Pete Posted January 31, 2006 Author Share Posted January 31, 2006 burn him at the steak Medium rare? Or do you mean one of those wooden things? (stake) (sorry, someone did this to me today earlier) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 31, 2006 Author Share Posted January 31, 2006 And I got pulled for doing 81mph on the M6. 3 lanes and not another car in sight. That sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 I've got my IAM ticket. Do you think they'd let me get away with it too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambertpig Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 YES he should be punished as we would be.you know the law even if it is sometimes unfair,i certainly do not think he should be banned just fined like the rest of us. i am a fireman and see the results of bad driving all to often. i do not consider myself an unsafe driver as i always risk asses before putting my foot down and i beleive that someone who practices fast safe driving on empty roads will be in better control of any situation in traffic at slower(or any speed) if fast reactions or evasive(slowing) action is needed .as opposed to the slow driver(usually in a crap car) who could do little to react well in such a situation.This is a veiw shared by many of my colleges Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toyotasuprauk Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I wonder if the next times someone on this site posts about doing highly excessive speeds (which they do) if we'll threaten to burn them at the stake, call them dangerous and wish punishment on them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Well, Ive served in the Falklands, The Gulf and Bosnia. Am I exempt my 3 points for my 81mph. No.... because you're not a police driver.... or are you? I'm not saying that anyone who's ever served their country is immune from the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminator Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Just a thought does the police insurance cover the testing and trailing of vehicles on public roads. The guys biggest crime is his lack of restraint. He was off duty, having a laugh, but forgot about the on board camera. As has been said, his attitiude must have been sus as if he was a popular respected officer, who ever found the evidence may have accidentally recorded over it. 80+ in a 30 is just insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 More than 80 in a 30 is a bit much but lets face it most of use with bpu TT's have been over 150 on an empty motorway... some much, much more than that when conditions have allowed. The biggest mistake this guy made was getting caught, if he got caught it means some people in his unit don't like him and therefore has a fair chance of being a bit of a cock anyway... So, the lesson is.. don't get caught! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Is 159 mph really necessary to familiarise ones self with a car? I would suggest lower speeds to start off with then build up to higher speeds and I would have thought 159 isn't really necessary in a pursuit. OK so he is an advanced driver, my observer never suggested I try high speeds, In fact it was all about safety and a favourite saying was "it is better to get there - than not get there at all" Throw the book at him I say - 100 to 120 I could have accepted 159 is a tad excessive despite the time of day and road conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I wonder if the next times someone on this site posts about doing highly excessive speeds (which they do) if we'll threaten to burn them at the stake, call them dangerous and wish punishment on them? I don't think anyone is suggesting that he gets punished any more harshly. all anyone asks is that it is fair, in line with what the general public would receive. If the general public can't use excuses like 'familiarisation', 'experience', 'expert driver' then why should anyone else? The law is very inconsistent - well actually not the law, the punishments handed out for breaking them that can be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blert596 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 No.... because you're not a police driver.... or are you? I'm not saying that anyone who's ever served their country is immune from the law. So, what are you saying? That we should "go easy" on him because he's a copper. Because he does a risky job? Were do we draw the line? Because hes done a police drivers course? Or do we allow everyone who's done an advanced driving course to be treated differently. Last time I looked every citizen within Britain was subject to the laws of the land. No clauses or special treatment for specific occupations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoboblio Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 So, what are you saying? That we should "go easy" on him because he's a copper. Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. He's already been infront of a judge for his actions and the case was dismissed. Why the retrial? We draw the line wherever the judge chooses to draw it. That's their job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 Looks like this office is going for a retrial on this case I heard on the radio this morning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethr Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 When I heard 159 on a deserted motorway I didn't see what the fuss was about (to an extent). Except that people have been jailed because the simple fact of travelling at that speed was deemed to be such a heinous crime, regardless of the circumstances. However, for 80+ in a 30, for no good reason, he does deserve to have the book thrown at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Peace Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 being a trained driver is all well and good, doesn't stop a tyre blowing out, an animal running out etc etc being a good driver doesn't mean you are invincible or can control or react to every situation, some things are out of anyones control. Exactly what i was thinking, this is absolutely disgusting, dosn't set a very good example to other Police Drivers, or the general public! I remember being pulled up by the Police once and asked 'Would you call yourself an Experianced Driver?' my reply was 'there is no such thing as An experienced driver' (i got off with a caution after driving down a short cut which was for Taxi's and buses only) The Police in my local neighbourhood have been driving about like maniacs recently i recently passed South Harrow Station where there was a car manouvering in the middle of the road and countless pedestrians crossing the road after a train arrival, then i saw a Police car doing about 70mph coming around the corner i flashed furiously leaning out of my window and waving him to slow down, but he just carried on giving me a filthy look. I once slammed my hand on the horn when a Police van cut me up in South London forcing me into oncoming traffic (he was'nt on an emergency call)he pulled me up and I told him his driving was appalling telling him he could of caused a major accident, he then gave me piles of abuse, I took it further and gave up at the thought of filling a form in ha ha, but I did get a verbal apology and some grovelling from his Inspector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 159mph on a deserted motorway - big deal, in a good car on a one way road with good visibility, it's no big deal. I wanted cars cruise on the autobahn for 3 and 4 miles at a time @ their 155 limiters. After a few days there speed gets into perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 159mph on a deserted motorway - big deal, in a good car on a one way road with good visibility, it's no big deal. I wanted cars cruise on the autobahn for 3 and 4 miles at a time @ their 155 limiters. After a few days there speed gets into perspective. The difference being that other cars are expecting vehicles to be approaching them at 155mph on the Autobahn, old Ted and his Montego aren't thinking about that kind of thing when they swerve into the outside lane over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbeh Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 .. and that are roads are in bad condition compared to those Its the general feeling that in Europe they build things to help travel the continent quickly, over here theres no need for it, so they use old cart tracks for the road design and go over hills instead of through them. Cheif, I see what you're saying fella, but this is the same guy that would be throwing the book at you and more for doing the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangerous brain Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Road conditions and driver ability etc etc are all completely irrelevant. What should stand for that guy is the law that would stand for anyone else, thats what its there for. If I get nicked at that speed (and I may or may not have done that speed myself) I expect to go to jail for it simply because thats the law. Where do we draw the line if you let this guy go without relevant punishment for this offence? Let a chief super off murder as he's a top guy ?? Mitigating circumstances can affect sentencing and yeah his qualifications should be submittable to offset the punishment but only to the same degree a civilians punishment would be offset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Road conditions and driver ability etc etc are all completely irrelevant. What should stand for that guy is the law that would stand for anyone else, thats what its there for. If I get nicked at that speed (and I may or may not have done that speed myself) I expect to go to jail for it simply because thats the law. Where do we draw the line if you let this guy go without relevant punishment for this offence? Let a chief super off murder as he's a top guy ?? Mitigating circumstances can affect sentencing and yeah his qualifications should be submittable to offset the punishment but only to the same degree a civilians punishment would be offset. Cant compare an irreversible crime like Murder with speeding on an empty road. He has his driver performance assessed and documented. We dont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 The difference being that other cars are expecting vehicles to be approaching them at 155mph on the Autobahn, old Ted and his Montego aren't thinking about that kind of thing when they swerve into the outside lane over here. Ol Ted would have been rattling the pictures on the bedroom wall with his snoring at that time of night, anyway the road was meant to be deserted/empty at the time of the offence. I dont like traffic cops either, but I just dont see what the fuss is about in this particular incident. If it had been during the day...........I'd be writing about this in a very different manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefgroover Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Aslo, if he gets away with it then wooopppeee, I'll go do some driving exams, and if i get caught, i'll use the same as a reference case and get off too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren-K Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 being the creme de la creme doesnt make you telepathic enough to know when a rabbits gonna run out,or a dog,. he should serve time for driving a that speed .,because he should know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithy23 Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Damn theyre getting faster, time for some more goodies! Seriously though its wrong and is just another example of the system we live in... rant over before it starts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dangerous brain Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Cant compare an irreversible crime like Murder with speeding on an empty road. He has his driver performance assessed and documented. We dont. I'm not saying that speeding on any given day is comparable to murder. That was meant as an opposite end of the scale as in where will it all end if (a) given officer is allowed to receive a complete pardon for an offence due only to the fact that he is an officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now