Unbelievable!!

Mank

Mank

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,124
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
As I was driving down my road tonight I was following a police car. Coming the other way, was a motorbike travelling at a fair speed.

Now this motorbike had no lights, it had 3 lads hanging off it with no helmets and had no numberplate (I checked as it went past). So guessing it wasn't taxed or insured either.

I see loads of them riding round here all the time but theres never any police around when I see them.

I though way hay!! About time they do it with a copper about.

Nope, the copper just drove on like nothing had happened. :( :thumbsdown:

I couldn't believe it! Are they not bothered about trying to even turn round and follow it? Or do they just give it up as a loss cause?
 
Chase it and likely not catch it.
Chase it and have accident, face prosecution and derision.
 
A couple of years back I saw a local yob popping wheelies on an off road bike down our village's main street with a copper sat in his car watching him. He watched him for a while and drove off.
 
There are several levels of police driving qualifications. Unless the driver was pursuit qualified or higher then the absolute most that they could do is to follow without lights at a safe distance.

If they've only passed at a basic level then they aren't allowed to break the speed limit or use lights at all.

How do you know that the offence wasn't called in and an RPU dispatched tom deal with it?
 
DemiLion said:
There are several levels of police driving qualifications. Unless the driver was pursuit qualified or higher then the absolute most that they could do is to follow without lights at a safe distance.

If they've only passed at a basic level then they aren't allowed to break the speed limit or use lights at all.

How do you know that the offence wasn't called in and an RPU dispatched tom deal with it?
Click to expand...

This was my first thought, call in for the correct unit and dont turn on the blues and twos as you just warn them possibly without the ability to give chase. Lets hope that was the case ;)
 
Probably off for his cup of tea and didn't want to miss it :D
 
Mustn't chase motorcyclists who don't have crash helmets on, they might fall off and hurt themselves. Naughty policeman.
 
DemiLion said:
There are several levels of police driving qualifications. Unless the driver was pursuit qualified or higher then the absolute most that they could do is to follow without lights at a safe distance.

If they've only passed at a basic level then they aren't allowed to break the speed limit or use lights at all.

How do you know that the offence wasn't called in and an RPU dispatched tom deal with it?
Click to expand...

Do anyone of those levels mean they don't have to use indicators? As this one didn't use them :lol:

I hope that was the case, especially as I saw a traffic copper down my road just 15mins before hand. (that ones indicators were broke too!!)

Probably just the cynic in me, but from the amount of joy riders I see riding around here, my guess is they do b****r all. :(
 
Mank said:
Do anyone of those levels mean they don't have to use indicators? As this one didn't use them :lol:

I hope that was the case, especially as I saw a traffic copper down my road just 15mins before hand. (that ones indicators were broke too!!)

Probably just the cynic in me, but from the amount of joy riders I see riding around here, my guess is they do b****r all. :(
Click to expand...

Ello! Ello! Ello! Whats all this then Gov? Next you will be saying they are all bent :lol:
 
C'mon..... they were probably off to arrest and cavity search a fully paid up, taxed & licensed motorist for doing 31 in a 30 zone........ /banter off

In all seriousness, if they weren't pursuit trained they may have called it in to get the relevant unit to follow up or they may have just been on a higher priority call at that point in time.

Whilst I'd also want something done about 3 yoofs hooning around on a motorbike, at that point in time there may have been more important things for the police to do.

Let's face it, they were struggling to keep up with demand 2-3 years agi and their numbers/resources are being cut all the time.......
 
Bluehawk said:
Mustn't chase motorcyclists who don't have crash helmets on, they might fall off and hurt themselves. Naughty policeman.
Click to expand...

Last time I got nicked for no lid was many years ago and I got 3 tickets for 3 different reg numbers at 30 second intervals! It was back in the days of "Rider" policies, where it was completely legal for one person to be the registered keeper of several bikes and insure them all under one policy to cover the biggest (in terms of CC). Other people could ride them providing they had insurance that covered them to ride other bikes (at that time, most policies allowed this as long as the person had a full bike license). None of us were pulled over (and certainly not chased!), Plod simply videoed our rear plates as we passed and sent the registered keeper the tickets! The other chaps both sent off admissions that they were the riders of the other bikes so I only had to take the fine and points for my own misdemeanour, although it would have been an interesting exercise to have taken it to court to see them prove (from a shot from behind, trained on the number plates) that I was actually riding any of the bikes!
 
Bluehawk said:
Mustn't chase motorcyclists who don't have crash helmets on, they might fall off and hurt themselves. Naughty policeman.
Click to expand...

I was told by a police officer in Nottingham that they aren't allowed to pursue motorcycles at all - helmets or not.

I think different forces must have their own rules maybe?
 
Mank said:
Do anyone of those levels mean they don't have to use indicators? As this one didn't use them
Click to expand...

No. Police officers, taxi drivers, BMW owners and driving instructors are exempt!


Steve.
 
although police do tend to adhere to the ACPO guidelines of 10% + 3mph
 
sturisoma said:
I was told by a police officer in Nottingham that they aren't allowed to pursue motorcycles at all - helmets or not.

I think different forces must have their own rules maybe?
Click to expand...

Correct. Most forces have a no pursuit policy on motorbikes.
 
gramps said:
Chase it and likely not catch it.
Chase it and have accident, face prosecution and derision.
Click to expand...

Yup :(

Police officer comes off worse for chasing though I do look and think if the punks got in to an accident it would be impossible to say they didn't deserve it.
 
I want to contribute, but that would mean me entering "RANT MODE" and I quite like my monitor unsmashed :)
 
They may of been going to another important call and radioed another police car of their location.
Who knows
 
You get what you apparently ask for.
The perception of the IPCC/ACPOO and a number of pressure groups is that car/bikes used in crime/are Stolen/being used to show off are only ever driven badly or dangerously when followed by police cars.
Of course, how stupid we all are to have not realised that.
Unfortunately those 3 esteemed groups have the sum total of ZERO knowledge and experience on the subject. OK, thats not true, ACPOO have a little bit, but there's no self promotion involved in disagreeing with the IPCC, so they opt to go for the next rank, not common sense.
So they end result is no chasing bikes, shortly to be followed by no chasing at all. At which point, watch road deaths go up.
 
Russ77 said:
Quite aware of that cheers :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Yes, but its surprising the number of people who think it's quite o.k. for them to exceed a 30mph limit by a few mph - usually the same people who insist on zero tolerance on every other crime.


Steve.
 
I'm still amazed people bother speeding in a 30 zone, I drove from the M56 to the M62 on the A49 today

Cars were overtaking me but every time I caught them at the lights 20 seconds later, then they'd shoot off for it to happen again , pointless

I was on the A421 near Buckingham this week, it's been reduced to 50mph, signs everywhere, so there I am driving along these wide straight sections of road at 50 when every country lane off the A421 has a sign saying national limit applies, 60:lol:
 
I have absolutely no time for people who break low speed limits, even by 1mph or +10%. The difference small increases make to stopping distances, and impact speed are immense. I completely support a zero tolerance in places under 40mph, and I don't think speeding on the motorway is much better. Speed limits are just that, limits. Anyone breaking them deserves the points and a steep fine. Do it repeatedly and you're not fit to drive. If you have a problem with the limits take steps to get them changed. Don't just ignore them and break the law. [/rant]
 
I agree Jamie. Speeding accounts for about 1000 deaths per year which is probably more than any other crime so it needs to be taken seriously.

However, many people seem to think it's o.k. for then to speed just a little bit and are outraged if they get fined via a speed camera or stopped by the police.

If speeding just a little bit is o.k. then so is shoplifting only low value items or hurting people just a little bit.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
Speeding accounts for about 1000 deaths per year which is probably more than any other crime so it needs to be taken seriously.


Steve.
Click to expand...
How do you work that out, you seem to claim most road accidents are speed related, which might make a good campaigning platform but has little basis in reality - except on the basis that if no vehicles moved there would be none.
 
Steve Smith said:
I agree Jamie. Speeding accounts for about 1000 deaths per year which is probably more than any other crime so it needs to be taken seriously.

However, many people seem to think it's o.k. for then to speed just a little bit and are outraged if they get fined via a speed camera or stopped by the police.

If speeding just a little bit is o.k. then so is shoplifting only low value items or hurting people just a little bit.


Steve.
Click to expand...

Are you differentiating between "Speeding" and "Inappropriate Speed"?

Big difference between the two, for instance I could legally travel at 30MPH past the local Primary school at 15:30 when there are kids running around everywhere......

Or

I could travel at 100MPH on a 3 lane motorway at 3am, the road is dry, visibility is good and if I lost control the chances are I'm the only one who's going to come to harm........

One is speeding, one is inappropriate speed.
 
odd jim said:
Correct. Most forces have a no pursuit policy on motorbikes.
Click to expand...

whats the justification on that Jim - Is it because of the increased likelihood of an injury if a biker comes off, or is it because it winds up being pointless because a bike can easily escape a car (Just interested)

A cop I know down here told be that D&C will only chase a bike if it comes up stolen btw
 
Injury to the biker, injury to public as these kind of scrotes will often go off-road in order to escape, and there's always an increased risk of an accident from the pursuing police car itself.

Cars were overtaking me but every time I caught them at the lights 20 seconds later, then they'd shoot off for it to happen again , pointless
Click to expand...
Even more pointless was the woman in the Lotus making a big song and dance out of "burning me off" at the lights when I was in my first car, a death rattling 1.1 Fiesta. People on foot could have pulled away faster, so it's not like it was anything to do with superior abilities on her part.
 
big soft moose said:
whats the justification on that Jim - Is it because of the increased likelihood of an injury if a biker comes off, or is it because it winds up being pointless because a bike can easily escape a car (Just interested)

A cop I know down here told be that D&C will only chase a bike if it comes up stolen btw
Click to expand...

Because its too risky for the crook on the bike, and the cops get the blame if they kill themselves.

Seriously, that's why!
 
Last edited:
Thats 'king ridiculous - next thing you won't be allowed to arrest criminals in case the experience harms their feeling of self worth :bang: :bang: :bang:
 
big soft moose said:
Thats 'king ridiculous - next thing you won't be allowed to arrest criminals in case the experience harms their feeling of self worth :bang: :bang: :bang:
Click to expand...

You can blame the blame culture for that (no pun intended). The government, and it seems the public, always want a cop to hang draw and quarter. It's never the scrotes fault...

It's got to the stage now where police officers are finding themselves in court for dangerous driving (and we are talking fully trained advanced pursuit drivers) following successful pursuits even when nothing's gone wrong after being charged by their own forces. Yep, that's the world we live in!
 
Last edited:
Russ77 said:
Are you differentiating between "Speeding" and "Inappropriate Speed"?

Big difference between the two, for instance I could legally travel at 30MPH past the local Primary school at 15:30 when there are kids running around everywhere......

Or

I could travel at 100MPH on a 3 lane motorway at 3am, the road is dry, visibility is good and if I lost control the chances are I'm the only one who's going to come to harm........

One is speeding, one is inappropriate speed.
Click to expand...


both would be speeding and inappropriate though :nono:
 
POAH said:
both would be speeding and inappropriate though :nono:
Click to expand...

:lol:

You're entitled to your opinion........ I'm entitled to disagree with it ;)

How can doing 30mph in a 30mph zone be speeding? That just doesn't make sense.

Especially considering the 70mph limit on a motorway was derived from the braking distances of cars built in the 40s & 50s........

Also consider this..... You are travelling at 30mph on a 30mph limit road and a bus is in a bus stop, you look ahead and the road is clear to go around the bus. However, as you reach the back of the bus, a small child steps out into the road at the front of the bus.

At 30mph, by the time you reach the front of the bus you've only just managed to get your foot on the brake pedal.......
 
Last edited:
Russ77 said:
:lol:

Also consider this..... You are travelling at 30mph on a 30mph limit road and a bus is in a bus stop, you look ahead and the road is clear to go around the bus. However, as you reach the back of the bus, a small child steps out into the road at the front of the bus.

At 30mph, by the time you reach the front of the bus you've only just managed to get your foot on the brake pedal.......
Click to expand...

Just because the speed limit is 30mph it doesn't mean you have to drive to it all the time. In the scenario you have outlined the prudent thing would be to reduce speed prior to reaching the bus, it's all about hazard perception and awareness and the onus is on you to drive to the surrounding conditions.
 
Hacker said:
Just because the speed limit is 30mph it doesn't mean you have to drive to it all the time. In the scenario you have outlined the prudent thing would be to reduce speed prior to reaching the bus, it's all about hazard perception and awareness and the onus is on you to drive to the surrounding conditions.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point!!!

You wouldn't be "speeding" yet the speed at which you're travelling could be deemed inappropriate :bang:

Forget it... we're off topic anyway.......
 
its 20mph past schools round here at in/out times so 30mph would be speeding :p

Russ77 said:
:lol:

You're entitled to your opinion........ I'm entitled to disagree with it ;)

How can doing 30mph in a 30mph zone be speeding? That just doesn't make sense.

Especially considering the 70mph limit on a motorway was derived from the braking distances of cars built in the 40s & 50s........

Also consider this..... You are travelling at 30mph on a 30mph limit road and a bus is in a bus stop, you look ahead and the road is clear to go around the bus. However, as you reach the back of the bus, a small child steps out into the road at the front of the bus.

At 30mph, by the time you reach the front of the bus you've only just managed to get your foot on the brake pedal.......
Click to expand...
 
odd jim said:
You can blame the blame culture for that (no pun intended)!
Click to expand...

Ultimately it's the government who's to blame

20 years ago if you were wronged in any way you'd go to a solicitor , he'd sit and listen patiently, then offer a course of action to gain compensation.

That course would always start with a cash retainer and a warning that if you lose you will pay his bill plus you could be liable for the opposing sides bill as well

this was usually followed by, it's not that bad, I'll leave it thanks

roll on to today where there's a 4mph rear end shunt, screaming, followed by people falling out of the doors clutching their necks and walking away with 5k because it's free
 
wack61 said:
Ultimately it's the government who's to blame

20 years ago if you were wronged in any way you'd go to a solicitor , he'd sit and listen patiently, then offer a course of action to gain compensation.

That course would always start with a cash retainer and a warning that if you lose you will pay his bill plus you could be liable for the opposing sides bill as well

this was usually followed by, it's not that bad, I'll leave it thanks

roll on to today where there's a 4mph rear end shunt, screaming, followed by people falling out of the doors clutching their necks and walking away with 5k because it's free
Click to expand...

True, but that's a different side to it. In those days, police officers weren't prosecuted simply for doing what they are trained and paid to do, as has happened a number of times of the last few years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top