Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Driving At 159mph Is Safe

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Driving At 159mph Is Safe

Old 23rd Oct 2006, 18:50
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 59
Posts: 587
BJ

Think you need to get your nose back in the books!

They've got you banged to rights!
brain fade is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 11:49
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 59
Posts: 587
Come on BJ!
Are you going to let pass without comment the statement that you, pprunes' policeman, don't even know when an offense has been committed?
brain fade is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 12:34
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ESSEX
Age: 61
Posts: 95
Plod

I had my plane shunted on its trailer on the M25 a few weeks ago. The other driver refused to give details and I had to go on the company address on the side of the truck. When I reported a failure to stop RTA to my local plod they could not give a sh!t. Told me to go the the force where the accident occured. When I did they said it was now over 24 hours so could not do anything. What a load of brush off there.
How to reduce crime and accident figures by refusing to do anything. We had someone try to nick a plane a few years back and the copper claimed they could not take fingerprints off a plastic canopy. I could see the !!!!!! things in daylight. 2k worth of damage and with no crime number a bit difficult to claim on the insurance.
We now have the technology to solve murders and putting the wrong sort of rubbish in a bin. Just the other 99.9% in the middle to do now !
bigflyingrob is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 13:01
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Coconutty

So all allagations made to police are true then?

Interesting,........But sadly, wrong.

Please go back and read what I said again.

The point answered BF.

bigflyingrob

I don't know why what happened to you did, and saly it's getting more and more common. The responsibility is to report to Police, not to a police area.
All I can say is that if you were reporting fail to stop by phone, I would have asked you to go to a police station, only because it is impossible to do everything needed by phone. That may or may not have been the reason, if not, it can't be defended.
bjcc is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 13:10
  #345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 59
Posts: 587
BJ

No. Not all allegations are true, as any fule no.

But.... There can be an offence committed- like the 'rape/ murder' scenario set out earlier, when the crim either is never apprehended or 'gets off'.

A crime/ offense has still been committed for sure. Ask the victim.

So when you speed you DO commit an offense. Therefore turn yourself in next time you speed O Holy One.
brain fade is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 18:30
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
BF

Is that a crime like Perverting the course of justice?

Yes, there could be a crime, and equally, there may not be. The evidence has not been tested if there is no trial, ergo, no one can be guilty until that time. Even someone daft enough to admit on a public forum how guilty they are of an crime.

Of course there are those whio consider its ok to lie thier way out of something, becuase they consider they have the right too, tell me what the difference is between you and someone who does the same for murder or rape? But I usually find that those who are happy to lie for thier own gain, are the first to complain, loudly, when others are aquitted, or not even charged. Who does that remind you of BF?
bjcc is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 18:35
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ESSEX
Age: 61
Posts: 95
Police

Maybe there should be a new crime of disturbing the police! Before I get slated too hard I used to be one!
bigflyingrob is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 19:50
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 735
BJ,

YOU ARE WRONG !

We are not talking about false reports - you're just trying to change what you said :
If a vehicle is seen going through a red light, and the driver summonsed and aquitted, there cannot have been an offence. The same applies to speeding, and in somecases rape and murder.
"We" are talking about an offence THAT HAS BEEN COMMITTED - to keep the thread on topic lets use speeding as an example, although some might find it easier to consider your rape or murder suggestion ....

Someone gets arrested and prosecuted for the offence THAT HAS BEEN COMMITTED - if they are subsequently found Not Guilty then from what you say the offence would not just be recorded as "undetected" - it would be deleted from Police files as though it never happened

Don't think so - You just don't seem to be able to grasp the concept which is quite straight forward really

Coconutty is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2006, 22:42
  #349 (permalink)  
419
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 401
Coconutty,
Maybe that's why Labour keep saying that crime is going down.

A crime is committed, someone is arrested and convicted, case solved. 100% crime clean up rate.

A crime is committed, someone is arrested and then acquitted. No offence has therefore been committed, (although there may be a body in the morgue).
100% crime clean up rate..

"Yes, there could be a crime, and equally, there may not be. The evidence has not been tested if there is no trial, ergo, no one can be guilty until that time."

So, using my earlier example. A woman is found raped and murdered. Someone is charged, tried, the evidence "tested" in court, then they are acquitted, so "there cannot have been an offence"
Simple logic. (your choice of words, not mine)., so a simple answer required.
If the above was to happen, would you still say that no offence had been committed against the dead woman?

Last edited by 419; 27th Oct 2006 at 23:03.
419 is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2006, 05:46
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 735
419 - Spot on

Next BJ will be telling us that there were no offences committed at the Birmigham Pub bombings

Offences committed, "people" arrested, charged, convicted, sent to prison but later had their convictions overturned because the Police evidence and confessions were "questionable" - so that MUST mean ( in BJ's World ) that no offence was ever committed

Whereas it really means that the offences WERE committed and now remain on the books as "open" or "Unsolved" or "Undetected" or whatever the phrase of the month is - it also does NOT mean that those "people" did NOT commit the offences, just that they no longer stand convicted of them - they "might" not have - who knows ?

But hey - what the heck has all that got to do with "Driving at 159 MPH being safe"

Coconutty is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2006, 15:41
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 59
Posts: 587
BJ

Yes. Just like PTCOJ!

Me guilty of above and happy to admit to it (pretending AN Other was driving when it was really me speeding like a mad fool at 44mph on a dual carriageway).

As you've pointed out before- it's an offence. I've not been convicted or even tried so according to you, no offence committed. Although if I ever was charged with it, then it WOULD be an offence. Is that it?

I hope YOU havn't been driving your car over the speed limit, you naughty policeman, because THAT IS AN OFFENCE and being the sanctimonious chap that you certainly are, I jolly well expect you to drive to the nearest nick and 'fess up.

Slightly more worrying is that it seems you are unsure of this most basic point of law?
brain fade is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 20:11
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: A home for the bewildered
Posts: 86
Maybe 159 mph isn't enough...

Take a look at Old Bill's latest idea.

















Eat yer heart out, bjcc!
GrumpyOldFart is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 22:44
  #353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NE Scotland & London
Posts: 40
I would have asked you to go to a police station, only because it is impossible to do everything needed by phone.
...and where might this mythical 'police station' be then? Hang on, who needs 'em, we've all got trannies - no wait, that's impossible...

Emerging whine - Police Officers don't get respected these days - One would think that of all people The Police would understand the the concept of 'cause and effect'

BM
BlooMoo is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2006, 07:29
  #354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: northants
Posts: 202
Will PC Milton be asked to test this Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 fully marked up as a Met Traffic car....199mph is the next target!
yakker is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2006, 07:55
  #355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ESSEX
Age: 61
Posts: 95
Talking Police

Wel from the link it's nice to see the Police have the money to spend on Lambo's. As stunts go it is a thick as 2 short coppers.
The local Chavs will want to race it, the rate payers will hate it and as a tool for catching burglars, muggers and conmen it's about as much use a a chocolate fireguard.
We have had several incidents at my local strip and the MET were useless. 14 burned out cars so far and they could not be bothered to read the chassis plates as they wanted to keep their uniforms clean.(Honest)
The famous case where someone tried to nick an XAIR was written off as "kids" and no crime number was ever issued. How to reduce crime numbers....don't issue any! Brilliant. Apparently one official guess is 30% of crimes go unreported. At least this in my opinion as I have had a couple of cases of criminal damage I didn't bother with.
They do a good job in the centre of Romford though on a Friday night. There are usually 3 or 4 wagons waiting for trade outside the night club.
Three Chavs in a car. Mummy, daddy and teanage daugher. Who's driving?
The policeman!
bigflyingrob is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2006, 06:56
  #356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ESSEX
Age: 61
Posts: 95
Devil Lambo

The link to the Lambo on pistonheads is quite good fun and as Photo shop windups go is pretty good. Bit early for April fool though.
I wonder how long courts will accept any form of picture or video evidence? Look at Forest Gump for a start. 30 years between some of the characters and most people cannot see the joins.
Remove a guys legs, put them back, remove a complete character from Star Wars ..easy with the kit.
I used to be a copper in the late 70s. One day we were given a load of Paterity award forms by mistake. These were when a court had found some guy was the father of a kid and he had to pay for its upkeep. Long before DNA of course.
One or two local gits had a very hard time from their wives as a result of these being filled in and posted off including one inspector who suddenly changed force! The guilty flee where no man pursueth!
bigflyingrob is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2013, 11:27
  #357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 35
This couldn't be the same guy - shirley..... ?

BBC News
Sleeping is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2013, 11:37
  #358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,897
It certainly is!

..and don't call me Shirley
Fox3WheresMyBanana is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2013, 14:33
  #359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Queen of The Moorlands
Posts: 99
You can't make this shit up. If he gets acquitted again, then how on earth can Shropshire Traffic Taliban ever prosecute Joe Public?

Oh yeah.. one rule for them..
Alloa Akbar is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2013, 15:08
  #360 (permalink)  
More bang for your buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 77
Posts: 3,511
Are you suggesting the police shouldn't try to catch car thieves then?
green granite is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.