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

Suffering aggressive driving from an unexpected source.

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

Suffering aggressive driving from an unexpected source.

Old 13th Feb 2006, 19:12
  #21 (permalink)  

Jet Blast Rat
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 46
Posts: 2,081
But Syllogism

If we are breaking the speed limits then we can't possibly be judgres of our own speed, we cannot possibly be good enough to judge for ourselves by the circumstances, and must abdicate that responsibility to some town-hall clerk. Yet if the police drive fast or close to other vehicles, well then they must know it is safe, or that the hazard is proportional to the urgency ...

bjcc has shown the most astonishing double standards in seemingly blaming eal for the hazard here.
Send Clowns is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 19:28
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: lots of different places....
Posts: 117
Just as another point of view, what if it wasn't the police driving it?
I've seen police vehicles being driven by by non police, I figure it was a 'return to station after some repairs' or 'positioning' but it definately wasn't police.
In all honesty I expected that they should have covered the police signs so road users weren't confused, I think it actually had a sign in the window indicating in transit. Saying that, everyone going past did stay within the speed limit.
It might be worth reporting it just in case it was one of these events and someone was abusing the vehicle.
Cool_Hand is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 20:14
  #23 (permalink)  
419
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 396
Why, if his 'antics' were so dangerous, did you not just pull over and let it pass.
Maybe this
"A driver thought he was doing the right thing by moving over for a police car with flashing blue lights. Martyn Knight was soon thinking again – after the officer booked him for nudging through a red traffic light. Mr Knight was on his way home from work when he drew up at pelican lights in his Renault Clio. A police car raced up behind and the 19-year-old barman moved on through th elights and on to the side of the road. The ‘helpful' move of a few feet cost him a £60 fixed penalty and three points on his licence"
Or this
A DRIVER who jumped a red light to let a 999 ambulance pass has been given a £60 fine and three points on his licence.Railway engineer Mark Freeman, 36, was snapped edging across a junction near his home in Doncaster, South Yorks.
.
Maybe eal thought if he pulled over, he might get booked for stopping where he shouldn't.
419 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 20:38
  #24 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 74
Posts: 1,859
'Traffic' Police are usually Advanced Drivers (whereas Noddies only need 'a licence' to earn a driving permit). I've been through the Police Advanced Driver's Course, and, although I was already an experienced professional (high speed) driver I DID learn a lot (including respect for Police Traffic High-Speed Pursuit Drivers). Just like human beings, there's a wide variation in driving skills amongst 'the Police', but only those who have passed-out from the stringent training get to drive jam-sandwiches. Others might be a danger, even on a bicycle (just like the General Public), and given the belief that they are untouchable because of their profession . . .
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 20:39
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
SC

Nice to see you're back with your normal grasp of ...erm, nothing.

Simple common sense says that if a vehicle is behind you, driving in a manner you consider dangerous, slow down.....If nessesary, stop! Is it that difficult to grasp?

Thats always assuming the EAL's recollection is accurate.

SyllogismCheck

I agree, there are some appauling examples of police driving about.

Basic drivers, the name changes between forces have no specific training, other than that which the public have recieved. Is it a good idea? No, but the Home Office have decreed that for going from point A to point B to do non emergency jobs that is sufficent. And it is, provided thats all they do.

However, it is very difficult to expect a police officer, who maybe the only person nearby who can get to an emergency, not to go. And of course the EAL's and SC's of this world moan like drains when police don't turn up quick.

Those who are trained should go, but are not always free to do so. You want police there quick, the non trained officer does what the public wants, maybe not too efficently, but then job gets done. Not right, I agree, but thats life.

Given that at a rough guess police vehicles are driven in excess of 15 million miles in a year, the accident rate is very very very low.

So if SC you can show the same proud boast for your occupation, feel free to make you sarcastic comments.

G-CPTN

Rubbish. All Police officers, whether traffic or not can do an advanced driving course. In London each station has an area car, not manned by traffic that has to be driven by an advanced driver.As you are not a police officer I very much doubt your claim to have been on a Police advanced course. Have you not claimed in the past to have a brother in Essex Pol, and made wrong claims about breath test kits? I wonder...........
bjcc is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:13
  #26 (permalink)  

Just Binos
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 66
Posts: 1,397
Sounds like a good opportunity to verify your claimed credentials, G-CPTN. Why not?
Binoculars is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:26
  #27 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 74
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by bjcc
G-CPTN
Rubbish. All Police officers, whether traffic or not can do an advanced driving course. In London each station has an area car, not manned by traffic that has to be driven by an advanced driver.As you are not a police officer I very much doubt your claim to have been on a Police advanced course. Have you not claimed in the past to have a brother in Essex Pol, and made wrong claims about breath test kits? I wonder...........
I have NOT got a brother in any Police Force, and, I admit that my knowledge of the standard of Police Driving is well out of current experience. I have NEVER commented, here or anywhere else about breathalysers (or breath test kits). I have zero experience about breath testing, having never ever SEEN a breath test kit in any capacity. You have mistaken me for another.

I have, indeed, been on a Police Advanced Driving Course. It was a concession granted by the Police, because of the close work that I was doing with Police vehicles and high-speed driving on public roads. You seek to discredit me, yet I was praising the officers that I met on that course (and, by implication, graduates of that course). I also implied that pursuit drivers are highly trained, whereas 'Plod' may have no training beyond that afforded to civilians (as I believe you confirmed), and can be just as much a menace as Joe Public.

I wonder what you wonder (and why?)


I refer you to the title of this thread . . . .
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:37
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 588
Thats always assuming the EAL's recollection is accurate.
At the time I posted, it was less than 24 hours since the incident. So, my recollection is perfectly accurate.

Mind you, I might of known you'd leap to the defence of a police officer in such circumstances.

Oh, and as someone with significantly greater common sense and intelligence than you pointed out, it was not safe to stop.

Two faced double standards of the highest order, as expected.
eal401 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:38
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
G-CPTN

I may be wrong over the essex pol thing, memory may not be as it was.

However, I am suprised you claim to have been on a police advanced course. Firstly, because has you done so, you would be aware that it is not the exclusive reserve of traffic officers.
Certainly in my old force, the majority of advanced drivers were not traffic. as you put it noddys. That is noddys who had a 3 or 5 week standard course, followed by a 2 day van course, then a 6 week part one advanced and a 4 week follow up to qualify.
Second reason to doubt your claim, is that the course invloves breaking speed limits and on occations authorised traffic signs, eg stop signs and traffic lights. You would not be authorised to do that. And whatever yopu do for a living high speed chases are not relevent to you, unless you are a police officer.
My third reason to doubt your claim, is why? You say you are empoyed doing high speed driving. Well, unless you work for the fire, police or ambulance service, you would only be able to drive with the speed limits. So why would you need the course?
Lastly, in these H&S days, well enough said about that peice of stupidity...In fact I would be happy to see non police officers being allowed to go on an advanced course, or even a 'dulled' down version> It might wake a few people up.
bjcc is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:43
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
EAL

Perhaps you can explain how it is safe to stop anywhere else, but not when you have a vehicle behind you being driven, as you discribe is an extreemly dangerous manner? Surely, slow gentle braking would be perfectly safe, on any road.
bjcc is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:54
  #31 (permalink)  

I'matightbastard
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,746
If the other vehicle is causing danger, would the sensible option not be to get out of the way, let it pass?
What if you had a learner driver, or a bus load of blind orphans, or a train of donkeys being led to the seaside by a scruffy looking girl with an admirable physique? What then? Should you let a lunatic pass, or, by being a buffer between him and the underskilled or undercapable road user in front, might you not save them from their inevitable panic as they suffer under the intolerable behaivoir of the lunatic and thereby save the rivers of blood that would surely flow as a result of the ensuing carnage?

Reasonable doubt your honour. Reasnoable doubt is all I have to show and I believe I have shown it quite clearly.

No further questions m'lud.
Onan the Clumsy is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 21:56
  #32 (permalink)  

Jet Blast Rat
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 46
Posts: 2,081
bjcc

Can you actually read? Is there any chance you will answer what I write, rather than what you imagine I might be thinking?

Indeed I've done waht you suggest, and have ended up stopped. The driver threatened to run me over. The police were very good about that, and offered to take things further.

However you are defending the policeman in circumstances more certainly hazardous than any of the speed limit infringemets you seem so certain are hazardous. That is a simple concept, exactly the one I put down before. Any chance you will address that rather than rant at me at a tangent? You also implied that the victim of this aggressive driving was at fault, without any criticism of the perpetrator!
whatever yopu [sic] do for a living high speed chases are not relevent to you, unless you are a police officer.
What a bizarre statement. Certainly complete garbage, and pompous as well.
Send Clowns is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 22:16
  #33 (permalink)  

Hmmmyeah
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Leopardess.
Posts: 652
Originally Posted by bjcc
So if SC you can show the same proud boast for your occupation, feel free to make you sarcastic comments.
I assume this, being in the part of your post so addressed, is aimed at me, so I shall respond.

No, I cannot make any such 'proud boast', as you call it. I don't have, and don't imagine there exist, any such annual mileage statistics for my profession. It's by the by anyway. I was simply taking you to task on what seemed to be an inability on your part to accept that the police driver may well have been the one at fault.

I fail to see what was in any way sarcastic about my comments. They were facts.

The WPC in the Astra did nearly drive into me as a result of driving carelessly, whilst on the phone and in conflict with the road markings and traffic flow.
The guy in the Omega did drive it straight off the road and through a large sign post on the central divider whilst exiting a roundabout for no reason other than his failure to recover an initially minor slide.
The driver of the unmarked Mondeo that rounded the blind bend occupying as much of my roadspace as his or her own at such an excess of speed that recovery into their lane was impossible and caused me the need to drive half my vehicle onto the, fortunately unobstructed, grass verge and a good few inches into the bushes there in order to avoid a 50% overlap, head on impact at a closing speed almost certainly in excess of 120mph (my 60 and their 60+ mph) did get it grossly wrong and endanger both my own life and that of the other occupants of the police vehicle.

Two of theses three vehicles were traffic vehicles. In fact, one, the Mondeo, was, as likely as not, a training vehicle.

So, where's the sarcasm? I'm simply telling it as it was.

Or were you simply referring to the the doughnut comment? If so - lighten up.

Still, all said and done, you've agreed that you're aware of incidences of abysmal police driving and my only isssue was that your tone seemed to suggest a reluctance to accept that could have been the case. It seems we agree, it could well have been the case.
SyllogismCheck is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 22:49
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
SC

"If we are breaking the speed limits then we can't possibly be judgres of our own speed, we cannot possibly be good enough to judge for ourselves by the circumstances, and must abdicate that responsibility to some town-hall clerk. Yet if the police drive fast or close to other vehicles, well then they must know it is safe, or that the hazard is proportional to the urgency ...

bjcc has shown the most astonishing double standards in seemingly blaming eal for the hazard here."

Dealing with EAL's problem first:

My answer was:

"EAL

Why, if his 'antics' were so dangerous, did you not just pull over and let it pass.

Thus eliminating any danger to your vehicle and family?"

So, your point is what exactly? EAL claims he was put in danger by the police vehicle driving too close. Slowly breaking and pulling over would allow the vehicle to pass and therefore eliminate the danger. Simple, but please point out where I have made EAL into a victim and blamed him?

Your other point. Please read what you wrote again, and tell me where there is a non retorical or non sarcastic point. So what would you like me to answer?

I can't answer for the Police driver in this incident, IF EAL is giving a true and accurate summery, then yes, the police driver is in the wrong. But I stand by my point, if it was that dangerous, why not pull over. He says it was not safe to do so. I cannot see how it can be safe to contuinue yet not safe to pull over????????

Now turning to your last post. Do most drivers need to get involved in car chases? No. In fact, apart from Police officers, does anyone need too? No. What is a large proportion of the advanced driving course made up of? Chases. So why is my comment "What a bizarre statement. Certainly complete garbage, and pompous as well."?

SyllogismCheck

No, it wasn't aimed at you. It was aimed at SC.

I agree there are some awful examples of police driving. In an ideal world it wouldn't happen. But it's not, and they do.

Bad drving is a reflection on the entire driving population, and even those trained to a high standard sometimes cock it up. But overall, given the high mileage clocked up by police vehicles and the type of driving conducted, there are very few accidents.
bjcc is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 22:55
  #35 (permalink)  

Just Binos
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 66
Posts: 1,397
Certainly complete garbage, and pompous as well.
Why Send Clowns? I'm trying to think of an occupation outside the emergency services where high speed chases are relevant. The only thing I can think of with even close relevance would be some of these bodyguard/chauffeur types for the self-important powerbrokers, diplomats etc, but no high speed chaswe they get involved in would be considered legal. Are you going to invoke James Bond here?
Binoculars is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 22:59
  #36 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,068
bjcc,

"Simple common sense says that if a vehicle is behind you, driving in a manner you consider dangerous, slow down.....If nessesary, stop! Is it that difficult to grasp?"

On a motorway slip road or a roundabout? Surely not. Weren't you strongly criticising a certain lady for stopping on a motorway hard shoulder, only a couple of weeks back?

If you're going to make a stand, at least be consistent.

BTW, there is NO excuse for tailgating. Advanced driver or not.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 23:05
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
ShyTorque

EAL wasn't on a motorway.

On a motorway, you have the option of changing lanes as an alternative to stopping.

Binoculars

SC referred to my comment that high speed chaes are not an issue fro non police drivers as:

"What a bizarre statement. Certainly complete garbage, and pompous as well."

A strange comment, as you point out that apart from emergency, or specificly police drivers, no one else gets involved in them and the advanced police driving course is largly how to conduct a chase.

The groups you mention maybe on the other side of a chase, ie the chased, which is a differnt sort of driving.

As for James Bond & co....there are survallance driving courses, which don't involve chases. the idea being not to show out.
bjcc is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 23:08
  #38 (permalink)  

Hovering AND talking
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 54
Posts: 5,711
Yesterday afternoon, I was driving westbound on the M55
From eal401's original post. I believe the M55 is a motorway.

Cheers

Whirls
Whirlygig is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 23:15
  #39 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,068
As far as the highway code is concerned, a slip road is considered part of the motorway.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2006, 23:40
  #40 (permalink)  

Jet Blast Rat
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 46
Posts: 2,081
bjcc

You really ought to go back to school. It is quite clear you are incapable of comprehending anything you read! Either that or you wilfully misrepresent what other people are saying.

You accuse me of using rhetoric, then you deliberately exagerate my comment to a ridiculous level in order to win an argument, only you are arguing against something I never said! It's known as a "Straw Man", and is a completely dishonest piece of rhetoric. Where did I say "most drivers need to get into chases"?

Nothing I wrote was sarcastic. It was a summary of the views you have expressed here, and quite obviously so. Since this is a debate then everything said in opposing opinions is rhetorical, so of course what I said was rhetorical. Everything you have said is rhetorical, and as I pointed out some is pure rhetoric, made up entirely for the occasion!

Where did I say you turned eal401 into a victim? He was the victim of aggressive driving, yet in your intial post you implied that he was to blame, by criticising his actions without making any comment on the actions of the police.

In fact pretty much everything you posted in reply to me either misrepresents what I have said or responds to a misinterpretation of what I say. If you can't be bothered to read what I write, or you are so arrogant that you assume you know what I really mean as opposed to what I write, then what is the point of posting?
Send Clowns 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.