educated person..:-((
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
But then I'm not a highly intelligent, well-educated person..:-((
I know the feeling.... ;-)
|
That, Stuart, was the joke. Hence the smiley. It's called irony.
|
As regards the possibility of a trainee driver:
1) only qualified police drivers are allowed to use blues and twos
2) trainee police drivers have to learn to drive at speed
so:
a police car at high speed on the public highway without lights/sirens may well be being used for training purposes
|
Don't be such a prat.
Out of order ND, er I mean $$.
|
|
|
|
>>Surely if you're hammering down the motorway at 100 i>>
Let's be realistic about this rather than using emotive words like hammering.
Most people on a motorway, whether they say otherwise or not, are normally travelling at around 80mph.
A police officer "ammering" down the motorway at 100mph" means other motorist are being overtaken at just 20mph or so, pretty similar to normal roads use.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
I would fas sooner have a jam sandwich doing 100 mph, than crawling along at 60mph, with the lemmings bunched up round it at 59.5 mph jamming up the motorway
|
I would fas sooner have a jam sandwich doing 100 mph, than crawling along at 60mph, with the lemmings bunched up round it at 59.5 mph jamming up the motorway
Spot on, RF. And, as it happens every single day on every single motorway, I would rather it was legal.
;-)
|
When on the motorway, it is standard practice to only display front blues/headlights. Given that a large percentage of motorists can't see a fully marked car, when it's behind them with full blues and twos, I had to chuckle when you said " I would have noticed the lights if they were on."
I also regulary travel to incidents on m'ways without lights. When the traffic is travelling at 80-85 (as it normally is) blue lights can cause panis and sudden, unpredictable movements. It's often safer to come behind a car, flash headlights and pass.
Of course I'll bow to your obviously greater driving skill. Next time you're travelling at 100mph following a Police car, I hope you're prepared to avoid the blind motorist, who on seeing the Police car pass by, automatically moves back into the outside lane.
Ans I'm fully aware you pay my wages. :-)
|
When on the motorway, it is standard practice to only display front blues/headlights.
And on that note of confirmation from an expert, can certain people step down from their soap boxes.
DD.
|
|
|
|
I agree totally with you, Patently and Renault Family.
I appear to have inadvertently upset a few people, I have been told I am narrow-minded, that I rant and rave, that I am a prat, that I am worthy of scorn... sorry everyone! I am obviously not a good arguer. Sob, nobody loves me etc.
I take the point about driver training, (despite my narrow-mindedness!)if that is indeed the case, then IMHO there should be a sign on the car. I also agree (despite being a prat) that there are occasions when the police shouldn't use "blues and twos". I do have a nagging suspicion that some police do just speed because they can, but that's because I am scorn-worthy I guess. I think I will adopt the 1950s attitude of unquestioning cap-doffing to authority because, after all, they do know best. Sigh. Stuart, that's irony again.
I think at this point that I'll "get my coat", as the old catchphrase goes. Sorry to one and all, I'll keep my opinions to myself in the future.
Steve
|
>>Sorry to one and all, I'll keep my opinions to myself in the future.>>
Nothing whatsoever to be sorry about or reason to cease to "rant and rave".
We don't want life in the forums to be dull, boring or lacking sparkle...:-)
If we all thought the same there'd be no point to these and similar websites.
It's been an entertaining Thursday...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
As Columbo says, "just one more thing".
Stuart, I am only joking! I read the replies higher up the page (from you and Patently) and they made me giggle.
I am more than aware my comment about being "educated and intelligent" was a TEENSY-WEENSY bit pompous! Thanks for deflating me chaps! : )
|
Linking to the 'Traffic Cop' prog thread the officer chasing the biker last night reached 135 mph and no sirens could be heard or flashing lights seen - he was trying to assess the speed of the biker - letting him know he was there wouldn't have been a good idea.
My BIL was called to a job (rapid response vehicle - reports of someone brandishing a hand gun) and was doing about 80 in a 60 limit. Blues and twos going when he rounded a bend and a car parked on the left pulled out and did a U turn - he avoided a collision but ended up in a field. He was found to be at fault and received a reprimand and points on his police driving license - blues and twos does not give the driver of any emergency vehicle the right to do as they wish.
|
|
I watched Traffic Cops last night and thought, if it's unsafe for a bike to do 130+ how can it be safe for a 2 ton car to do it? especially when a fully liveried Range Rover was a couple of miles further up the road and could have stopped the bike. The offence of speeding is an absolute, you are speeding or you aren't, I don't think it was necessary to get an exact figure, over 100 would suffice. I'm sure he'd have had much greater effect just parking on the bridge and slowing everyone down.
|
|
|
blues and twos does not give the driver of any emergency vehicle the right to do as they wish
I think that you'll find that when police cars have their lights on, they are allowed to drive as quickly and as dangerously as they like, in the same way that the use of hazard warning lights allows you to park on double yellow lines without prosecution.
|
On a slightly different, but related tack, I read this on an old post, about the late and very much lamented L J K Setright: he referred to speed limits as a "nefarious and pointless tool of state repression."
I bet if HE had posted something on here, no-one would call him a prat! I might start dressing elegantly, smoking Sobranie cigarettes and being generally eccentric. I already have the dangerous driving off to a tee, according to some people... : )
Yes, I know I said I was "getting my coat", decided to make a comeback.
I would love to know if midlifecrisis is going to respond to DrS's provocative comment!
|
Stevie,
You'd find it very difficult to hate the speed limits as much as I. I'll be the last one in line to berate anyone for speeding but what I am disagreeing with is how because two little blue lights on a car aren't on, they then become invisible.
The world is a dangerous place - as are the roads. I can't think of any other people I'd rather speed than the cops blue lights or no blue lights. They're trained and all this rubbish abouot not seeing them is just that - rubbish. You go to move out a land and look in your mirror. If there's a car, you don't pull out. If there isn't, you do. Simple as.
Of course, I realise I'll get done for speeding after in which case, my viewpoint may change!
|
|
I note that 'stevied' has a very bursty posting history.
|
What on earth is a "bursty" posting history? : )
Nearly wrote busty. How very Carry On.
Anyway, I agree with the comment about the lights completely. I don't have any moral objection to police speeding, it's the fact that, if you're stopped for speeding, they patronise you, give you the third degree, tell you how bad it is, how people die etc.. etc.. but they seem to do it themselves with impunity. Sorry, I meant training.. : )
Incidentally, I am a huge advocate of the 30 limit, and 20 in very built-up areas. I am also very much of the belief that the driving test needs toughening up, that we should be re-tested every 10 years and that anti-social, as opposed to fast, driving should be clamped down on. No more Max Power brigade if I get into government!
|
I would love to know if midlifecrisis is going to respond to DrS's provocative comment!
Nah! I don't respond to provocation. I've set out my stall. I'm no saint, but I have a job that I do to the best of my ability.
Then I go home and forget about it! (hopefully!)
|
|
Ah, you're a patient tolerant soul! Can I borrow some?
|
As I have said before on here a number of times, it is not speed that is dangerous, it is the collision between two objects that is dangerous, be they car & car, car and person, bike and lorry, lorry and bridge etc etc etc.
I.e. it is safer to do 150 mph and not hit anything than to do 15 mph and hit something.
To bring this into context the question is as follows, is a uniformed police car at 100 mph any more likley to hit something than Joe Public is at 70 mph, I must say I reckon the answer is no.
|
No, exactly. But I'm not sure that's the argument here. It's the principle of the thing really. If a police officer needs to speed as part of their duty, that's fine. If a police officer wants to speed because they're late for their tea, that's not fine - that's double standards. The person and the officer have to remain different people.
----
Life is complex; it has real and imaginary parts.
|
I apologise for "prat".
Would it be acceptable to offer Plonker" and a Delboy-esque cheeky virtual grin?
I still find your stance untenable, not to say a mite disingenuous, but prat was a bit strong.
:o)
|
One has to be very careful with insults, DD tells me that he is of the view that calling someone a 'fool' is not insult though calling them an 'idiot' is, perhaps it was the two adjectives that proceeded 'idiot' that did it.
I reckon it might best just to avoid insults altogether though provocation can bring out a little virtual road rage in any of us I guess.
|
One has to be very careful with insults, DD tells me that he is of the view that calling someone a 'fool' is not insult though calling them an 'idiot' is, perhaps it was the two adjectives that proceeded 'idiot' that did it.
Not quite how I worded it, as you well know. DD.
|
As I usually say at a point like this DVD will be along in a minute.
The Road Traffic Act allows Police vehicles (and other misc. services) to be driven at a speed in excess of the speed limit if the speed limit would hinder the use of that vehilce.
It makes no mention of blues and twos, however local constabulary guidelines may require their use at such a time.
Some Theories.
1. It was going to an emergency and the blues were hidden to vehicles behind - or the B&T were not switched on.
2. They were making "progress" in a situation that the speed dialled in by the driver was considered appropriate, it may have been re-positioning itself to something that was "heading their way".
3. Some Force guidleines allow Class 1 drivers to hone their skills by appropriate use of speed.
4. They were having a hoot.
I am comfortable with all the options, its nothing I haven't done myself and have yet to be booked for.
|
Rheory 1.
DD has already explained what may the reasons for this particular issue.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Stevie, can't help but think if it annoyed you so much, why didn't you pull into the services and ask them?
However, maybe the incident was in the services, armed hold up for instance?
Or they were on a call to an incident with the front lights on, as discussed above, and then the call was cancelled for whatever reason, so they just pulled in to the services?
Either way, its not worth worrying about especially as you openly admit you yourself decided to speed after it and break the same rules you are querying - unless you had your front strobes on as well????
|
I've regularly been overtaken whilst doing a little more than 70 by the police.
Up until now I've always assumed they're actually following someone doing much more than the limit.
Also, am I right in thinking that Blues and Twos are discretionery and not mandatory when in a pursuit?
|
I think it's about time Stevied got some back up.
I agree wholeheartedly with the general thrust of his arguement. Namely that police officers seem to get with things that you or I would not. And it's not just when they're breaking motoring laws.
In a democracy such as ours that is totally unacceptable. It's the thin edge of a wedge which we as citizens should not accept. Indeed I believe it's our duty to kick up a fuss.
The price of freedom, etc...
|
I think it's about time Stevied got some back up.....
Far from me to suggest that Police Officers have the freedom to do what they like. I'm sure there are times when they do stretch the rules, and yes they shouldn't.
However before we condemn POs alone let's have a think.
Lorries with tinkered speed limiters
Coaches that obviously push the limit to keep to schedules
Drivers who speed up between safety cameras.....
There are a few instances IMO where individuals in ANY job flaunt the rules in such a way that demonstrates contempt for those around them, however lets not get wound up by someone somewhere seeing a police car going above the speed limit without lights flashing.
There could be several reasons why this occurred.
He could have been tailing a non police speeder to track his speed.
He could have been pursuing or following someone of 'interest' without wanting to drawer attention to himself when there were no unparked cars to respond.
As has been suggested, he could have been responding to an incident. If he could see a way clear he may have thought it unnecessary to use the blues and twos.
I suggest that those of you who are bothered by this enough to do so, consider asking the local constabulary why a police car is behaving in a way that you find unnaceptable, next time this occurs, but also consider whether your call is a good use of their time.
Those of you who are not can worry about getting to your destination safely.
I see no reason to go round the houses again so I've locked this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
