Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Driving/Incidents/Roadrage' started by developer, Feb 22, 2014.
A "tw**t of the day" table?
A police officer once defined this situation as a "front tail".
He was quite clear in his view that it could lead to a prosecution.
To be followed and get nicked is not good.
To follow a marked police car and get nicked speaks for itself.
Perhaps a monthly table would safer as we are all human and can 'days'. Besides, the results would be more conclusive.
MrB sums it up nicely.
Anybody overtaking a Police Car and exceeding the speed limit in the process, without reasonable justification (normal law applies) is asking to be charged with (a) speeding - they were and that can be proved and (b) Driving with without due car and attention - It could be argued that you didn't notice that you were overtaking a marked police car. What would your defense be? I didn't see the jam sandwich markings? He was speeding so I did the same?
Nope. The Q7 driver probably got a talking too. However, given his disregard for the Police it is likely that he converted his talking too into a formal charge and points.
We do not (last time I checked) have a pick and choose system in this country for which laws we think should apply at which time and to whom they should apply. Any argument about the Police car speeding up or slowing down would simply irritate the magistrates and probably lead to bigger fine.
Rule 1. Follow the rules.
Rule 2. If you don't like Rule 1, petition for change.
If you think this silly then try to argue this.
You see the Police with guns. Do you then rush home and grab a gun because you saw with Police with Guns? No. You see the Police speeding? Do you instantly think I'll have some of that?
Now then Bruce!
You are just being sensible, logical and reasonable, that will never do!
I find it amazing that people would even think about debating the rights and wrongs of overtaking a marked Police Car and speeding whilst doing so. A bit like looking for gas leaks with a cigarette lighter or land mines with whacker plate.
There does seem to be a tendency here to "boast"about previous wrongs that are all the fault of the Police - Running a red light - Police Fault, Speeding - Police Fault. No ownership for his/her own actions. This can only lead in one direction and I suspect will not end well. But that will no doubt be the Police's fault.
But hey ho. What do I know.
Absolutely legitimate. In its simplest form all the officers need to show is that the tail car maintained a constant distance from the lead car (thereby travelling at the same speed as the police vehicle) for a particular distance, and that the police speedo was accurate.
VASCAR (if it is still in use these days) can also be used from the front. In fact VASCAR can be used from a stationary vehicle.
I usually find "f*ck you" works quite well .
Yes, yes, chill - of course I'm kidding .
Unfortunately not - we followed the Q7 for quite a few miles before the police car appeared. He/she was generally in quite a hurry.
My lad took a photo of the view as we drove along, and captured said Q7 in his shot:
Maybe I should have. Never met such a bunch of girls bringing rights/wrongs into everything and not accepting minority opinions. Imagine if I told them I worked for a bank and am a BMW fan! (I think I should join the PCS GTG as anonymous).
Don't worry fella - in my experience the people you meet at GTG's aren't the same people you encounter on here, even though they are, if you get my meaning.
Having spent years in courts I remember so well the "aggrieved" who wanted to use the venue as a chance to vent his rage at being caught and his dislike of the police.Whilst he was perfectly entitled to these opinions that was not the place to express them. A wise bench would politely ignore them,others would enter into a debate and I suspect increase the penalty as a result.
We would all groan as it always meant further delay in getting our cases on. I never heard such people say afterwards that they felt better for having put their opinions and it certainly didn't sway the court.Inevitably the case against them was open and shut and the only outcome they wanted was to be exonerated. That was never going to happen.
Moral: If caught bang to rights pay the penalty,learn from the experience and move on. Usually whatever your views of others involved doesn't alter your conduct or provide any excuse.
How do you know he was stopped for speeding?
The police probably let him overtake so they could tail if he didn't stop.
Might be a wanted murderer... and they just caught him!!
Anyway if you speed anywhere (until the law changes) man up and face the consequences.
Maybe you should work on your powers of observation?
First line of defence when deliberately breaking the law is surely observation, especially if your driving style attracts unwanted (from your point of view) attention, which it did apparently, on this occasion.
That was 19 years ago when I was 21. I've had a clean licence for as long as I can remember. Thanks for the tip!
Accepting minority opinion is a sign of Dictatorship.
Allowing such opions to be voiced without actually accepting them is a sign of Democracy, It's called Debate.
You posted yours, did you not? And they are still there for all to see?
Incidentally, girls are most welcome on this forum.
Throwing insults is also the sign of a weak and lost argument.
Unfortunately I doubt that reason and good sense will prevail here.
Changing the subject completely, what's that on the side of your car in your avatar?