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 21st May 2005, 13:17
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
pilotwolf, wow, your post's really are a tribute to insightful discussion.

So I ask you to tell me why 4mph over the 30mph limit for me is potentially very dangerous, which is why I will be fined if caught, and you tell me you can't be bothered, but you do know that a
host of reason come to mind
.

And apparently you couldn't possibly comment on either a safe speed for joe public to travel through a village at, or a safe speed for highly trained police drivers, as there are 'far too many variables'.

Well, that's cleared that up then.
Maximum is offline  
Old 21st May 2005, 14:44
  #102 (permalink)  

Helicopter Pilots Get It Up Quicker
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location:
Posts: 885
Well, that's cleared that up then.
Yes I think it has actually! I can't help it if you can't be bothered to do a search!

What do you want me to say? "Oh yes 90 mph is perfectly safe through all villages", or "60 mph through village 'A' is safe, regardless or weather or other traffic" and then you use that in your speeding defence even though you admit to breaking the law?

The 40mph, (the posted limit) was often unsafe through my old village due to the houses, shops and pubs opening on to the pavement 2 feet from the road. But that didn't stop people travelling at 60mph on a regular basis. I travelled it both on and off duty and including on emergency calls, even with lights and sirens on sometimes it wasn't safe to exceed 30 mph yet another time I have travelled through it PERFECTLY SAFELY at 70 mph... .

You re bleating on about having reasons for this and that and straight answers to questions when it's simply not black and white, (as I pointed out in the post!) and therefore those answers cannot be given!

Suggest you read the rest of the post too instead of using part of my reply...

...as depends on the drivers' training and aquired skill levels... ...(or maybe not depending on your hazard perception)
If you can't absorb the information posted or chose to ignore it is it any wonder why I would maybe think the same lack of absorption or ignorance of the hazards makes you a higher risk than a trained, (think its still 6 weeks full time for police Class 1), who drives professionally, as in for a living. Oh and not forgetting that if it does all go wrong there is no emergency drivers' licence for the points, the firm doesn't pay the fine or your own insurance hikes and of course the agony of living with the mistake possibly for the rest of your life....

So I ask you to tell me why 4mph over the 30mph limit for me is potentially very dangerous, which is why I will be fined if caught,
Again some of the reasons were in the post... but at the end of the day its because YOU BROKE THE LAW by speeding not because it is potentially very dangerous!

At the end of the day whether you or I agree on if this was safe or not the police officer didn't NOT break the law. It's a clear excemption to exceed the speed limit for police purposes. As for dangerous driving well thats a opinion which differs between everyone and I would guess the tape was shown in court and the judge (controversial or not) decided that the driving was NOT dangerous. Maybe an appeal will decide otherwise.

PW

Last edited by pilotwolf; 21st May 2005 at 14:58.
pilotwolf is offline  
Old 21st May 2005, 15:17
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
pilotwolf, why do you use such a pejorative tone?

I'm not "bleating on" as you so nicely put it - just looking for some straight answers.

When I ask about safe speeds, you say:
it's simply not black and white, (as I pointed out in the post!) and therefore those answers cannot be given!
Isn't that the whole point - that it's not black and white - your words not mine - and yet under the eyes of the law, when a member of the public exceeds the speed limit, it is! No excuses, no leeway.
Again some of the reasons were in the post... but at the end of the day its because YOU BROKE THE LAW by speeding not because it is potentially very dangerous!
(Just for the record I've never had a speeding fine). Ok, then why are we always being told that SPEED KILLS and should have the same social stigma attached to it as drink driving? Surely implicit in the speed limit is the idea that it presents a good balance of road useage versus risk. Therefore to exceed it is to endanger oneself and others.

SPEED KILLS - not my words.
Maximum is offline  
Old 21st May 2005, 15:53
  #104 (permalink)  

Helicopter Pilots Get It Up Quicker
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location:
Posts: 885
Maximum
and yet under the eyes of the law, when a member of the public exceeds the speed limit, it is! No excuses, no leeway.
I think you answer your own question there - under the eyes of the LAW - whether we agree that the law is or isn't right - it's been broken! Unfortunately the speed cameras remove any judgement calls or leeway you might have got from a police officer if you weren't driving dangerously and were polite and accepted your mistake, etc.

Ok, then why are we always being told that SPEED KILLS and should have the same social stigma attached to it as drink driving?
Because IMHO and of many others including police officers and the likes of the RAC/AA/etc it's a way of jusifying the camera cons and the statistics seem to support the fact speed doesn't kill - INAPPROPRIATE speed kills. Again this has been covered over and over - hence my initial suggestion to do a search.

(Just for the record I've never had a speeding fine).
Sorry, didn't mean to infer you had - for YOU read member of the public.

Therefore to exceed it is to endanger oneself and others.
Yeah potentially but so is moving the vehicle at all or indeed even attempting to get in it! As someone here said before we could prevent all future aviation accidents by ensure nothing ever flew again.... but I m sure someone would manage to walk into a parked arcraft and injure themself!

Sorry if you found my tone offensive.

PW
pilotwolf is offline  
Old 21st May 2005, 17:51
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
pw, hey, no problem, and strangely enough I'm largely in agreement with what you've just said!
Maximum is offline  
Old 21st May 2005, 22:27
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Midlands
Age: 45
Posts: 393
As a serving copper and response driver may I add my thoughts.

1. The bloke is a complete and utter pr@t.
2. Speed alone does not make driving dangerous, all manner of prevailing conditions and training/ability need to be taken into account.
3. The bloke got off on a legal loophole.

Allow me to expand.

My job is now 10 times harder because the public perception is on rule for one and one rule for another. Make no mistake, police drivers do need to ensure they are happy in the handling of their cars. Pursuits with very serious criminals do take place at speeds in excess of 150mph, and I frequently exceed 130mph responding to incidents. Likewise I also have done 70+mph in 30 and 40 limits. I have never driven dangerously though, because on each occasion I could justify my actions. Just as Joe Bloggs has found many a loophole in the laws relating to speeding and drink driving, the vague wording as to what a police driver can legally do has provided a loophole here. It is not one rule for one and one for another, it is quite simply that the policies and law have not been tested in this manner before and have been found wanting. You can be damned sure that changes will be afoot pretty soon. It still doesn't help me do my job, because it is still going to cause me grief.

If our station had a new car, yes I would take it out and see how it handles. I wouldn't take the p1ss and do so for half an hour or more as this muppet did. I don't want to find the handling deficiencies when I need to get somewhere quick, I want to build up my knowledge of the car gradually. If I pootle gently up to you being stabbed I get criticised, but if I try to familiarise myself with the tools of my trade, I also get criticised.

The issue here is that this PC took it too far and when he was caught did exactly what you or I would do. He looked for the way to save his own neck. When he found that nick in the armour plate of the law, he utilised it, causing public outrage in the process. I don't feel he can fully justify his actions and should have faced the consequences, but likewise we need some common sense here. It is impossible to legislate for all of the circumstances that police are faced with day to day and so you cannot stick strict rules as to what speed an officer should or should not be doing. You can however seek their justification and that should be robustly questioned in court, certainly more so than this case was.

IMHO I think he was being an idiot and went out to have a play in the new toy. When found out, he hired a solicitor and they then looked at the law and policies to find a legal loophole. One of the reasons why there are differences between the police and the other emergency services is that the police need to have the ability to exceed the speed limit even if there is no emergency (covert follows in vehicles for surveillance for example). The blurry line is where that officer is acting in lawful execution of their duty.

The line I have always given to the officers I supervise is that don't do anything you can't justify. That goes for everything not just the driving aspect of our job. For what it's worth a colleague of mine used the defence of autonamatism against a charge of careless driving (genuine defence I might add, he wasn't playing the game so many people do in court of what can I use to get off this) and got double the penalty because the magistrates thought he should have been better able to deal with it as a police driver. It's just the flip side is far less interesting and far less glamorous for the media.

Awaits barrage incoming.

Obs cop
Obs cop is offline  
Old 21st May 2005, 23:36
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Obs cop

This is not incoming I assure you - just interest.

What's your opinion on speed cameras, if, as you say, 'speed alone does not make driving dangerous'?

It's just that I hate the bl**dy things, as a moment's inattention or perhaps distraction because of something more safety critical can lead to a fine and penalty points. Meanwhile I see all sorts of for example teenage 'boy racers' openly sticking the proverbial finger up at the law and driving without due care and attention because they know where the speed cameras are sited.

Another classic I have to put up with repeatedly is obeying the variable speed limits on the M25. On a fair number of occasions at between two and six in the morning I've had these showing 30mph in the inside lane and 40mph in the middle while workers put cones out. I've even had on one occasion, 20mph in the inside lane. Fine, if that's deemed to be the safe speed limit given that men are in the road then who am I to disagree? Two I think were killed or injured only last week. But my g*d, going at 20mph on a fairly empty stretch of motorway is very interesting - because just about no one else out at that time of the night does it! So I sit there like a prat crawling at 20 or 30mph while trucks and cars bear down on me at 50-70mph, then flash me as they suddenly realise what speed I'm actually doing, and have to go into avoidance mode!

Now, if I were to drive for the prevailing conditions, I'd go faster, but of course some of the overhead gantries displaying the variable speed limit signs are speed camera equiped, so I'm between a rock and a hard place! Apart from that, I do like to try and obey the law, and I'd rather not kill someone putting out cones.

As I say, not incoming, just interest. And I know your job is to enforce the law, not make it.

So what's your view on speed cameras, and the public perception that they don't discriminate between being a few mph over the 30mph limit and the real careless and wreckless louts?
Maximum is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:09
  #108 (permalink)  

Eight Gun Fighter
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Western Approaches
Posts: 1,127
I've stayed out of this till now.
Frankly there are not many cars in the general population that can do anything near 159 mph.

But, IMHO, there should be more focus on coordinated helicopter tracking along with staged interceptions and spike strip usage than hell bent for leather chases. You're going to have to buy more helicopters and practice the pit manouver.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Rollingthunder is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:27
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 837
Can,t understand the fuss made of speed cameras.
If you ain't speeding you ain't gonna get done!
I have worked for a company involved in the development of speed cameras. I am often amazed how people cannot see the fixed cameras or the flourescent jackets of a mobile speed camera crewor white van at side of road.

Probably too busy yakking on a mobile phone!
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:30
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 49
What a stupid comment !
Astrodome is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:32
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 837
The only people that moan about speed cameras are people that have been done by them.
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:41
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Take a tip from an old hand old son?

If you want to post on here then read up and get a feel for the type of person on here.

Your sanctimonious comments won't go down well at all.

If you had just a little inkling of life, and motoring you would realise just what a prattish set of comments you have just made.

Regrettably the 99% of the normal people who inherit this country are not so perfect as you obviously are.

When you get a moment why not take a course in accident causation?. You might actually learn something useful
Astrodome is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:47
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 837
As in aviation, usually bad judgement causes accidents.
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 00:53
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 49
.
As in aviation, usually bad judgement causes accidents
Well thank you for that elucidating fact. Nice to have an experienced pilot on Jet Blast giving us the benefit of his many years of experience.

Ever find yourself as the minority voice at the AAIB ?


Good night Bob.

Make sure you switch the computer off before Mother finds you are up so late, eh?

She might even take it off you.
Astrodome is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 01:00
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 837
No problem...glad to be of service


Nighty nite.
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 01:02
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Can,t understand the fuss made of speed cameras.
If you ain't speeding you ain't gonna get done!
Gawd, it's like beating your head against a brick wall.

We could apply that logic to all infringements of the law then, and have draconian penalties couldn't we?

How about death for any law breaking across the board - of course, if you haven't broken the law, you've no need to worry!

Orwell's 1984 springs to mind.
Maximum is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 01:18
  #117 (permalink)  

Helicopter Pilots Get It Up Quicker
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location:
Posts: 885
BEB
I ve never been done by a camera but I think they re a waste of time and do little if anything to improve road safety.

I ve been stopped for speeding though and had my knuckles sternly rapped - I know that had far more effect than a nasty surprise in the post! Also know which is more likely to find my bald tyres/dodgy brakes/blown bulb/etc.

PW
pilotwolf is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 04:34
  #118 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 79
Posts: 4,668
Maximum and Astrodome, excuse me one moment.


BigEndBob Please could you enlighten us as to which of your ends is big?
Loose rivets is online now  
Old 22nd May 2005, 07:02
  #119 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 918
The next question, what happens to said Officer now?. OK, he got off on a technicality, but his judgement has been shown to be flawed---so, is he quietly "removed" from Traffic and Firearms duty. Or is he offered re-training ?--given that as he was found not guilty, he could, I presume, have a case for discrimination if any sanctions were applied.

Spoke to two of my relatives who are serving Police Officers, one on Traffic, both said the same about him---t%%t--- plus, as Obs Cop says, their job and public confidence / support has just been diluted still further.
Krystal n chips is offline  
Old 22nd May 2005, 17:08
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,917
His force is not bound by the court's decision.

A police officer may still be guilty of a disciplinary offence even if not guilty of a criminal offence.
If the Chief Constable thinks it appropriate to move him to another job within the force he can do so with or without disciplinary proceedings.
Flying Lawyer 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.