Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Roanoke on May 18, 2005, 03:23:21 pm
-
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/4559173.stm)
160 mph in a country limited to 70. F**k me.
-
What. The. ****.
The "creme de la creme" of Police drivers? Ahh, I see - that's OK then.
Following the same logic - I shall now become the creme de lame creme of soldiers. Ergo, it shall be legal for me to kill anyone - because I'm so incredibly good at what I do - and I'll be testing out a new gun each time.
I hate this country. I hate its laws. Grr.
-
This is stupid, if I were to drive even 5 miles over the limit and get caught I wouldn't hear the end of it and would end up with a fine or a court case.
But noooo, if your a cop you can get let off with it. Talk about supporting your own.
-
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (Rospa) said it was shocked that such a speed was not regarded as dangerous by the court.
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety, said: "Police are governed by health and safety laws just the same as any other employer.
"We don't believe 159mph can ever be justified on public roads.
"Even in emergencies we consider that driving at 100mph or more is too dangerous."
:wtf: Well all bank robbers have to do now is drive at 101mph to get away from the police then.
Quite frankly I think the guy should be prosecuted for driving that fast in a built up area where anything could happen but I do agree that the police do need to learn how to drive fast somewhere and in general they do this by driving late at night on the motorways.
-
speeding gopher, eh? damn those little animals.
-
Originally posted by karajorma
the police do need to learn how to drive fast somewhere and in general they do this by driving late at night on the motorways.
They should do it on a specially created track then. Soldiers aren't taught to fire live firearms in public woods for a good reason... they might hit a civilian. It's more or less the same thing when you think about it.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
They should do it on a specially created track then. Soldiers aren't taught to fire live firearms in public woods for a good reason... they might hit a civilian. It's more or less the same thing when you think about it.
Can you see any government stumping up the cash for multiple simulated towns for police car learning, though?
-
A couple in the country would be good enough though - it's not like England is a big place. One in South / London area and another nearer Manchester. Heck, it doesn't have to be huge - just notably separate from a civilian road.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
A couple in the country would be good enough though - it's not like England is a big place. One in South / London area and another nearer Manchester. Heck, it doesn't have to be huge - just notably separate from a civilian road.
And what of Scotland (particularly the Highlands & Islands regions), N.Ireland and Wales?
Also bearing in mind the cost of transport (of officers and cars), the cost of covering said officers while they are away, and soforth.
Methinks it'd be both expensive and a logistical bastard to arrange. Not that I'm advocating they use stupid speeds on the roads, though; I can just see why it may happen.
-
You don't even need a whole town.
The police academy attached to my college does their driving training on a big concrete parking lot.
-
indeed. police do their maneuvers in the community college parking lot in this county.
-
most likely go to jail for doin' more than 100 mph nowadays (unless you're a copper like)
-
Can anyone honestly say they wouldn't do the same if they had the chance?
-
That's not really the issue kietotheworld - of course I'd love to drive at that speed (assuming I had a car that were capable, heh). But obviously the issue here is that any civilian caught doing that speed would face a world of legal pain. Because of his job and apparent excuses such as "the road was deserted and it was good driving conditions", it's ok for this guy to do it.
If this country is going to be anal about speed laws - it could at least practice being consistent as well. Then the rest of us wouldn't feel we were being screwed over while those in charge can do as they please.
aldo_14 - point taken, to be honest I don't think you could do over a hundred on most Scottish roads anyway (certainly not safely). But if that's not feasable then any large expanse of land such as an airfield would be suitable. Such testing just shouldn't be done on an open and public road.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
They should do it on a specially created track then. Soldiers aren't taught to fire live firearms in public woods for a good reason... they might hit a civilian. It's more or less the same thing when you think about it.
Didn't say I agreed with it. Just that it's standard policy at the moment so as long as he had stuck to motorways there wouldn't have been anything different about what this particular policeman did.
-
Although I'm sure there have been worst miscarriages of justice in recent years this is certainly the most obvious one I can ever remember. This is decision is astonishing and sets a new precedent for what the police can get away with. It's also worth pointing out that while this reckless prick was doing 160 on a motorway (which is bad enough) he was also doing 85 in a 30mph limit zone. 30mph limit of course means "built up area". ie: with houses and pedestrians and other insignificant stuff like that. If someone had tried to cross the road at that point you think he would have been able to stop?
-
I realise its wrong that one person can get away with it just because of his job, I was just pointing out that anyone would else would do the same as him.
-
This in a country where Medical Rapid Response Vehicles, Rapid Organ Transport and even Bloody Ambulances (no pun intended) get nailed for speeding.
-
Thats a good one, yes I remember now that a fire engine driver was fired from his job for running a red light to get to an emergency. Of course he had his lights and sirens on.
Heaven forbid that he was actually rushing to potentially save lives.
-
Best part of the article:
The officer, who is also trained in the use of firearms, was recorded travelling at 159mph on the motorway near Telford in the early hours of 5 December 2003.
As if the journalist implies that we should be suprised that he wasn't shooting his gun at the same time.
Really though, it's a glorified speeding ticket, only because he's a police officer and got away with it. They get away with everything. Nothing new.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Thats a good one, yes I remember now that a fire engine driver was fired from his job for running a red light to get to an emergency. Of course he had his lights and sirens on.
Heaven forbid that he was actually rushing to potentially save lives.
That's completely messed up. At least around here, police/fire/emergency vehicles have full authority to drive through red lights when responding to emergencies. In fact, many ambulances have transponders that will automatically change the light to green at major intersections.