Mature And Preemptive Policing.

[John]

I believe that would be called entrapment. Certainly not legitimate.

As he wasn't overtaking anyone, the only possible explanation for a highly trained police driver being in the overtaking/right turn lane is he was about to turn right.

Perhaps he was just about to slow down

Or maybe he was fishing for people to go passed like John was about to.

You can't pass him on the outside if he is on the inside lane...

 

[sspeed]

It sounds to me like Mr Developer is a right hoodlum and dodgy to boot.
Its indefensible to harass a poor unsuspecting X5 driver.
I think there should be a new law..
It should be illegal to intend to have fun or even to think about it.
you are not here to have fun you are a money making unit for our suprior and overworked masters.

 

[Dryce]

I don't understand why that resulted in unnecessary sarcasm.

If as many people read the small print in their normal lives as opposed to invoking small print in their internet lives the world would be a better place.

The police are not perfect. I almost wound down my window the other day to have a chat with two officers about the fact they rolled past me and the advance stopped line I was waiting at under red. But then I decided that giving them the attitude test was going to get me nothing and it would only ensure that fate saw to it that I committed stupid minor violation further up the road to prove that there was a plank in my driving technique that more than matched the splinter in theirs.

In this case it seems that the BiB have given the OP the benefit so we should give them the benefit.

On that basis it was totally necessary sarcasm - in fact mandated sarcasm. Though t'was not intended to be targeted at any particular esteemed participant in this thread.

 

[Dryce]

It sounds to me like Mr Developer is a right hoodlum and dodgy to boot.
Its indefensible to harass a poor unsuspecting X5 driver.
I think there should be a new law..

Well the death penalty and flogging are already reserved.

So where do we stand on punishments for this - being put in the stocks and have unsuspecting X5 drivers invited to throw rotten fruit at the miscreant?

 

[Giantvanman]

I believe that would be called entrapment. Certainly not legitimate.

EDIT: Changed my mind about responding.

 

[Dryce]

EDIT: Changed my mind about responding.

So you switched lanes and then hestitated and switched lanes again.

Hope you checked your mirror and signaled *each time*.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

On that basis it was totally necessary sarcasm - in fact mandated sarcasm. Though t'was not intended to be targeted at any particular esteemed participant in this thread.

Since you quoted a participant on both occasions, I assume that was further "mandated sarcasm" in another attempt at humour. No doubt you received the mandate from an acknowledged source, so I'll doff my vetoed sarcapsm to your superiority and leave it at that.

 

[meeeb]

I commented on an example of inconsiderate driving by someone referred to earlier as "a highly trained police driver". What the officer is alleged to have done may have resulted in a fine if repeated by a member of the public. It may come as a surprise to some, but the police are bound by the same laws as the rest of us. I was asked to explain why I considered the officer's actions illegal, and I did so. i didn't comment on the seriousness of the officer's actions, just that he was breaking one of the laws that he is duty bound to enforce. I don't understand why that resulted in unnecessary sarcasm.

What I do expect from our "highly trained police drivers" is a better example of how we should be driving. I would expect such driving to include adherence to ALL our laws, no matter how insignificant they may seem to some.

Well, no, not necessarily. The police and other emergency services are allowed to drive in a way which would be unlawful for others, if complying with certain traffic regulations would impede the execution of their duty.

"While emergency service drivers are not exempt from the offences of dangerous and careless driving, the current legislation allows drivers in some circumstances to break speed limits legally as well as exempting them from certain traffic regulations"

As regards an offence of wilful obstruction of the highway - hogging the outside lane for example - so far as I remember, this has to be without lawful authority or excuse. A police vehicle 'hogging' the outside lane to prevent the commission of a speeding offence, for example, would be protected by this previso.

I know it's galling that the police can lawfully do things that ordinary mortals can't, but, for obvious reasons, that's the way it is.

 

[crisc204]

errrrr hellloooooo X5's should not be in the Mercedes lane anyway, so that's the first thing to educate the driver about.

This cop knew exactly what was about to happen and he gave you a touch, it's not a suprise when a "63" is about to let loose on an open road, he could probably hear the V8 in the Plod wagon!

 

[itaintemeyouno]

I believe that would be called entrapment. Certainly not legitimate.

It's not necessarily entrapment as defined by law:

"A grant of a stay is awarded if the conduct of the state was so seriously improper that the administration of justice was brought into disrepute. In deciding whether to grant a stay, the Court will consider, as a useful guide, whether the police did more than present the defendant with an unexceptional opportunity to commit a crime"

I would say the situation as described wasn't more than an unexceptional opportunity. This sort of situation isn't uncommon as shown by two threads around this one on lane hogs and undertaking.