Watch out the police are out to get you!

[CycleWidow]

This is a most interesting debate. I do agree that despite levels of training anyone, regardless of profession, can make mistakes and no doubt fall into bad habits especially where driving is concerned. I also agree that in the majority our policeforce do attend in a timely and safe manner....having used their services on many an occasion I totally respect them.....however...no manner of training could have prevented a police officer in my home town driving in a dangerous manner....

on his MOBILE PHONE!

I drive as part of my job and in line with the not so recent guidelines fitted my car with an appropriate hands free device. I use this to respond to calls from my own base with potential emergencies that I may need to attend to whilst out and about. I believe police cars are fitted with even better gadgets.

So to add fuel to the flame...what makes a well trained, no doubt to a higher standard than myself (my husband believes I can drive backwards better than forwards!) exempt from this new law?

The point is that no matter how well trained we are....people make mistakes. Thats life.

 

[col]

The point is that no matter how well trained we are....people make mistakes. Thats life

And tell porkies to cover up their mistakes

 

[Søren]

The manner of police driving can often reflect and be caused by the job they are either dealing with or attending. Unfortunately when being asked to attend jobs, sometimes at speed, we are also being asked to collate information, make non-driving decisions, deal with unusual reactions from other drivers to our blues and twos. Sometimes we are required to be gaining evidence and talk about other actions while still driving. These situations cannot be avoided, so to accommodate this different forces now offer a fairly standard level of training.

Our force now puts student officers through a 'standard' driving course (three weeks including response and initial pursuit tactics) after their six months initial training, before they are allowed in a patrol car. This is good in that it creates an expected standard of all police drivers. There are negatives though, because these officers get the training before they fully understand the job, and some seem to believe they get 'chipped' with superior driving skills during these three weeks. It takes a lot more than three weeks to gain the experiential driving skill and attitude to become a good police driver, so the important thing for them to learn is to know their limits and work well within them.

There are checks and balances in place, usually initiated by peer criticism, but complaints from the public can and do cause drivers tickets to be pulled, or remedial training to be sought.

 

[chris42]

Soren,
I take on board everything you have said. The main problem I think everyone has isn't the responding to emergencies it is the normal driving.
For example, yesterday I was on a small back road near my home in Deal.
It has a 20 MPH speed limit and is on a nature reserve.
A police car was behind me while I was riding at just over 20 MPH.
He was reving his engine and making movement to pass me in very unsuitable places.
When he did pass me he sped off at well over the limit. I was doing the limit.

No lights therefore no reason to break the law is there?

This in my opinion is what really pis**s people off

 

[col]

Soren,
I take on board everything you have said. The main problem I think everyone has isn't the responding to emergencies it is the normal driving.
For example, yesterday I was on a small back road near my home in Deal.
It has a 20 MPH speed limit and is on a nature reserve.
A police car was behind me while I was riding at just over 20 MPH.
He was reving his engine and making movement to pass me in very unsuitable places.
When he did pass me he sped off at well over the limit. I was doing the limit.

No lights therefore no reason to break the law is there?

This in my opinion is what really pis**s people off

Totally agree,blues and twos sounding,i think we would all do our best to help,but normal driving or patroling,most of the time they dont signal,give way,stop in very unsuitable places,just pretty bad driving in general.

 

[Søren]

Soren,
I take on board everything you have said. The main problem I think everyone has isn't the responding to emergencies it is the normal driving.
For example, yesterday I was on a small back road near my home in Deal.
It has a 20 MPH speed limit and is on a nature reserve.
A police car was behind me while I was riding at just over 20 MPH.
He was reving his engine and making movement to pass me in very unsuitable places.
When he did pass me he sped off at well over the limit. I was doing the limit.

No lights therefore no reason to break the law is there?

This in my opinion is what really pis**s people off

Speed limits can be exceeded without blues and twos, but this can be misinterpreted by some road users as arrogance or abuse of powers.

But for the most part I agree, and I would and do pull up my colleagues for driving I considered to be agressive or intimidatory. I have at least as much interest as you in ensuring the police driving standard remains an example rather than an activity of ridicule. Usually our frustration at road users that are impeding our progress is due to a genuine need to get past that person, and blue lights can often frustrate the police purpose at that time. This frustration should never (but sometimes can be) exhibited as impatience intimidation or aggression. If that happens you are right to complain about it, and please take my word for it, any investigation regarding the manner of driving of a police vehicle is taken seriously.

 

[Mortiroloboy]

I don't intend to get into an argument with you regarding this topic, but as you have probably never undergone the level of training that I have (unless you can tell me otherwise) in fairness you are unable to make an informed comment on the skills of trained police drivers. I would never endanger other road users or myself for that matter, and that is the whole reason for undergoing the intensive course that we do, in order to become a safe driver.

I am sorry to say but that is such pious crap. You may be a highly trained driver, you may indeed be a very good driver, but the fract that someone has not had the training you have does not prevent them from being able to make informed comments on the standard of driving of a police officer.

This is the typical attitude that prevails amongst several police officers that seeks to put themselves above the law and seeks to run the defence that they should not be tried for alleged offences as a jury cannot make an informed decision on their actions.
Sadly for such police officers, this is not part of English Law and you are subject to the same tribunal for alleged crimes as others- ie a jury of 12 persons.

I'm sure that if you ever had to call on any of the emergency services, you would expect them to get to you as soon as they possibly could in the safest quickest way, if this requires the trained driver to exceed the speed limit, and drive on the wrong side of the road, then you can rest assured that they would do that in a safe manner when, and only when it was safe to do so, crossing red lights, when you have established that all other road users have seen you and given way in order for you to proceed safely towards your destination. On the other hand we can just amble over making best speed and get to you eventually.

So there has never ever been an emergency driver who has driven in an unsafe manner has there? Perhaps all those who were convicted were victims of miscarriages of justice because you seem to think you are above the law and are perfect drivers
EVERYONE is prone to make mistakes, training or not[/QUOTE]


Please do not presume to put me in this category, I would expect to be dealt with in the same manner as any member of the motoring public in the event that such and incidence arose.

I have not claimed to be above the law, everyone is prone to mistakes, after all we are human.

Anyway, this is I believe a forum, and I think we still live in a democracy, therefore we are all entitled to an opinion.

My original post was intended to clear up a couple of misconceptions regarding the level of driver training officers undertake, in order to carry out their duties, in serving the general public, it appears to have upset a few of you and started a debate.

Incidentally each year I am subject to a cross check drive by a qualified level1 advanced driver and my 'ticket' is valid for 5 years, at which point I would expect to re-sit a test.

I still stand by my view that as a trained driver I am capable of making informed decisions about the way I respond to any given set of circumstances, which will form the basis of decisions I make about how I drive to get to an incident, and if that means that I drive on the wrong side of the road, exceed the speed limit, cross traffic lights on red, then I will continue to do so, but you can rest assured, that I would NEVER put another road users life or my own life at risk, in order to do so.

 

[col]

I don't intend to get into an argument with you regarding this topic, but as you have probably never undergone the level of training that I have (unless you can tell me otherwise) in fairness you are unable to make an informed comment on the skills of trained police drivers. I would never endanger other road users or myself for that matter, and that is the whole reason for undergoing the intensive course that we do, in order to become a safe driver.

I am sorry to say but that is such pious crap. You may be a highly trained driver, you may indeed be a very good driver, but the fract that someone has not had the training you have does not prevent them from being able to make informed comments on the standard of driving of a police officer.

This is the typical attitude that prevails amongst several police officers that seeks to put themselves above the law and seeks to run the defence that they should not be tried for alleged offences as a jury cannot make an informed decision on their actions.
Sadly for such police officers, this is not part of English Law and you are subject to the same tribunal for alleged crimes as others- ie a jury of 12 persons.

I'm sure that if you ever had to call on any of the emergency services, you would expect them to get to you as soon as they possibly could in the safest quickest way, if this requires the trained driver to exceed the speed limit, and drive on the wrong side of the road, then you can rest assured that they would do that in a safe manner when, and only when it was safe to do so, crossing red lights, when you have established that all other road users have seen you and given way in order for you to proceed safely towards your destination. On the other hand we can just amble over making best speed and get to you eventually.

So there has never ever been an emergency driver who has driven in an unsafe manner has there? Perhaps all those who were convicted were victims of miscarriages of justice because you seem to think you are above the law and are perfect drivers
EVERYONE is prone to make mistakes, training or not[/QUOTE]


Please do not presume to put me in this category, I would expect to be dealt with in the same manner as any member of the motoring public in the event that such and incidence arose.

I have not claimed to be above the law, everyone is prone to mistakes, after all we are human.

Anyway, this is I believe a forum, and I think we still live in a democracy, therefore we are all entitled to an opinion.

My original post was intended to clear up a couple of misconceptions regarding the level of driver training officers undertake, in order to carry out their duties, in serving the general public, it appears to have upset a few of you and started a debate.

Incidentally each year I am subject to a cross check drive by a qualified level1 advanced driver and my 'ticket' is valid for 5 years, at which point I would expect to re-sit a test.

I still stand by my view that as a trained driver I am capable of making informed decisions about the way I respond to any given set of circumstances, which will form the basis of decisions I make about how I drive to get to an incident, and if that means that I drive on the wrong side of the road, exceed the speed limit, cross traffic lights on red, then I will continue to do so, but you can rest assured, that I would NEVER put another road users life or my own life at risk, in order to do so.[/QUOTE]



Fair point,but i dont think we are saying it was you who drives badly,but some of the people who do the same job as you,just as i wouldnt say you are dishonest,unless you were part of the shift that was on that night because they were

 

[Mortiroloboy]

Hmm, point taken, and no real bad feelings to anyone on here, I do sometimes get a leetle bit hacked off, when people make comments, from a position of lack of knowledge about drivers of police vehicles, I tend to take an unecessary personal standpoint, but I won't let it upset me too much!

In future I'll bite my cyber tongue, and confine my threads to cycle related topics or though this did start off as a cycle related topic...Oh well.

 

[chris42]

Speed limits can be exceeded without blues and twos, but this can be misinterpreted by some road users as arrogance or abuse of powers.



Yes I can see this in some circumstances, but in a nature reserve at 08:00 with no other cars on the road and this route is not a short cut to get somewhere how could that be good reason to speed?

I'm afraid the emergency services are staffed by humans and they are the same wether they have a uniform or not.
As soon as they get into that little metal box they and it are the most important thing on the road, yes police will normally be better equiped and trained to go fast but that does not excuse breaking the law because the shift is ending or your tea is going cold or you just think the speed limit set for the road is to slow.

Not all emergency personal speed, just like all members of the public obay the law all the time!

 

[Tetedelacourse]

What's wrong with breaking the law every once in a while anyway? It's not like it's illegal or anything.

 

[Søren]

Speed limits can be exceeded without blues and twos, but this can be misinterpreted by some road users as arrogance or abuse of powers.



Yes I can see this in some circumstances, but in a nature reserve at 08:00 with no other cars on the road and this route is not a short cut to get somewhere how could that be good reason to speed?

I'm afraid the emergency services are staffed by humans and they are the same wether they have a uniform or not.
As soon as they get into that little metal box they and it are the most important thing on the road, yes police will normally be better equiped and trained to go fast but that does not excuse breaking the law because the shift is ending or your tea is going cold or you just think the speed limit set for the road is to slow.

Not all emergency personal speed, just like all members of the public obay the law all the time!

Only you know the incident Chris. All I'm saying is that many bad driving experiences involving police may have an explanation for them that is unknown to the witness. The actual event may also be completely misunderstood by the witness.

From experience as a police driver and a cyclist it is not good practice to stick sirens on right behind a cyclist. It's possible that this police driver had been making purposeful progress without blues and twos because the road was nice and quiet. Should he come up behind a car there's no problem, stick the display on, then the car driver will probably see the blues, or hear the siren and will pull over. If he comes up behind a cyclist there's a point at which he should stick the sirens on - far enough away not to frighten or shock. He may not have had the opportunity to do this, or thought that he would have no problem getting past a cyclist. Many defensive cyclists will however maintain their position on the road especially if they are already at or close to the speed limit. The result is a degree of conflict of interest between the two, caused by the police driver trying to be considerate by not putting sirens on.

But if you believe it is worthy of bringing to the attention of the officer's supervisor, then do it. He/she may have an over-inflated sense of the importance of their duty which may be causing him or her to take liberties. A composite of reports from members of the public and colleagues alike would certainly result in remedial training, disciplinary or perhaps even criminal prosecution.

 

[chris42]

Speed limits can be exceeded without blues and twos, but this can be misinterpreted by some road users as arrogance or abuse of powers.



Yes I can see this in some circumstances, but in a nature reserve at 08:00 with no other cars on the road and this route is not a short cut to get somewhere how could that be good reason to speed?

I'm afraid the emergency services are staffed by humans and they are the same wether they have a uniform or not.
As soon as they get into that little metal box they and it are the most important thing on the road, yes police will normally be better equiped and trained to go fast but that does not excuse breaking the law because the shift is ending or your tea is going cold or you just think the speed limit set for the road is to slow.

Not all emergency personal speed, just like all members of the public obay the law all the time!

Only you know the incident Chris. All I'm saying is that many bad driving experiences involving police may have an explanation for them that is unknown to the witness. The actual event may also be completely misunderstood by the witness.

From experience as a police driver and a cyclist it is not good practice to stick sirens on right behind a cyclist. It's possible that this police driver had been making purposeful progress without blues and twos because the road was nice and quiet. Should he come up behind a car there's no problem, stick the display on, then the car driver will probably see the blues, or hear the siren and will pull over. If he comes up behind a cyclist there's a point at which he should stick the sirens on - far enough away not to frighten or shock. He may not have had the opportunity to do this, or thought that he would have no problem getting past a cyclist. Many defensive cyclists will however maintain their position on the road especially if they are already at or close to the speed limit. The result is a degree of conflict of interest between the two, caused by the police driver trying to be considerate by not putting sirens on.

But if you believe it is worthy of bringing to the attention of the officer's supervisor, then do it. He/she may have an over-inflated sense of the importance of their duty which may be causing him or her to take liberties. A composite of reports from members of the public and colleagues alike would certainly result in remedial training, disciplinary or perhaps even criminal prosecution.[/QUOTE]

I was using this as an example of somthing that happens from time to time.
as you may have guessed this is not a one off and the view of the public in general is that the police do as they please SOMETIMES when they are driving.
Here in rural Kent there is no local police stations open outside Monday to Friday 9-5
The main number is routed to a call centre 30 miles away
responce time in measured in hours sometimes days
you can see what is coming next... whats the point no one will listen and so the myth that the police abuse their powers/the roads grows.

 

[Søren]

I was using this as an example of somthing that happens from time to time.
as you may have guessed this is not a one off and the view of the public in general is that the police do as they please SOMETIMES when they are driving.
Here in rural Kent there is no local police stations open outside Monday to Friday 9-5
The main number is routed to a call centre 30 miles away
responce time in measured in hours sometimes days
you can see what is coming next... whats the point no one will listen and so the myth that the police abuse their powers/the roads grows.

I'm also trying, using your specific example to make the general point that our intentions and purpose are sometimes misconstrued. I could give plenty of examples of bad driving by police, and have advised, warned and reported some. I could give examples where my own driving has placed too much significance on the job I'm attending resulting in a drive that might be seen to be too aggressive.

It shouldn't happen, but it does, and while most of the population believe we are not allowed to speed unless we use blues and twos, our actions are always going to be subject to a significant degree of inappropriate criticism from those who believe our use of speed is only to get us to the do-nut shop before it closes.

 

[twentysix by twentyfive]

Incidentally each year I am subject to a cross check drive by a qualified level1 advanced driver and my 'ticket' is valid for 5 years, at which point I would expect to re-sit a test.

Hey - that's good news . Is that the case throughout the UK or just your Force area?