# pulled over .....



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

well the speedbumps near where i live are stupidly big (would give a small wall a run for its money) so as my car is low i have to pretty much crawl over them (still scuff) .... next thing i know i hear sirens and an unmarked focus is behind me, copper inside telling me to pull over .... i then get a 15 min lecture about going too slow and being a "hazard" and also told me he could have given me a ticket but he was going to let me off !!! .... thought i better keep my mouth shut but made a note of his badge number ... grrrrrrrrrrrr


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

sounds like he was bored......what an idiot

J
xx


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

You did the right thing, keeping quiet, rather than arguing your case. As you know there is no minimum speed, and speed bumps are there to make you slow down, just cos he is driving a car he doesn't care about, doesn't mean everyone is.

Some, not all, coppers are right arrogant power hungry knobs. Probably bored.


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

Yeah I just let him have his moment of glory .... Just a shock being pulled over for going slow haha normally it's the other way round lol


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

J88nny said:


> Yeah I just let him have his moment of glory .... Just a shock being pulled over for going slow haha normally it's the other way round lol


Not sure if you've ever watched Corrie, but Roy failed his driving test for driving too slow.....

J
xx


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> J88nny said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah I just let him have his moment of glory .... Just a shock being pulled over for going slow haha normally it's the other way round lol
> ...


But was he driving a low TT .... Hahahaha


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

not the point lol 

J
xx


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> not the point lol
> 
> J
> xx


Haha  ... I could understand if he failed for going over a bump to slow ... In a low TT .... Haha


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Police like this do my head in, arrogant cnut.

Just for the record, in future if you haven't done anything wrong and don't listen to any of thier crap. Know your rights.

You don't have to listen to his "lecture" you don't even have to speak to them, only confirm your name and address. You don't have to get out your car either. Just lock the door and put the window down an inch, if they touch your car ask them politely to refrain from doing it. Ask what traffic law you have broken. ( going too slow over a bump is ridiculous) and if they cannot give a proper law ask if you are free to leave if they cannot tell you exactly which law it is.

Report the incident, take ask for their identification number. Turn off your engine, remove the keys place them on the dash and film them on your phone if you like "for your protection and theirs".

I respect the police 100% and 99% are deacent people doing a crap thankless job, and if you are in the wrong comply with them or you will make it worse.

But moronic bullies like do my head in. They are there to protect and serve the public, not harass innocent people.


----------



## Skeee (Jun 9, 2009)

Bored?
Small penis, or just jealous 'cos he wasn't in a TT!

Either way, well done for not pointing that out, to our wonderful boys in blue, of which he sounds like an exception.
Forget about it.

_But keep note of the badge number, exact time, date, location, and direction of travel then store it away on your pc etc just in case the bell-end revisits!
_


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

The actual offence is 'Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' (that's what you could have got a ticket for) which is what driving too slowly with no good reason is . It's extremely annoying to be held up by drivers not making reasonable progress in the conditions. The officer would have to show that at least one person was inconvenienced by your actions to prove his case. He is of course just as entitled to be annoyed at being held up as any other road user, but was he the only person being held up or were there others behind you also being held up?

You've dropped your car to the point where it grounds over speed bumps regardless of how slowly you go over them and I can well imagine how frustrating that might be for people stuck behind you. As usual, there are two sides to this story and we've only heard one. :wink:


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

I'm going to report it when is finish work, got his badge number and car reg, what a cock !!! Lol


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

igotone said:


> The actual offence is 'Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' (that's what you could have got a ticket for) which is what driving too slowly with no good reason is . It's extremely annoying to be held up by drivers not making reasonable progress in the conditions. The officer would have to show that at least one person was inconvenienced by your actions to prove his case. He is of course just as entitled to be annoyed at being held up as any other road user, but was he the only person being held up or were there others behind you also being held up?
> 
> You've dropped your car to the point where it grounds over speed bumps regardless of how slowly you go over them and I can well imagine how frustrating that might be for people stuck behind you. As usual, there are two sides to this story and we've only heard one. :wink:


Was just him behind me, his attitude stunk and to be fair I'm not going to risk ruining my car


----------



## OllieTT (Aug 22, 2013)

Should have just noshed him off and be done with it.... Just saying....

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

J88nny said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > The actual offence is 'Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' (that's what you could have got a ticket for) which is what driving too slowly with no good reason is . It's extremely annoying to be held up by drivers not making reasonable progress in the conditions. The officer would have to show that at least one person was inconvenienced by your actions to prove his case. He is of course just as entitled to be annoyed at being held up as any other road user, but was he the only person being held up or were there others behind you also being held up?
> ...


But you wouldn't have to risk ruining your car if you hadn't lowered it to that extent in the first place so that's a problem of your own making, and I assume you're not going to risk damaging your car regardless of how many vehicles are stuck behind you? What if it was an ambulance or fire engine behind you?


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

J88nny said:


> Was just him behind me, his attitude stunk and to be fair I'm not going to risk ruining my car


Playing devils advocate, I think the argument would be that you made the choice to lower your car to the point where it was unable to drive over speed bumps at a reasonable speed. I'm not allowed to remove my windscreen wipers, then crawl along at 10 mph in the rain because "I'm not going to risk having a crash because I can't see properly".

For the record I think it's a bit ridiculous he stopped you, and it was probably more due to his own frustration than any concern for the law.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

J88nny said:


> I'm going to report it when is finish work, got his badge number and car reg, what a cock !!! Lol


I think you should - let us all know how that pans out! You don't have his badge number you have his collar number.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> The actual offence is 'Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' (that's what you could have got a ticket for) which is what driving too slowly with no good reason is . It's extremely annoying to be held up by drivers not making reasonable progress in the conditions. The officer would have to show that at least one person was inconvenienced by your actions to prove his case. He is of course just as entitled to be annoyed at being held up as any other road user, but was he the only person being held up or were there others behind you also being held up?
> 
> You've dropped your car to the point where it grounds over speed bumps regardless of how slowly you go over them and I can well imagine how frustrating that might be for people stuck behind you. As usual, there are two sides to this story and we've only heard one. :wink:


With all due respect.

Bollocks, he wouldn't have a leg to stand on had this gone to court. He is in such a hurry and so inconvenienced he had time to harass an innocent motorist exercising her right to travel by spending 15 minutes "lecturing" her. 
Some speed bumps are excessively high and need to be driven over slowly. How much inconvenience would it cause if you cracked your sump and spilled a gallon of oil on the road?

I'd have told him to wright me the ticket and beat it. Then ticked the "see you in court" box.


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

I'll nip to the police station later and ask to speak to a sergeant, to be fair the car is only lowered 40mm on springs and like I said In my original post, the speedbumps were massive ! ... Normal speedbumps are fine, although I still slow down for them.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

Spandex said:


> For the record I think it's a bit ridiculous he stopped you, and it was probably more due to his own frustration than any concern for the law.


The cop is a road user and he can be just as inconvenienced as anyone else. The outpourings of nazi fury in this thread are ridiculous. None of us were there and can't judge the issue, especially on a one sided account


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> The cop is a road user and he can be just as inconvenienced as anyone else. The outpourings of nazi fury in this thread are ridiculous. None of us were there and can't judge the issue, * especially on a one sided account *


It looks to me that you have already made up your mind who is wrong.



igotone said:


> But you wouldn't have to risk ruining your car if you hadn't lowered it to that extent in the first place so that's a problem of your own making, and I assume you're not going to risk damaging your car regardless of how many vehicles are stuck behind you? What if it was an ambulance or fire engine behind you?


What a rediculous point to make, it's not like there are speed bumps every 6 inches, I'd imagine she would do what any motorist would do regardless, of how fast they negotiate speed bumps, she would have pulled over at the nearest safe point and allowed them to pass.


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

im a HE by the way ....... just sayin hahaha


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > The actual offence is 'Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' (that's what you could have got a ticket for) which is what driving too slowly with no good reason is . It's extremely annoying to be held up by drivers not making reasonable progress in the conditions. The officer would have to show that at least one person was inconvenienced by your actions to prove his case. He is of course just as entitled to be annoyed at being held up as any other road user, but was he the only person being held up or were there others behind you also being held up?
> ...


Very nice Brian - adds a whole new weight to your argument does that! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

J88nny said:


> im a HE by the way ....... just sayin hahaha


Sorry fella, I red your name as jenny


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

brian1978 said:


> J88nny said:
> 
> 
> > im a HE by the way ....... just sayin hahaha
> ...


No worries, it's Jonny .... Close though haha


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


All I'm saying Is it's bollocks, and the point your making is also bollocks. If he was crawling up the road at 5mph with no obstructions with a car behind him then yes you are correct about that law. However. 
Pulling someone for going too slow over a speedbump is just ridiculous and an utter waste of police time.

And while we are all being pedantic, how is it a new weight when it was the first point I made :wink:

I'm not falling out with you over this, everyone has a right to express an opinion. And I really can't see how jonny can be the one in the wrong here.


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> Not sure if you've ever watched Corrie, but Roy failed his driving test for driving too slow.....
> 
> J
> xx


I failed my first bike test for this!! Was doing 20mph past a school at 8:30am when it was a 30mph zone... i considered that to be appropriate but apparently not!?

Also in the flip side i was let of VERY lightly by two police officers the other night. Driving through a country hamlet at 3am doing... a lot more then the speed limit and avoiding bumps on the wrong side of the road... they used their heads as there was no other road users and actually very politely told me to slow down!

Before anyone says, i am well aware that i was being a C*** and that i got away with driving murder as they could easily have given me an instant ban. However i have learnt my lesson and won't be doing it again!


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> Pulling someone for going too slow over a speedbump is just ridiculous and an utter waste of police time.
> 
> :


It depends entirely on the circumstances. There's a road near me with speed bumps every fifty yards and it's about a mile long, usually with quite heavy traffic. Being stuck behind a car forced to negotiate those bumps slower than everyone else, because it has had been lowered to that extent would cause severe congestion.

I'm not judging anything - just trying to point out that there are two sides to this story. You're the one who's pigeon holed this cop as an arrogant b****** while knowing nothing about the circumstances except what the OP has chosen to tell us.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

LOL Not falling put with anyone mate - I'm off out now.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> LOL Not falling put with anyone mate - I'm off out now.


I wasn't making a statement about you, just saying how I felt about the discussion 

Tata.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

igotone said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> > For the record I think it's a bit ridiculous he stopped you, and it was probably more due to his own frustration than any concern for the law.
> ...


Sure he can be inconvenienced. I'm not arguing that he was technically in the wrong for pulling him over - driving too slow can be an offence - I'm just saying it's such a minor thing, particularly when you take into account the speed bumps, that it's a bit ridiculous that he bothered pulling someone over for it.

I certainly don't think there's any point making a complaint, because clearly the officer hasn't actually done anything wrong.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Spandex said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > Spandex said:
> ...


 Personally I'd report it anyway, if for no other reason than to put it on record should it become a regular occurrence.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

There's a legal limit of 100 mm I seem to recall for speedbumps. A villiage I know had some installed which were much higher and in no time the stretch of road was littered with bits of exhaust and broken down vehicles etc. and the bump cushions themselves had deep gouges in them. The council had to plane them off and I presume whoever installed them too high had to pay out a lot of compensation claims. They were replaced by some much more civilised ones that you could drive over normally up to the speed limit. If you have to slow down for these you are too low.


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

igotone said:


> The actual offence is 'Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' (that's what you could have got a ticket for) which is what driving too slowly with no good reason is :


Was not the speed hump a good reason are they not put there to slow traffic :?: :?: my TTs are not that low but I have to drive very slowly over some of the stupidly high speed humps we have


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

The point Igotone is making is a very salient one. Someone posts a complaint against the cops and there's always those quite willing to take that point of view as absolute Godpel truth and jump all over it with their vehement condemnation of the police.

When there are two people in conflict there are always three sides to the story; one person's point of view, the other person's point of view and then the reality. J88ny has posted here to make a complaint. It stands to reason his account will be written with a tendancy to support that complaint - otherwise what would be the point? Any one not an idiot would realise that there has to be another point of view to this and given we don't (and never will) have access to that point of view then we simply are not and never will be in a position to make properly informed comment.

But that doesn't stop some people, does it? After all, it's writen on the internet, so it must be exact truth.


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

Spandex said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > For the record I think it's a bit ridiculous he stopped you, and it was probably more due to his own frustration than any concern for the law.
> ...


I cant see why people expressing an opinion are nazis!

We all get inconvenienced on the roads by other road users, having a bit bit of patience is all that is required. As a professional police driver, he should know this more than anyone else.
As I said before the policeman does not care about his car, its a tool of his work. Where as the TT is someone's pride & joy, looked after, and the owner is entitled to take extra care of something he has worked hard & earned.

Suely whole purpose of speed bumps is to slow traffic, now we are being told to go quickly over them, is no no freedom of choice? The police have lots of offences you could be charged with, for doing seemily nothing wrong.


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

Mark Davies said:


> The point Igotone is making is a very salient one. Someone posts a complaint against the cops and there's always those quite willing to take that point of view as absolute Godpel truth and jump all over it with their vehement condemnation of the police.
> 
> When there are two people in conflict there are always three sides to the story; one person's point of view, the other person's point of view and then the reality. J88ny has posted here to make a complaint. It stands to reason his account will be written with a tendancy to support that complaint - otherwise what would be the point? Any one not an idiot would realise that there has to be another point of view to this and given we don't (and never will) have access to that point of view then we simply are not and never will be in a position to make properly informed comment.
> 
> But that doesn't stop some people, does it? After all, it's writen on the internet, so it must be exact truth.


You;re wrong, this is a forum, Forum means ... an assembly, meeting place, television program, etc., for the discussion of questions of public interest.

Surely people are only having a discussion, expressing their freedom of speech, giving their own opinion.

Maybe the definition of too slow is up for debate, as is if its worth the time of the police man to stop and threaten a charge, for something that affected no-one other than the police man, who has the power!


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Mark Davies said:


> The point Igotone is making is a very salient one. Someone posts a complaint against the cops and there's always those quite willing to take that point of view as absolute Godpel truth and jump all over it with their vehement condemnation of the police.
> 
> When there are two people in conflict there are always three sides to the story; one person's point of view, the other person's point of view and then the reality. J88ny has posted here to make a complaint. It stands to reason his account will be written with a tendancy to support that complaint - otherwise what would be the point? Any one not an idiot would realise that there has to be another point of view to this and given we don't (and never will) have access to that point of view then we simply are not and never will be in a position to make properly informed comment.
> 
> But that doesn't stop some people, does it? After all, it's writen on the internet, so it must be exact truth.


I think maybe you should credit people with the intelligence to understand that J88nny has simply given their side of the story. That doesn't mean we can't form and express an opinion - ironically, it certainly didn't stop you from forming and expressing one.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Mark Davies said:


> The point Igotone is making is a very salient one. Someone posts a complaint against the cops and there's always those quite willing to take that point of view as absolute Godpel truth and jump all over it with their vehement condemnation of the police.


Are you saying jonnie is lying about what happened?

I'm sorry but bar him literally taking 30 or more seconds to negotiate every speed bump I can hardly see any other side to this story.

Nobody vehemently condemned the police, he had a rant about ONE incident, I myself said that I consider 99% of them hard working people doing a thankless job. But you do get that 1% of arseholes that stand out more than the decent 99%, it's the same with people reporting problems with their car. You don't get many coming on and saying "yep another trouble free day, nothing went wrong"

You also don't see posts every day saying, "no problems with the boys in blue today. All smashing chaps" but when that 1% does do something stupid, say stopping a man harmlessly taking his time negotiating a speed hump in his pride and joy? You are going to hear about it.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

As usual - this is going nowhere. If you feel you have a complaint against a police officer, then you should take it to the proper quarters where it will be investigated and both sides heard. What is the point in posting on the internet other than to raise the responses which it has done here? If the officer was half the cock he is being made out to be then the matter should be properly investigated don't you think?

With all due respect to the OP - go and report it if you feel aggrieved. Trial by internet doesn't work!

What we don't know about this incident would fill a book. Was it a single speed bump or was it one of a series negotiated unduly slowly?

The officer is described as having a bad attitude with no actual accounts of conversation to back that up. The officer didn't give you a ticket and I assume he didn't inconvenience you by giving you a ticket to produce your documents - you got a really raw deal there! All too often these posts are prompted out of indignity that a policeman has actually had the temerity to stop them and speak to them.

15 minutes you say? That's an awful long time to be talking to someone about negotiating a speed bump too slowly. Count the time off on your watch and imagine how you might pad out that time- personally, I'd be struggling. :wink:


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

igotone said:


> .


Are you a police man?


----------



## zltm089 (Jul 27, 2009)

Agree, always two sides to a story or three if you like.

Yes slow drivers annoy me.

However, speed bumps are there for a reason....for you to slow down. It does sound like the officer was taking this a little bit too seriously.

I would complain formally.


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

igotone said:


> As usual - this is going nowhere.
> 
> *Seems is a hot topic that has spilt opinion, maybe you dont like the fact yours is the minority opinion.*
> 
> ...


----------



## spaceplace (Mar 10, 2013)

Should have said "there was a line of ducks crossing in front of you" or that you realised he was a policeman in an unmarked car so slowed down

Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

igotone said:


> As usual - this is going nowhere. If you feel you have a complaint against a police officer, then you should take it to the proper quarters where it will be investigated and both sides heard. What is the point in posting on the internet other than to raise the responses which it has done here? If the officer was half the cock he is being made out to be then the matter should be properly investigated don't you think?
> 
> With all due respect to the OP - go and report it if you feel aggrieved. Trial by internet doesn't work!
> 
> ...


And there's me thinking this a forum where you can talk about stuff ....


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

spike said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


Yes, as is mark. Both very quick to side with the anonymous cop that pulled jonny.

:roll:


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

brian1978 said:


> spike said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


haha thats it then .... touched a nerve ..... :lol:


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> spike said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


Actually, I'm not a policeman , I'm long retired although I was a cop for 30 years - most of it in CID.

I don't believe either I or Mark have sided with the cop, we're just not joining the baying crowd all too ready to lynch this cop without a little more evidence than we have here. He wasn't anonymous, he has his collar number clearly displayed and will show you his warrant card on request. Anonymity is posting ill considered opinion on the internet with whatever user name you choose to use, without being in possession of the facts .


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

igotone said:


> I don't believe either I or Mark have sided with the cop, we're just not joining the baying crowd all too ready to lynch this cop without a little more evidence than we have here. He wasn't anonymous, he has his collar number clearly displayed and will show you his warrant card on request. Anonymity is posting ill considered opinion on the internet with whatever user name you choose to use, without being in possession of the facts .


Are you reading a different thread to me? There's no lynch mob here. Neither is there any of the generalised anti-police bollocks you often get.

It's an odd thing to get pulled over for. That means it will generate comments and opinions.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> I'm not a policeman , I'm long retired although I was a cop for 30 years - most of it in CID.
> 
> I don't believe either I or Mark have sided with the cop, we're just not joining the baying crowd all too ready to lynch this cop without a little more evidence than we have here. He wasn't anonymous, he has his collar number clearly displayed and will show you his warrant card on request. Anonymity is posting ill considered opinion on the internet with whatever user name you choose to use, without being in possession of the facts .


Could have fooled me then, looked pretty obvious who you thought was the guilty party. I hope you didn't use this same logic when you were in active service. 

I didn't mean he was anonymous because he didn't have a collar number, I ment anonymous as in you don't know anything about him. Sorry if it wasn't clear.

You also both posted opinions holding the same facts we do. You can't have it both ways.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

Read the initial post again. The OP doesn't refer to a single speed bump, he refers to "them" and to having to "crawl " over them to avoid scuffing his car. That is quite arguably very inconsiderate to other road users.

As for a 15 minute lecture - use your loaf ... I could report him for process, issue him with a ticket to produce his documents , give him my very dodgy renderings of "Sam,Sam, Pick Up Thy Musket" and "The Lion's Eaten Our Albert" and still be away in under 15 minutes.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

As said there are two sides to this story, however there are speed hump and speed humps. My TT is not lowered yet I think twice about hitting many of them at any speed above 5mph for fear of damage. The worst are cushions where the wheels straddle the hump, I will not straddle these and insist on put one wheel on them to ensure I get clearance.

I will not risk damaging my car unnecessarily.

Since having the Evoque, I have been tempted to hit speed humps at higher speed and surprised even with off road suspension how bone jarring some humps can be.


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

igotone said:


> Read the initial post again. The OP doesn't refer to a single speed bump, he refers to "them" and to having to "crawl " over them to avoid scuffing his car. That is quite arguably very inconsiderate to other road users.
> 
> As for a 15 minute lecture - use your loaf ... I could report him for process, issue him with a ticket to produce his documents , give him my very dodgy renderings of "Sam,Sam, Pick Up Thy Musket" and "The Lion's Eaten Our Albert" and still be away in under 15 minutes.


Haha ... So I'm lying now ... Ok then


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> Read the initial post again. The OP doesn't refer to a single speed bump, he refers to "them" and to having to "crawl " over them to avoid scuffing his car. That is quite arguably very inconsiderate to other road users.
> 
> As for a 15 minute lecture - use your loaf ... I could report him for process, issue him with a ticket to produce his documents , give him my very dodgy renderings of "Sam,Sam, Pick Up Thy Musket" and "The Lion's Eaten Our Albert" and still be away in under 15 minutes.


I watch police pulling motorists several times every day, my shop window looks onto a restricted traffic area that motorists use to to take a fly shortcut, frequently traffic police will use this opportunity to issue tickets to offenders.

I'd say 15mins in the back of the police car is an absolute minimum. What are they doing, playing a game of snakes and ladders?

No I'd imagine they are running a pnc check while issuing a ticket while the other officer doles out his lecture.

Although they didn't give jonny a ticket, running a PNC check, no doubt checking his tyres etc.... and giving him a lecture would take 15 minutes easily.


----------



## OllieTT (Aug 22, 2013)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > Read the initial post again. The OP doesn't refer to a single speed bump, he refers to "them" and to having to "crawl " over them to avoid scuffing his car. That is quite arguably very inconsiderate to other road users.
> ...


Which all could have been avoided with a quick back seat nosh...

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Well I think it's a cautionary tale highlighting the sheer folly of lowering your car - it looks daft because the car appears impractical for our roads by reducing clearance and compliance, it exposes you to to the increased risk of ripping off your exhaust or cracking your sump, you are more likely to hold up the traffic and annoy other road users whilst you demonstrate how impractical your choice has made the car, attracting police attention because of the predictable effect on traffic flow and although not the case with the TT on a smooth road (I bet this wasn't the motivation) actually reducing handling performance.
Why do it? Looks? From an engineering and practical design point of view it looks rubbish - AND - it causes all sorts of arguments amongst otherwise friendly people on tinternet - perhaps I should make it a sticky? :lol: Only pulling legs but to every choice there is a consequence it has to be said :wink:


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> You also both posted opinions holding the same facts we do. You can't have it both ways.


That's because we live in the real world where there's a very inconvenient thing called 'evidence', and we're used to accruing some of it before we leap to judgement on the basis of one account. This is all based on a skimpy 6 line post with very little information on which to pass any judgement, yet you had no qualms about posting this....

*Police like this do my head in, arrogant cnut. *

On that note Brian,I shall refrain from further comment.


----------



## Skeee (Jun 9, 2009)

John-H said:


> *There's a legal limit of 100 mm I seem to recall for speedbumps.* ............................


Can you provide a reference for this? 
Please.
Because the speed hump at both my local council Recycling Centres is so high that I have to stop and drive at an angle otherwise it touches the undertray. 
My suspension is stock albeit post facelift. before the fuzz on The Forum have ago!

The OP hasn't stated if his is 4cm lowered from pre or post, facelift. Or if it is a Quattro or V6 as that may affect the front undertray height.



John-H said:


> ....................more civilised ones that you could drive over normally up to the speed limit. If you have to slow down for these you are too low.


 Then my stock 225 2005 Roadster is too low!

The last time I was in London on a busy 'rat run' route running parallel to the S Circ, it was obvious that I was holding up a few cars (albeit travelling particularly fast) so at the next hump I simply pulled close in to the kerb whilst not actually stopping, but to make it clear for the couple of cars to pass. Which they did. If I had been pulled in by plod then for that, I would have been as irate as Johnny is! 
Whether I would have argued the toss or just sat there and accepted the patronising lecture would have depended solely on how I was feeling that day. As pointed out in my previous post I do have a lot of time and respect for almost all plod. It's just that I have little experience arguing with them as usually when I have to sit and listen to the patronising talk it's for a good reason.
_
I have actually been pulled a couple of times when doing nothing illegal but simply because it was late at night but on both these occasions I was treated politely, perhaps abrupt, but with respect._


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Certainly: The Highways (Road Humps) Regulations 1999
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999 ... ion/4/made

I got stopped 43 times by the Police in my rally car before I gave up counting. In all cases they were just checking it wasn't stolen and often became curious to see the engine, neither of which I minded because I felt they were looking after my interests or just being friendly


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > You also both posted opinions holding the same facts we do. You can't have it both ways.
> ...


Yea they do, I believe jonny and I stand by that comment.

If you are going to post snippets of what I wrote to skew what I said to make me look like a dick at least quote the part where I say the other 99% of police are decent hard working members of the community. :roll:


----------



## Skeee (Jun 9, 2009)

Thanks. Ruler will be in the boot for my next visit


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

LOL it actually depends whether the road is adopted for the purpose of the Highways Acts and Road Traffic Acts.If the road is within the recycling centre itself, it may well not be and therefore not governed by the same regs.


----------



## Skeee (Jun 9, 2009)

Thanks. I did wonder that if the road was private there'd be some 'get out.'


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Skeee said:


> Thanks. I did wonder that if the road was private there'd be some 'get out.'


Yea if It's private they can pretty much do what they like, the post office depo where I live has a hump just inside the gate that would stop a tank. I don't even attempt it.


----------



## redsilverblue (Mar 9, 2011)

igotone said:


> But you wouldn't have to risk ruining your car if you hadn't lowered it to that extent in the first place so that's a problem of your own making, and I assume you're not going to risk damaging your car regardless of how many vehicles are stuck behind you? *What if it was an ambulance or fire engine behind you?*


I assume you mean an ambulance/fire engine being in a rush; personally I would indicate left and completely stop for them to pass, then would continue the speed bump journey :?

I daily have to dive through 4 speed bump areas (that's many speed bumps) and I don't think I have ever driven over a single speed bump faster than 5mph even though my TT hasn't been lowered. In fact, very recently, I've been overtaken by a Matiz which bounced on them like a fricking ping-pong ball ... what's the point, why risk damaging your car. Reading that police might stop me for driving to slow on them is definitely not gonna make me speed up and I would rather take a ticket :lol:


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

5 mph is fine and perfectly reasonable. The guy has admitted that his car is lowered and regardless of how slow he takes these bumps, it still bottoms out. I'd invite you consider how slowly you'd be taking these bumps knowing that the car IS going to ground. Excruciatingly slowly I'd say, and how many of these bumps are we talking about - we still don't know.


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

igotone said:


> 5 mph is fine and perfectly reasonable. The guy has admitted that his car is lowered and regardless of how slow he takes these bumps, it still bottoms out. I'd invite you consider how slowly you'd be taking these bumps knowing that the car IS going to ground. Excruciatingly slowly I'd say, and how many of these bumps are we talking about - we still don't know.


There is 3 bumps to be precise ... Oh and your right the police officer wasn't talking to me for 15 minuites ... I got pulled at 08:30 and when I put my key in the ignition it was 08:46 .... So 16 minuites .. Do apologise


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> 5 mph is fine and perfectly reasonable. The guy has admitted that his car is lowered and regardless of how slow he takes these bumps, it still bottoms out. I'd invite you consider how slowly you'd be taking these bumps knowing that the car IS going to ground. Excruciatingly slowly I'd say, and how many of these bumps are we talking about - we still don't know.


Didn't he say it was on 40mm lowering springs, this does not make a TT very low, perhaps 15-20mm if it's a facelift car. I have 40mm lowering springs on my facelift TT and I scrape on a LOT of the ridiculous humps round my way. My car isn't that low. Perhaps 1 inch lower than when it left the factory.

as for saying how fast he goes over bumps you simply dont know, you are just making facts up now.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> Didn't he say it was on 40mm lowering springs, this does not make a TT very low, perhaps 15-20mm if it's a facelift car.
> You are just making facts up now m8.


Brian, read his first post FFS. he clearly states the car still scuffs.

I drive a TTRTS and I can't say I've ever bottomed out on a speed bump, and I certainly don't need to take them any slower than the general volume of traffic does.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > Didn't he say it was on 40mm lowering springs, this does not make a TT very low, perhaps 15-20mm if it's a facelift car.
> ...


I read every post FFS. he clearly said he only has 40mm lowering springs, incase you are unaware these do not lower facelift cars 40mm. They lower 40mm more than the original pre facelift non lowered car.

I can't say for sure about the humps round where you live but a few where I live scuff my car. It's not because my car is too low, it's because the stupid bumps are excessively high.
What exactly do you propse he does, wreck his car driving over them at 30mph?


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

J88nny said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > 5 mph is fine and perfectly reasonable. The guy has admitted that his car is lowered and regardless of how slow he takes these bumps, it still bottoms out. I'd invite you consider how slowly you'd be taking these bumps knowing that the car IS going to ground. Excruciatingly slowly I'd say, and how many of these bumps are we talking about - we still don't know.
> ...


Oh hello Johnny!  Well you've started the usual forum war with your post and you've had ample time to enlarge on what it was about this incident which is so annoying and what it was about this copper that makes him an arrogant cnut, a cock, and several other choice descriptions used by people who weren't there and know nothing about the circumstances because you've told us next to nothing.. Please enlighten us and I'll definitely advise you to complain if you're justified.

If on the other hand he's just offended your dignity by having the temerity to point out to you that you're driving too slowly in the prevailing circumstances , which might well include speed bumps then you need to get over it. It is an offence - quite rightly so, and has been for as long as I can remember.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> Oh hello Johnny!  Well you've started the usual forum war with your post and you've had ample time to enlarge on what it was about this incident which is so annoying and what it was about this copper that makes him an arrogant cnut, a cock, and several other choice descriptions used by people who weren't there and know nothing about the circumstances because you've told us next to nothing.. Please enlighten us and I'll definitely advise you to complain if you're justified.
> 
> If on the other hand he's just offended your dignity by having the temerity to point out to you that you're driving too slowly in the prevailing circumstances , which might well include speed bumps then you need to get over it. It is an offence - quite rightly so, and has been for as long as I can remember.


Lmfao, he didn't start a forum war with his post, if anyone started it, it was you. all he did was pass comment on an experience he had with the police. :lol:

Here is the original post, incase you have forgotten how innocently it was put across. hardly inciting a forum war, is it?



J88nny said:


> well the speedbumps near where i live are stupidly big (would give a small wall a run for its money) so as my car is low i have to pretty much crawl over them (still scuff) .... next thing i know i hear sirens and an unmarked focus is behind me, copper inside telling me to pull over .... i then get a 15 min lecture about going too slow and being a "hazard" and also told me he could have given me a ticket but he was going to let me off !!! .... thought i better keep my mouth shut but made a note of his badge number ... grrrrrrrrrrrr


I have a feeling no matter what jonny says it will not change your attitude towards the situation.

I still stand by my and most other peoples opinion. Pulling someone over for driving over speed bumps too slowey is as stupid as It is a waste of everyone's time. Just because it is technically an offence doesn't mean it must be enforced. Common sense must be applied.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > Oh hello Johnny!  Well you've started the usual forum war with your post and you've had ample time to enlarge on what it was about this incident which is so annoying and what it was about this copper that makes him an arrogant cnut, a cock, and several other choice descriptions used by people who weren't there and know nothing about the circumstances because you've told us next to nothing.. Please enlighten us and I'll definitely advise you to complain if you're justified.
> ...


This is pretty pointless Brian, we don't know how far apart these bumps were, how long this cop had been behind him, or what progress he was making between the bumps, let alone his speed over the bumps themselves. Short of the cop being a TT driver and posting here we're never going to hear that side of the story. I'm just pointing out that there are two sides to this story and we haven't even had a tangible account of the one side we've heard.

We solve nothing by arguing here, the OP should complain if he feels he's justified in doing so.

And now, I really am out - I could have more fun sticking pins in my bollocks. :wink:


----------



## J88nny (Dec 21, 2013)

igotone said:


> J88nny said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


So I've caused a forum war ???? I was talking about an expieriance I had this morning, if anyone is creating anything it's you ... I wasn't aware forum rules were to give a step by step account of what happened ... Fact is I got pulled over for going slow over a speed bump ... No matter what side you look at it it's pathetic ! Another waste of time from the police,
Him pulling has made no difference what so ever ! I will still go slow no matter what, I shall reconsider putting anything on this forum if this is what happens ... Absolute joke


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

J88nny said:


> So I've caused a forum war ???? I was talking about an expieriance I had this morning, if anyone is creating anything it's you ... I wasn't aware forum rules were to give a step by step account of what happened ... Fact is I got pulled over for going slow over a speed bump ... No matter what side you look at it it's pathetic ! Another waste of time from the police,
> Him pulling has made no difference what so ever ! I will still go slow no matter what, I shall reconsider putting anything on this forum if this is what happens ... Absolute joke


I wouldn't sweat it m8.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> Oh hello Johnny!  Well you've started the usual forum war with your post and you've had ample time to enlarge on what it was about this incident which is so annoying and what it was about this copper that makes him an arrogant cnut, a cock, and several other choice descriptions used by people who weren't there and know nothing about the circumstances because you've told us next to nothing.. Please enlighten us and I'll definitely advise you to complain if you're justified.
> 
> If on the other hand he's just offended your dignity by having the temerity to point out to you that you're driving too slowly in the prevailing circumstances , which might well include speed bumps then you need to get over it. It is an offence - quite rightly so, and has been for as long as I can remember.


Well that's some pretty condescending s***. You could start a forum war talking down to people like that :roll:

I also like how you ask johnny to " Please enlighten us and I'll definitely advise you to complain if you're justified." Then basically tell him to [email protected]@k off because it's boring you before he even got the chance to respond.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > Oh hello Johnny!  Well you've started the usual forum war with your post and you've had ample time to enlarge on what it was about this incident which is so annoying and what it was about this copper that makes him an arrogant cnut, a cock, and several other choice descriptions used by people who weren't there and know nothing about the circumstances because you've told us next to nothing.. Please enlighten us and I'll definitely advise you to complain if you're justified.
> ...


I didn't tell anyone to [email protected]@k off , that's your interpretation of what I said and the relevant remark was addressed to YOU not Johnny. Read the posts! :roll:


----------



## JNmercury00 (May 22, 2007)

http://www.somethingawful.com/news/how-win-any/

Looks like someone has been reading this guide! Point 4.


----------



## JNmercury00 (May 22, 2007)

igotone said:


> Spandex said:
> 
> 
> > For the record I think it's a bit ridiculous he stopped you, and it was probably more due to his own frustration than any concern for the law.
> ...


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

JNmercury00 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > Spandex said:
> ...


That's a quite funny article actually and I hadn't read it.


----------



## JNmercury00 (May 22, 2007)

Anything to lighten the mood......


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

J88nny said:


> So I've caused a forum war ????


No, you're not the one who has caused offence - not to me anyway. You've had an experience that you wanted to vent your spleen about and you've posted it in the flame room of a chat forum on the internet. That's what they are for. No worries about that. If you have had a poor experience at the hands of one of my less-than-amicable colleagues (sadly some do exist) them you have my sympathy. As Igotone said, do submit a complaint about his behaviour if you feel aggrieved.

What is annoying is the way people who were not even there, had nothing whatsoever to do with the incident, know virtually nothing about it except the barest facts given from a clearly polarized point of view _*still*_ decide to put their oar in and declare someone a cnut - which you, the person involved, didn't even do.

And then they think that's fine as long as they say they still think 99% of cops are okay.

No, it's not fine. I can assure you that every one of those 99% of'decent' cops will feel personally affronted by that attitiude. This officer was called a cnut without any real justification at all - so effectively he's been called a cnut just because he's a cop and someone happened to talk about him. So that may as well be Igotone, me or any one of my colleagues who go out there day after day working hard to try and ensure you sleep safely in your beds at night. Thanks.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


I didn't say you told him to [email protected]@k off, I said you basically told him to [email protected]@k off... you asked him to explain the situation, then before he got a chance to do so you said.....



igotone said:


> And now, I really am out - I could have more fun sticking pins in my bollocks. :wink:


To me that's basically telling us to [email protected]@k off as you have no time for us :wink:


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

Well said Mark. I dunno why I get involved anyway - I'm just a test pilot for Audi nowadays. :lol:


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > And now, I really am out - I could have more fun sticking pins in my bollocks. :wink:
> ...


Brian, please don't put words in my mouth. The remark was addressed to you and in no way can that be interpreted as 'Us' or Johnny. You've been one of the most vociferous people in this thread and are quite unable to see you don't know the full circumstances. It was my way of telling you I was fed up of having a pointless argument with YOU - that's all.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Mark Davies said:


> J88nny said:
> 
> 
> > So I've caused a forum war ????
> ...


Well since this is clearly talking about me. I'll comment.

I have already stated the reason I said he was a cnut was because I decided to believe my fellow forum member and tt enthusiast. I am entirely entitled to form my opinion on whatever evidence I choose. The same as you are.

Shouldn't you be off posting on the newbie welcome threads shamelessly plugging your book :lol:


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> Oh hello Johnny!  Well you've started the usual forum war with your post





Mark Davies said:


> J88nny said:
> 
> 
> > So I've caused a forum war ????
> ...





igotone said:


> Well said Mark. I dunno why I get involved anyway


Jesus, make up your mind. What a load of bollocks :lol:

As Duncan banatyne says.... I'm oot.


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

igotone said:


> J88nny said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


You say "don't puts words in my mouth" You;re the one who called the police man all manor of names, I don't recall anyone else doing so in the thread, a few of us called him arrogant, but not the words you used. You also called some of the forum members nazis, for which you should apologise.

Jonny may have a life away from the forum, so saying he has had ample time to enlarge on his comment, is unfounded without you knowing the facts, or evidence, of jonny's schedule today.

I;d hate to be have dealt with by a police man such as you, who won't accept any discussion against your one sided views. You;re not helping the policeman's cause. The fact is public time was used to reprimand someone for going too slowly over a speed bump.

Again I will state that a forum is a place for discussion.


----------



## Bartsimpsonhead (Aug 14, 2011)

redsilverblue said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > *What if it was an ambulance or fire engine behind you?*
> ...


Reading through this this was exactly the point I was going to make - given it's safe to do so, and if completely necessary, I'd slow to a stop to let the emergency vehicle overtake.
But then, in other circumstances, given some people have been prosecuted for doing so, I'd definitely think twice about pulling forward through a set of traffic lights if they were on 'red' to let an emergency vehicle through.

Back on topic - mine's lowered by maybe 25mm (on Eibach springs) and I still slow down for speed humps. Though someone mentioned a minimum height for speed humps, is there a maximum? (edit: I found/read the link - no lower than 25mm and no higher than 100mm) I guess not all speed humps are uniform, so Johnny's might be excessively big.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Bartsimpsonhead said:


> redsilverblue said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


100mm is the maximum. Not the minimum.

Thank god :lol:


----------



## Bartsimpsonhead (Aug 14, 2011)

Yep, just found and read that link. Though sometimes they feel bigger going over them.


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

BUNDLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

There are a lot more bumps being put in that are pretty much square blocks and those are to "slow buses down" I slow right down for those and any other bumps because I'd rather not trash the suspension on my car.....

J
xx


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

spike said:


> You say "don't puts words in my mouth" You;re the one who called the police man all manor of names, I don't recall anyone else doing so in the thread, a few of us called him arrogant, but not the words you used. You also called some of the forum members nazis, for which you should apologise.


Seriously, how can we have any sensible discussion when you can't read the thread? "Arrogant cnut" is well covered in the thread and Johnn actually did call the officer a cock. We'll gloss over the member whose considered advice was he should just have "noshed him". :roll: Don't hold your breath while you're waiting for my apology.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

Finally, if the officer was out of order and his manner was truly offensive or oppressive, I hope to hear in due course that Johnny has taken the complaint to where it belongs and where the full facts will be ascertained.

The officer was there and made a judgement on the circumstances as he saw them. We don't even know if the officer was concerned about his speed solely over the bumps or his progress along that whole stretch of road. None of us were there, and no-one can judge this matter as simply or one sidedly as too many people here are all too ready to do.


----------



## Skeee (Jun 9, 2009)

Bartsimpsonhead said:


> But then, in other circumstances, *given some people have been prosecuted for doing so,* I'd definitely think twice about pulling forward through a set of traffic lights if they were on 'red' to let an emergency vehicle through..................


Any examples? 
I've done this on a few occasions, once quite recently on the A350 crossroads.
Definitely don't think once, let alone twice, before doing it. It's either visibly clear and safe to do so in which case I've gone or it isn't.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

Skeee said:


> Bartsimpsonhead said:
> 
> 
> > But then, in other circumstances, *given some people have been prosecuted for doing so,* I'd definitely think twice about pulling forward through a set of traffic lights if they were on 'red' to let an emergency vehicle through..................
> ...


This is a difficult one. I've gone through red lights checking for safety obviously, when it was obvious the police car, ambulance or fire engine desperately wanted me to go - blues and twos on and flashing headlights at me etc. I've certainly gone well over a ton on the M6 where it was coned off to a single lane, when a police Volvo came zooming up behind me with everything on and I got an appreciative wave from the driver as soon as I pulled over and he was able to pass, but be absolutely sure that's what they want you to do!

Standard advice to emergency vehicles is not to leave sirens on etc when stationary at lights behind traffic unless they're intending and wanting to go there and then - it's a very bad practice and just pressurises motorists into erratic decisions. Unfortunately I do see this sometimes and it's quite obvious the obstructing traffic can't get out of the way safely anyway.

Unfortunately there was a well publicised case of a motorist driving across red lights to make way for an ambulance which actually was in a real hurry, but the lights were covered by a camera and despite all his protestations - he ended up having to pay the FP ticket.

So - something which depends on the circumstances, but you do need to be careful.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> Skeee said:
> 
> 
> > Bartsimpsonhead said:
> ...


That's just ridiculous him/her having to pay the fine, just shows the lack of real intelegence of the people who must have looked at this case and decided to decline his/hers appeals.

I assume the law still applies to emergency vehicles and is only waved for them NOT changed to suit them that the ambulance driver got a fine? Well obviously not. But how can they not enforced one but enforced the other.

Typical example of people in a position of power getting it wrong and innocent people suffering as a result. I must admit I'm more inclined to do something risky to let an ambulance or a fire engine through than a police car. Probably because the 2 former have a higher likely hood to be going to a life or death situation where time is of the absolute essence than a police car. I would still go through a red light to let any of them squeeze through though. Maybe not one with camera now though


----------



## Bartsimpsonhead (Aug 14, 2011)

There was this one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -pass.html
Considering the driver got a fine AND points on his license its worth considering NOT moving through lights to let them pass.
I've heard of other cases, but can't find them just yet...

The IAM did a survey on it which is quite interesting.
http://www.iam.org.uk/media-and-researc ... y-vehicles
I guess being an IAM driver, those questioned would be more aware of the law with regards driving through lights than 'regular' motorists, and might consider against it.

A discussion on the matter from some 'special' people: http://www.policespecials.com/forum/ind ... y-vehicle/

Interesting little video on how to help the Emergancy services - http://www.bluelightaware.org.uk/


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

brian1978 said:


> I assume the law still applies to emergency vehicles and is only waved for them NOT changed to suit them that the ambulance driver got a fine? Well obviously not. But how can they not enforced one but enforced the other.


The law specifically exempts emergency vehicles under certain circumstances. They're not just 'let off'.

On a lighter note, when googling something about traffic lights I found this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ps-waits-roadworks-sign-intended-traffic.html


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

igotone said:


> spike said:
> 
> 
> > You say "don't puts words in my mouth" You;re the one who called the police man all manor of names, I don't recall anyone else doing so in the thread, a few of us called him arrogant, but not the words you used. You also called some of the forum members nazis, for which you should apologise.
> ...


So its ok for you to call forum members nazis?


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Mark Davies said:


> ... you've posted it in the flame room of a chat forum on the internet....


Just a correction there Mark - this is Off Topic not the Flame Room, so no foul language is allowed.

As for the general comments - it's free speech and anyone can give an opinion or even give an opinion about someone else's opinion etc - just so long as we don't get into personal attacks against the person as they are not allowed even in the Flame room - which we are not in anyway - so would members please be careful.


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

spike said:


> nazis?


comma nazi's? where????? [smiley=idea2.gif] [smiley=rifle.gif]

J
xx


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

....Get the feeling this post may need some inappropriate cheese related posts to calm the mood!


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

igotone said:


> The cop is a road user and he can be just as inconvenienced as anyone else. The outpourings of nazi fury in this thread are ridiculous. None of us were there and can't judge the issue, especially on a one sided account


No apology then for suggesting members are like nazis?

I actually think this is a serious personal attack on the members for simply expressing an opinion.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

spike said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > The cop is a road user and he can be just as inconvenienced as anyone else. The outpourings of nazi fury in this thread are ridiculous. None of us were there and can't judge the issue, especially on a one sided account
> ...


Serious personal attack my arse - grow up!

And make your mind up - did I say the members "were" Nazis or "Like" Nazis? Answer.... neither!


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> spike said:
> 
> 
> > igotone said:
> ...


Can you please post some quotes of these " outpourings of nazi fury ". I've looked but can't seem to find any :?


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> Can you please post some quotes of these " outpourings of nazi fury ". I've looked but can't seem to find any :?


LOL.Really Brian? How about this one.....

*Police like this do my head in, arrogant cnut.

Just for the record, in future if you haven't done anything wrong and don't listen to any of thier crap. Know your rights.

You don't have to listen to his "lecture" you don't even have to speak to them, only confirm your name and address. You don't have to get out your car either. Just lock the door and put the window down an inch, if they touch your car ask them politely to refrain from doing it. Ask what traffic law you have broken. ( going too slow over a bump is ridiculous) and if they cannot give a proper law ask if you are free to leave if they cannot tell you exactly which law it is.

Report the incident, take ask for their identification number. Turn off your engine, remove the keys place them on the dash and film them on your phone if you like "for your protection and theirs".

I respect the police 100% and 99% are deacent people doing a crap thankless job, and if you are in the wrong comply with them or you will make it worse.

But moronic bullies like do my head in. They are there to protect and serve the public, not harass innocent people.*


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

My conclusion , and last I will say, i'd that the ex policeman has done nothing, in my opinion, to improve the negative views many perfectly law biding citizens have of the police. As both Myself & brian have said a minority of police let the good ones down.


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > Can you please post some quotes of these " outpourings of nazi fury ". I've looked but can't seem to find any :?
> ...


Giving my opinion is an outpouring of Nazi fury?

I can form my opinion and say what I like, it's called freedom of expression and it's my human right, (is article 5 of the bill of human rights by the way)

You don't seem too fond of this freedom of expression. And comparing this to "Nazi outpourings" is simply ludicrous.

Isnt it ironic that the Nazi's themselves are famed for this lack of respect for the fundamentals of human rights also.


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

... inglorious bastards... great film!


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

NickG said:


> ... inglorious bastards... great film!


Ok you win, some cheese related humour.


----------



## zltm089 (Jul 27, 2009)

NickG said:


> ... inglorious bastards... great film!


brilliant film!!!!

and so, is law abiding citizen!


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > brian1978 said:
> ...


The original post said nothing whatsoever about the copper's attitude , but the following posts immediately described him as an "idiot" and a "power hungry nob" Then you jumped in with your Mr Angry tirade, making it all too obvious that you have issues with the police - adding a quick reference to 80% of police being OK doesn't really fool anyone - you have issues , despite the fact you've probably never met one of these "arrogant cnuts" or "moronic bullies".

I'm all for freedom of speech, but in the case of some people it really needs to be licensed


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

mmmmm cheese 

J
xx


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> The original post said nothing whatsoever about the copper's attitude , but the following posts immediately described him as an "idiot" and a "power hungry nob" Then you jumped in with your Mr Angry tirade, making it all too obvious that you have issues with the police - adding a quick reference to 80% of police being OK doesn't really fool anyone - you have issues , despite the fact you've probably never met one of these "arrogant cnuts" or "moronic bullies".
> 
> I'm all for freedom of speech, *but in the case of some people it really needs to be license*


So freedom of speak is ok when it suits you, you sound like a right little dictator.

It's quite concerning that an ex police officer thinks like this. Or is it you just don't like people talking back to you?

As I've said before people can say what they like and form opinions from whatever facts they have, you clearly have done this so why is it not ok for others to do it? 
I didnt add a quick reference to 80% of police being alright I said 99% were decent hard working people, It is written on the same page as your quote. So please don't try to alter the facts to suit yourself.

Whether you agree with me or not Is irrelevant, to me this shows an ingrained and probably unconscious tendency to alter facts to suit your own arguments, again disturbing given your previous occupation.

Contrary to whatever fantasy has been brewing in your head I do not have any problems with the police, I have a few relatives who serve in the force and one older family member who is also ex CID.

I do however have problems with police wasting peoples time for going slow over a speed bump.


----------



## igotone (Mar 10, 2010)

brian1978 said:


> Whether you agree with me or not Is irrelevant, to me this shows an ingrained and probably unconscious tendency to alter facts to suit your own arguments, again disturbing given your previous occupation.
> 
> .


 :lol: Thatis just soooo funny coming from you!

OK- I'm now drawing my line under this...

HERE______________________________________________________________________________________________

Mmmmm....cheese!


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

igotone said:


> brian1978 said:
> 
> 
> > Whether you agree with me or not Is irrelevant, to me this shows an ingrained and probably unconscious tendency to alter facts to suit your own arguments, again disturbing given your previous occupation.
> ...


Show me one example of where I blatantly changed facts to suit my own argument, I can find several on this thread alone where you have done it.

Let's summarise. 
You think freedom of speech is ok, but not when you don't like it. 
You change facts to suit yourself. Then blindly accuse me of doing the same. 
It's ok for you to form opinions of me and others with little or no evidence but not ok for us to do the same?
You compare our freedom of expression to "Nazi outpourings"
And you seem to think you have the right to begin the debate and then end it at your choosing.

Ok let's as you said end this here.

No hard feelings, I love a good debate.

Brian


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

*MMMMMMMMM CHEESE!!!!!!*

J
xx


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

*Stinking Bishop!*


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> *MMMMMMMMM CHEESE!!!!!!*
> 
> J
> xx


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

*....WAITING FOR JESS TO MENTION SMOKED AUSTRIAN...*


----------



## spike (Dec 26, 2013)

brian1978 said:


> igotone said:
> 
> 
> > The original post said nothing whatsoever about the copper's attitude , but the following posts immediately described him as an "idiot" and a "power hungry nob" Then you jumped in with your Mr Angry tirade, making it all too obvious that you have issues with the police - adding a quick reference to 80% of police being OK doesn't really fool anyone - you have issues , despite the fact you've probably never met one of these "arrogant cnuts" or "moronic bullies".
> ...


I agree with Brian


----------

