news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/7409714.stm
This from timesonline should make anyone's blood boil. {alternate link substituted that doesn't offend the swearfilter - DD}
{ps, don't let this descend into a police bashing thread - the full FACTS haven't yet been disclosed. Remember also that a life was lost and therefore show respect to surviving family and friends - DD}
thread locked at the request of several BR's
Edited by Webmaster on 21/05/2008 at 15:33
|
|
I think I would rather wait till the full facts are known before commenting.
|
I think I would rather wait till the full facts are known before commenting.
I agree.
|
|
|
|
There has been what appears to be a tragic accident. The media are publicising a variety of statements from "witnesses", some of which claim the car was travelling fast.
Until the full facts are established what else is there to say?
|
what is there, from the limited facts stated so far, for anyone's 'blood to boil'?
marked traffic car, single crewed, ANPR bleeps, officer possibly responding (speculation) to the ANPR collides with pedestrian late at night
public servant, out on patrol, single crewed (can't monitor tv type screens as well as drive, so have to sit there for a moment reading the screen before responding), responding to crime (or similar), which is what he's paid for, hits a person in a group of teenagers crossing the road late at night
for me has all the hallmarks for an absolute tragedy for all concerned
|
|
People CLAIM it was a Volvo with no headlights;A Volvo with no lights?
|
People CLAIM it was a Volvo with no headlights;A Volvo with no lights?
Hmm, I would have thought the Police would have the day-running lights switched off?
And if it is a model that has had them switched off, perhaps more likely to be running with out lights, since they'd normally be on all the time?
|
|
|
|
I don't care what incident the car was responding to. ANPR has nothing to do with it. The car must still be driven safely and able to stop if necessary.
BTW, the BBC article is the least informative I've seen.
|
The car must still be driven safely and able to stop if necessary.
You are prejudging what happened at the incident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
... should make anyone's blood boil.
It makes my blood boil that someone has the gall to start such a thread.
|
|
|
|
Why does the "swearfilter" object to the Times online link? Is tinyurl better: 8< SNIP {please see post below for why}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 21/05/2008 at 13:57
|
Why does the "swearfilter" object to the Times online link?
I did not think you were a new member of the backroom.
But here is a recent link:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=62771&...f
{ www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=62771&...e is the actual one that explains all you need to know}
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 21/05/2008 at 13:57
|
BTW, the BBC article is the least informative I've seen.
Because it's BBC's duty to protect govt.
Otherwise they won't get their funding [ie TV license :)]
|
|
|
Ah, that makes sense now. HJ only endorses the telegraph. Fair enough seeing as he has a column in the telegraph and the times is a competitor. The telegraph is one of the better papers you can buy. As well as HJ there's James May too.
Link to telegraph:
tinyurl.com/6ab5ae
|
|
|
|
Why does the "swearfilter" object
Aha. Thank you, DD. I object to that organ, too, but for a "proprietory" reason.
BTW, I really thought it was a "swearfilter" issue!
Edited by FotheringtonThomas on 21/05/2008 at 14:24
|
I'm sure the facts will be irrelevant in this. Police 'collisions' always seem to result in the office getting nothing more than a token slap on the wrist.
Still a tragedy for those concerned though.
|
|
Just heard on radio 2 that a reg no had been flagged up the Police Car's ANPR system; what's the betting said reg no was just an untaxed car????
|
|
|
|
As nothing can or should be said just now why not just lock the thread at this point?
|
yes, please lock thread. No point in commenting on speculation.
|
|
|
An absolute tradgedy indeed.
Without getting into the specifics of this case, I think there needs to be a serious rethink on the risks taken in response to relatively minor issues such as ANPR hits for tax or insurance. No life is worth more than catching a VED evader or the like.
There's been enough concern about accidents involving police vehicles north of the border for the issue to have been raised recently in the parliament here:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7286566.stm
As emotive and raw a subject as it is at this time, it is one that merits debate at some point, albeit perhaps not at this immediate moment.
|
|
|
|
I'm sure the facts will be irrelevant in this. Police 'collisions' always seem to result in the office getting nothing more than a token slap on the wrist.
I don't normally lose my temper when I read a post, but this takes the biscuit. If a Police Officer is involved in a collision he/she will be subjected to an investigation far more stringent than anybody else would have to suffer. If there is ANY doubt, they will be prosecuted.
Get your facts right before making such a ridiculous post.
I wonder if the 'witnesses' who saw the car 'doing 100mph' are the same caliber as those who complained of HGVs traveling at 'over 80mph' through their village. Seems every one of them must have removed their limiter.
Facts aren't available. Don't see the point of the thread. It should be locked.
|
Agree with mlc and others - please could mods lock this thread.
There are plenty of other fora to indulge those with a taste for ill informed comment.
|
|
|
"Don't see the point of the thread. It should be locked."
Agree. Mods, get your keys out.
done
Edited by Webmaster on 21/05/2008 at 15:32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
