# one rule for them.....



## ronin (Sep 6, 2003)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shro ... 284962.stm


----------



## Dr_Parmar (May 10, 2002)

maybe i shud go familiarise myself with my car!

twat.


----------



## GoingTTooFast (Apr 4, 2006)

ronin said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/5284962.stm


He's also got a face you'd never get tired of punching hasn't he?

He looks the arrogant twat you need to be to progress in the police force.


----------



## CH_Peter (May 16, 2002)

GoingTTooFast said:


> ronin said:
> 
> 
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/5284962.stm
> ...


Yeah, every last cooper above constable is a complete arsehole.


----------



## TTotal (Aug 12, 2002)

Didnt know Policemen made barrels ? :?


----------



## CH_Peter (May 16, 2002)

TTotal said:


> Didnt know Policemen made barrels ? :?


Tres drole. :roll:


----------



## TTotal (Aug 12, 2002)

TrÃ©s drole ? Pardon mois :lol:


----------



## GoingTTooFast (Apr 4, 2006)

CH_Peter said:


> GoingTTooFast said:
> 
> 
> > ronin said:
> ...


That's not what I meant, but yes I agree it could be read like that. It's just I've met my fair share of arrogant coppers over the years (on the RIGHT side of the law I might add! ) and this story just reminded me of every single one of them!


----------



## mike_bailey (May 7, 2002)

The judge said he'd sufferred enough due to the trial taking two and a half years but if he'd pleaded guilty at the start he wouldn't have suffered at all. Real shit for brains reasoning.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

I'm quite familiar with my car; maybe I should get more intimate in future, seeing as it's allowed. :wink:


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

But NONE of us is creme de la creme! :roll:


----------



## Hev (Feb 26, 2005)

vlastan said:


> But NONE of us is creme de la creme! :roll:


Speak for yourself 

Hev x :-*


----------



## MikeyG (Sep 17, 2005)

Good result!

This man, based on being a police class one driver AND being considered very good within that elite group, is a f*&k of a lot safer driving at very high speed in the middle of the night than most people on the UK roads are in their day-to-day driving.

Would anyone here seriously argue that everyone is equally safe on a motorway (for example) if they're driving at 70 mph? They're not - not even remotely so. Some people are VERY safe doing that - others are driving too close (the majority), not paying attention, talking on the 'phone, etc. and are vastly more danger to themselves and others than this highly-competent driver in the middle of the night on a deserted road! It would be more reasonable and useful if everyone (and I mean in the media, not here) who's whinging about this decision focussed on why it is that all the tailgaters don't get sent to court.

More to the point - wouldn't it be nice if speed limits varied according to competence, with a series of increasingly difficult tests giving the right to drive faster, subject to road and weather conditions, etc.? Won't happen, but it's a good idea - might make a few people a bit less rubbish at this driving thing.


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

Minor point, but it is not the policeman that has acquitted himself. I believe the magistrate is the one that made the decision.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

MikeyG said:


> Good result!
> 
> This man, based on being a police class one driver AND being considered very good within that elite group, is a f*&k of a lot safer driving at very high speed in the middle of the night than most people on the UK roads are in their day-to-day driving.
> 
> More to the point - wouldn't it be nice if speed limits varied according to competence, with a series of increasingly difficult tests giving the right to drive faster, subject to road and weather conditions, etc.? Won't happen, but it's a good idea - might make a few people a bit less rubbish at this driving thing.


Mikey

I tried that one after 15 years of successful motor racing; it didn't work. As a matter of fact I think it went against me. Narked the bench no end.

If your man was doing what he was doing, how do you know that some other innocent driver might be around at the same time, returning home late, what have you. What about mechanical failure at that speed etc etc. Don't misunderstand me, I'm guilty as charged, only difference is, I know I would be for the high jump.

Joe


----------



## MikeyG (Sep 17, 2005)

TTCool said:


> MikeyG said:
> 
> 
> > Good result!
> ...


Fair point Joe, and I can see why the 'I know what I'm doing and am better than everyone else' argument in court is a dodgy one! My gripe is really that things like this garner huge attention and censure, whereas the generally appalling driving you see, most of the time, from a majority of drivers, is not considered 'bad' in the same way (yes, that's a generalisation but I'm not going to write an essay full of caveats and political correctness here ;-) )

There is a current obsession with speed, per se, being dangerous, which is not strictly true - what's dangerous is lack of observation and anticipation in people's driving. I'd rather have someone coming up behind me on a motorway at 150 mph, but fully alert and competent, than the more usual driver who's fixated on the car they're tailgating, not looking ahead, quite possibly making a phone call or chatting to their passengers, but travelling at a legal 70 mph. I stick to the point that the latter driver is far, far more dangerous.

Mike


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

MikeyG said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > MikeyG said:
> ...


All true, but IMO the Police need to be whiter than white and not break the law that they are meant to uphold. Imagine how fucked off you'd be if you were caught by this traffic cop and lost your licence because you were driving at 100mph.

IF he was chasing someone or had the blues and twos going, fair enough. But to do it on a public road when not on Police business means that he deserves to be punished. If he wanted to familiarise himself with the car on a a motorway, why not go somewhere like the test track at Gaydon? Closed to tbe public, no danger to anyone but himself.

FWIW, I also think that when racing drivers are let off for speeding because they can handle the car at higher speeds than ordinary people is also wrong.

Of course it's a much bigger debate as to whether the speed limit should be 70 when even the cheapest little superminin will do that quite happliy and so should be factored out of this argument.

Speed limit is 70, he exceeded it by over double the amount, doesn't matter what time of day it was or how good a driver he was he shouldn't have done it.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

MikeyG said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > MikeyG said:
> ...


All true, but IMO the Police need to be whiter than white and not break the law that they are meant to uphold. Imagine how fucked off you'd be if you were caught by this traffic cop and lost your licence because you were driving at 100mph.

IF he was chasing someone or had the blues and twos going, fair enough. But to do it on a public road when not on Police business means that he deserves to be punished. If he wanted to familiarise himself with the car on a a motorway, why not go somewhere like the test track at Gaydon? Closed to tbe public, no danger to anyone but himself.

FWIW, I also think that when racing drivers are let off for speeding because they can handle the car at higher speeds than ordinary people is also wrong.

Of course it's a much bigger debate as to whether the speed limit should be 70 when even the cheapest little superminin will do that quite happliy and so should be factored out of this argument.

Speed limit is 70, he exceeded it by over double the amount, doesn't matter what time of day it was or how good a driver he was he shouldn't have done it.


----------



## Guest (Aug 29, 2006)

TTCool said:


> I'm quite familiar with my car; maybe I should get more *intimate* in future, seeing as it's allowed. :wink:


 [smiley=stop.gif] 

just make sure those exhausts are clean :wink:


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

AndyRoo_TT said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > I'm quite familiar with my car; maybe I should get more *intimate* in future, seeing as it's allowed. :wink:
> ...


I've only got the standard exhausts, so no use. Perhaps when I get my Milltek 100mm?


----------



## Karcsi (Mar 6, 2003)

It's not just about the competency of the driver, but the competency of those around you.

However, I don't see what the problem is if this policeman decided to take it up to 160mph to see how it would behave, if the car was brand new to him and if he had not been given reasonable opportunity to do so under controlled conditions. Would you prefer it if he did that for the first time in day time traffic chasing down a fellon?

I really didn't appreciate the report the BBC (I think it was) did on him last Friday. They tried to show how shockingly fast 160mph would be on a public road by filming in a car doing just that on a test track: "I could hardly focus on the road" said the reporter. Tell that to a driver in Germany and you will be laughed out of the country.

For that matter, for how long was this guy driving at excessive speeds? They keep going on about 159mph this and 159mph that, but nothing about the period this went on for.

Having said that, I wonder what Mr Swanson, head of Fife's policing unit, would have to say about PC Milton?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4598412.stm


----------



## MikeyG (Sep 17, 2005)

Karcsi said:


> It's not just about the competency of the driver, but the competency of those around you.


It is indeed, but a very large part of the competency of the driver, on public roads, is in observing and anticipating the actions of other drivers, and other people not in vehicles. At that sort of speed, the presence of pretty much any other car would indicate slowing down.



Karcsi said:


> However, I don't see what the problem is if this policeman decided to take it up to 160mph to see how it would behave, if the car was brand new to him and if he had not been given reasonable opportunity to do so under controlled conditions. Would you prefer it if he did that for the first time in day time traffic chasing down a fellon?


Quite. 'The Public' are quick to complain when the police fail to effectively give chase to wrongdoers. I'm wholly in favour of anyone authorised to drive a police car at high speeds in a stressful situation having tried the high speeds out prior to the stress occurring. I suppose what this points to is that police class one drivers should be given proper, legal opportunities to practice.



Karcsi said:


> I really didn't appreciate the report the BBC (I think it was) did on him last Friday. They tried to show how shockingly fast 160mph would be on a public road by filming in a car doing just that on a test track: "I could hardly focus on the road" said the reporter. Tell that to a driver in Germany and you will be laughed out of the country.


Yes; that's a fine example of the media hyping things up and pandering to the average punter's gut reaction, which is that he "shouldn't be allowed to get away with that just because he's a police officer". It's the typical, censorious, Daily Mail outrage attitude with no proper analysis of the real problem. The whole thing is a ridiculous storm in a teacup.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2006)

i still dont understand how he was caught - being a traffic 'cop, should he know where all the speed cameras and mobile speed cameras are on the motorway? :?


----------



## Karcsi (Mar 6, 2003)

The car's own built in video / speed camera recorded the event, I believe. Don't know whether it is on all the time, but it would be a good control if it was and the cars occupants couldn't turn it off / mess with it.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

I think it was recorded on the car's video equipment and he went in gobbing off at how fast he had been and someone took exemption to it and complained. By brother is in West Mercia Police and he says their complaints department are extremly proactive and rumour has it often try and set bobbies up. Shame the department doesn't put their obviously good policing skills into caughting criminals.........oh sorry that would mean them coming out of their office, speaking with normal members of the public and doing shifts, sometimes in the dark!


----------

