selby newcomer:
the old bill were doing the same thing around the m18/m62 area a while ago, cost a lad i used to work with his job, he got caught without a seatbelt on and on our daily time sheet, it says “have you been stopped by the police today” he ticked yes and shot himself in the foot,so after forgetting to disconnect the airlines and snapping them all and lateness, he was shown the door.
So in fairness, getting stopped by the police didn’t cost him his job, being a complete and utter nob did!
leo.saphira:
surely if the unit in question is not fitted out with blues and twos and tending to a “job” that requires the blues… then their speed limit by law is 50mph ). therefore they are breaking the speed limit law themselves to catch others being naughty?
They are above the law. One rule for us and one for them. I have more respect for criminal then i do for the police.
leo.saphira:
surely if the unit in question is not fitted out with blues and twos and tending to a “job” that requires the blues… then their speed limit by law is 50mph ). therefore they are breaking the speed limit law themselves to catch others being naughty?
They are above the law. One rule for us and one for them. I have more respect for criminal then i do for the police.
Ummmm, some, maybe.
As for these pigs, as soon as they ‘hit’ the A14 everybody knew, I must have had at least 12 texts and calls warning me, couldn’t read them cos I was driving No excuse really, you don’t see many new(ish) solo units on the A14, Seen this unit quite a few times along the A14 from the Dockspur Roundabout up to the Blakenham turnoff, then on my way up to the A14 on the A140 they were going at speed towards Diss, pig cars in front and behind. On a ‘mission’ or going home. That was about 4pm.
Waste of fuel and time, just to catch a few ‘workers’ without seatbelts, ffs. Knobs
I saw the BBC Look East report last night about it. The old bill were saying that they are doing this because of a rise in accidents caused by HGV’s so they are checking drivers eating/phoning etc etc.
They then go on and pull a foreignor and fine him £60 for not wearing a seatbelt!
So how does NOT wearing a seatbelt cause an accident■■?
Just another moneymaking scheme!
(BTW I do wear my seatbelt before anybody starts bleating on)
xfmatt:
You can’t blame the police for just doing their job. They are assigned to the traffic unit for a reason, to deal with crime committed on the roads. So all this ■■■■■■■■ about you should be out catching “real” criminals is a load of nonsense.
No it aint a load of nonsense, I am all for sorting crime on the roads, or anywhere else for that matter, what gets up my entrance is their policy of selective policing, why do they prioritise on trying to catch me having a sip of coffee adjusting my radio, scratching my arse, or whatever other minor misdemeanour you can think of, when surely it would be more important, and time better spent to concentrate their resources on real crime, ie to patrol lay bys, truck parks, ind ests, services etc to actually try and catch the piece of sh who may be prepared to cave my head in to nick my load and/or truck, so it aint bollox to suggest they catch real criminals is it.
If he pulls along side me he’ll get a good shot of me giving him the coffee-handshake.
xfmatt:
You can’t blame the police for just doing their job. They are assigned to the traffic unit for a reason, to deal with crime committed on the roads. So all this ■■■■■■■■ about you should be out catching “real” criminals is a load of nonsense.
No it aint a load of nonsense, I am all for sorting crime on the roads, or anywhere else for that matter, what gets up my entrance is their policy of selective policing, why do they prioritise on trying to catch me having a sip of coffee adjusting my radio, scratching my arse, or whatever other minor misdemeanour you can think of, when surely it would be more important, and time better spent to concentrate their resources on real crime, ie to patrol lay bys, truck parks, ind ests, services etc to actually try and catch the piece of sh who may be prepared to cave my head in to nick my load and/or truck, so it aint bollox to suggest they catch real criminals is it.
If he pulls along side me he’ll get a good shot of me giving him the coffee-handshake.
If you’re allowed to be selective as to which laws apply to you, why can’t the police also be selective as to which crimes they investigate, or is it a case of one rule (or not in this case) for you and one rule for everyone else?
xfmatt:
You can’t blame the police for just doing their job. They are assigned to the traffic unit for a reason, to deal with crime committed on the roads. So all this ■■■■■■■■ about you should be out catching “real” criminals is a load of nonsense.
No it aint a load of nonsense, I am all for sorting crime on the roads, or anywhere else for that matter, what gets up my entrance is their policy of selective policing, why do they prioritise on trying to catch me having a sip of coffee adjusting my radio, scratching my arse, or whatever other minor misdemeanour you can think of, when surely it would be more important, and time better spent to concentrate their resources on real crime, ie to patrol lay bys, truck parks, ind ests, services etc to actually try and catch the piece of sh who may be prepared to cave my head in to nick my load and/or truck, so it aint bollox to suggest they catch real criminals is it.
If he pulls along side me he’ll get a good shot of me giving him the coffee-handshake.
If you’re allowed to be selective as to which laws apply to you, why can’t the police also be selective as to which crimes they investigate, or is it a case of one rule (or not in this case) for you and one rule for everyone else?
Are you for real or just in an argumentative mood, and at what point did I say I actually commited these “crimes” ? I did not think it was necessary to state that I was speaking in the context of making a point in response to a post that I did not agree with, but it appears that in this case it was
You use the phrase ‘real crime’ therefore you have a perception as to which crimes are ‘real’ and which are other, could you perhaps post a list of what you feel are real crimes as opposed to offences that you think should be overlooked.
I think you’ll find one of the remits of road policing is to reduce casualties. I for one would be pretty miffed if a traffic officer turned up to investigate a murder rather than a CID officer…
I used your quote to respond to the ludicrous statement Wayne in the post above yours made
VOSA are certainly selective, I pointed out a 4x4 pick up towing another 4x4 pickup on an unbraked a frame. The towed vehicle was damaged and had the number plates partly obscured so most likely a cat d write off that has been bought for repair.
Offences
1 unbraked trailer over 750kg
2 no MOT (lapses on write off)
3 no road tax
4 no insurance (no mot)
And possibly from drivers age
5 gross weight of combination exceeding licence cat.
Did they do anything, what do you think.?
Would you like to encounter a driverless 4x4 pickup loose on the M6?
Derf:
You use the phrase ‘real crime’ therefore you have a perception as to which crimes are ‘real’ and which are other, could you perhaps post a list of what you feel are real crimes as opposed to offences that you think should be overlooked.
I think you’ll find one of the remits of road policing is to reduce casualties. I for one would be pretty miffed if a traffic officer turned up to investigate a murder rather than a CID officer…
I used your quote to respond to the ludicrous statement Wayne in the post above yours made
Derf:
You use the phrase ‘real crime’ therefore you have a perception as to which crimes are ‘real’ and which are other, could you perhaps post a list of what you feel are real crimes as opposed to offences that you think should be overlooked.
I think you’ll find one of the remits of road policing is to reduce casualties. I for one would be pretty miffed if a traffic officer turned up to investigate a murder rather than a CID officer…
I used your quote to respond to the ludicrous statement Wayne in the post above yours made
OK, I assumed you were responding to me as you used my post as a quote as opposed to Waynes. As for making a list, is that really necessary? perhaps I should have used the phrase “serious crime” instead of “real crime” do you not agree that a robbery from a truck possibly with an attack on a driver is equal in terms of seriousness… with for eg… a driver eating an apple while driving? maybe you do, and if the Police are of the same opinion is it any wonder there is a lot of anti Police feeling.
Don’t believe all you read in the daily mail, (or hear in an RDC waiting room / freight lounge on a ferry etc) it the DM told me it was saturday, I’d go out and buy a calendar just to make sure.
As far as i am aware, there is no offence of ‘Eating an apple whilst driving’, I suspect the driver was prosecuted for ‘careless driving’ also known as not in proper control, which suggests he was unable to perform the simple task of eating an apple while driving without swerving all over the place. This however doesn’t made sensationalist reading in the Daily Mail.
To prove careless driving, the onus is on the officer to show that the driving was well below the standard that a reasonable person would feel acceptable. Unless of course you are advocating (as someone that probably spends a large chunk of their life sharing the road with others) that it is perfectly reasonable for someone to move 40+ tonnes of metal aroundwithout being in proper control of it. to my mind, that has the potential to severely impact on the lives of others (killing them / their loved ones) and should rightly be policed.
Unless of course, the whole ‘eating an apple’ thing isn’t just hear-say and you can scan in and post on here the ticket that has ‘Eating an apple whilst driving’ in the offence description box (usually found directly below / beside the offence code box)
Tim1962:
VOSA are certainly selective,
2 no MOT (lapses on write off)
3 no road tax
4 no insurance (no mot)
no2 does not count or 3 , and as long as the vehicle doing the towing is insured to tow its fine and its on a solid bar / a frame
i know due to getting a tug towing a non runner land rover and having to produce insurance cert of towing vehicle to confirm it was covered
Derf:
Don’t believe all you read in the daily mail, (or hear in an RDC waiting room / freight lounge on a ferry etc) it the DM told me it was saturday, I’d go out and buy a calendar just to make sure.
As far as i am aware, there is no offence of ‘Eating an apple whilst driving’, I suspect the driver was prosecuted for ‘careless driving’ also known as not in proper control, which suggests he was unable to perform the simple task of eating an apple while driving without swerving all over the place. This however doesn’t made sensationalist reading in the Daily Mail.
To prove careless driving, the onus is on the officer to show that the driving was well below the standard that a reasonable person would feel acceptable. Unless of course you are advocating (as someone that probably spends a large chunk of their life sharing the road with others) that it is perfectly reasonable for someone to move 40+ tonnes of metal aroundwithout being in proper control of it. to my mind, that has the potential to severely impact on the lives of others (killing them / their loved ones) and should rightly be policed.
Unless of course, the whole ‘eating an apple’ thing isn’t just hear-say and you can scan in and post on here the ticket that has ‘Eating an apple whilst driving’ in the offence description box (usually found directly below / beside the offence code box)
What makes you think I read the Daily Mail , or worse that I can not form an opinion of my own without influences from another party, are you mistaking me for someone you do actually know, or do you just patronise everybody generally? Why else are the Police practicing this operation other than to catch out drivers eating, drinking, or whatever else so that revenue can be raised under the guise of road safety, accidents happen, fact, they always will in relation to high traffic statistics and the size of the country, thats life, and in the world of PC induced theory every time a driver takes one hand off the wheel a family of four will be wiped out, but in the real world that is not the case, see if you can form a pedantic argument from this also
What evidence do you have that drivers are being prosecuted for taking one hand off the wheel?
The police are enforcing the law, it’s what they’re paid to do. Whether you agree with those laws is an entirely different matter. Point is, you wouldn’t have gone into road transport blind, you must have been aware there were road traffic laws in order to pass your test. If you don not agree with following those laws, or have a problem with how they are enforced, perhaps you should reconsider your career choice.
They are above the law. One rule for us and one for them. I have more respect for criminal then i do for the police.
Are you for real or just in an argumentative mood, and at what point did I say I actually commited these “crimes” ? I did not think it was necessary to state that I was speaking in the context of making a point in response to a post that I did not agree with, but it appears that in this case it was 
