tallpaul

I don't know about rubber necking being 'compulsory'....but I think following a test pass, a trip to the morgue to see a post mortem, would make people think twice about how they drive...

Not wishing to be rude...but does it matter? If it's serious, it'll be on the news. If not, it wont. This is not directed at you peardrops, but the public's fascination with death and destruction is why there are so many associated collisions at accident scenes caused by rubber-necking..

I understand what you mean, in some ways.. But can you tell me why you think that would make is safe for everyone.? Thanks. Paul

Good point Heyesey... It's better the devil you know.....people will be kicking themselves in the government decide to covertly locate speed cameras due to people whining about them distracting people....

There is a place for speed cameras...but not at the expense of less visible police on the roads..in my knowledge and experience... I must admit though..the introduction of the SPECS average speed cameras on the A628 Stocksbridge ByPass have reduced collisions, injury and death significantly....

But does that make it somehow more acceptable? I don't think it does

As you've used the term PC plod...I suppose I must answer your post. Firstly, small motorbikes ARE allowed to use motorways. It's mopeds that can't. Secondly, Defensive driving isn't taught to the police. Or at least, it's never termed that. Advanced and Standard driving courses are undertaken by police officer, dependant upon their role. Of course, if you're one of the half dozen support workers involved in Standard driving courses, you'll know that....if it's true what you say.

Very true....however I wasn't going to cloud the issue with legalities....

Some bus lanes are out of bounds for motorbikes/scooters. Personally, I wouldn't give a rider a ticket, as it's just as easy for them to filter anyway..they aren't queue jumping. However, as a bike licence holder, I'd be avoiding a bus lane that is usually swimming in diesel..

prioryx is absolutely correct.. The problem nowadays is that too many people call on the police, frankly for non-police matters. We seem to spend our lives sorting other people's lives out.. There's some stats where we spend 85% of our time dealing with 10% of the population.

That's exactly what we need... Then inconsiderate and rude drivers might think twice about undertaking the vast majority of decent law abiding drivers...who weren't tempted to use the bus lane.

What you say is true neddio.. I personally think people's view on the police is derived out of a natural wariness of authority. Remember at school how funny/entertaining it was to see the headmaster trip up or fall etc? It's the same with the police. This 'service/force' call it what you will, is there to keep law and order and if you step out of line, you might be prosecuted etc...So when they (the police) do something wrong..it's just so healthy to jump on the bandwagon. I see the difference between police and nurses. You go to casualty on a Friday or Saturday evening and you'll be sitting for 5 or 6 hours in pain, waiting to be dealt with. People accept it and feel sorry for how the nurses have to cope under such conditions, understaffed, poorly represented, funded etc.. Report a crime to the police and if they aren't there within a few minutes...they "must all be sitting with their feet up".."They are rubbish"..."I've lost respect for them"...etc etc..

Some quick figures for you to look at: The latest insurance figures for car crime, show our city to be better than many other towns.... CAR THEFT HOTSPOTS Hull - 126.1% (above national average) Bradford - 107.4% Leeds - 95.6% Bristol - 72.2% Nottingham - 68.4% Bath - 57.1% Ilford - 56% Sheffield - 55.4% Swansea - 53.4% Stockport - 52.5% {Source: Insurance ombudsman}

I agree 100%

Long term use can precipitate the following effects: negative impact on liver function, permanent tooth darkening (of a greenish tinge), susceptibility to ulcers, and diminished sex drive. Khat is usually not an addictive drug, although there are some people who cannot do without it for more than four to five days, feeling tired and having difficulty concentrating.

There's a lot of sense in that....I know many will agree with you. Again..worthy of applause:thumbsup:

I can't answer why they didn't turn up, but it sounds very unusual. I mean, i've responded within minutes to reports of damage to a bus shelter, let alone someone whose caught thieves in the act. I think a lot depends on what exactly your other half told the 999 operator. Then again, like i've tried to explain...if there are only X number of officers in that area and they are dealing with other emergencies, where do you think you're going to get a police officer from? Whoooooaaay..wait a minute here ! So you gave a desciption of the offender and a few days later he was arrested ! Isn't that what you call good police work? Of course it'd be ideal if they had caught him at the time, but it's not an ideal world, is it Bob? Was he picked out on the ID parade? If so, there was enough evidence to charge him. Was he charged? Did it go to court? Are you aware that in criminal cases it's the CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE that decides whether or not a person is charged/appears before a court...and NOT the police? The police only place the information/evidence before them. Yeah, that brick could have hit you. Does your lack of faith in the police extend to a lack of faith in the Crown Prosecution Service and the other Criminal Justice agencies...Presuming that you are aware of them ?

On this subject.....you'll find the 'bigger picture'...is far more distasteful than you think. What about the rights of the criminals? The right to legal advice, the right to appeal, the right to this that and the other?

Yep, hypocrisy at his highest. Disgusting. It further proves my earlier statement though..that many cops aren't interested in motoring offences (ie: prosecuting people for them). This is what blows the theory that cops are only out to target the motorist...as so few of them actually engage in traffic enforcement. You're absolutely correct John. Very much like in the opening sequence of BBC1 classic "Porridge", criminals do see prison as "an occupational hazard". I must admit though, we do put more people in prison, per head of population than any other European country. You're right though, there should be more inside. An educated opinion from a man in the know suggests that over 200,000 people need to be in prison to make a big difference in the crime figures. (Currently there's 80,000) I'm afraid the higher ranks of the police force quickly become 'managers', 'human rights experts' and, dare I say it, 'politicians'...so quickly realise that the government of the day does what it likes. I mean at the moment, MPs are trying to get a £40,000 per year pay rise..and it looks like they'll get a big portion of it. I agree 100%. In my experience you only need to send 3 or 4 'prominent' criminals to prison to see a real drop in a city's crime figures. However, my experience allows me the unfortunate knowledge that they rarely spend long enough in prison...and prior to getting there...they are often realised on bail time and time again....allowing them to commit further crimes before they eventually get sent to prison. Once in prison, many of those crimes will be 'written off' by the authorities as it wont be in the 'public interest' to pursue them..as the criminal is already inside. Eh? I think au contraire ! It's very much in the public interest. Perhaps that way, the criminal can have his/her sentence increased...

I can fully understand that. It's frustrating..and i'm sure you're honest enough to say it's the first time that you've been 'caught'...as opposed to the first time you have committed the offence. I know exactly what you mean. You had to fork out £60 and suffer 3 penalty points on your licence. Meanwhile, a criminal breaks into someone parked car and steals a stereo. When he's caught, if it's his first offence he'll be eligible for a caution. Written record, no points, no monetary fine. It's not fair, not fair at all...and I agree with you 100%. I'm sure you'll be aware that it's not the police that set these rules...It comes from other 'bodies'. You'll find that most cops are delighted when someone they catch received a custodial sentence. I'm personally over the moon...as despite the fact that they are hardly likely to be suffering hard labour in prison..they are very likely not to be out stealing. Of course that is possible at the moment..with the Special Constabulary. A person only needs to donate so many hours per month to the role.

You can't say do nothing. That's rubbish..and you know it. The cops can do what they can, with the resources available. What about the parents of these kids having a bit more control? Family values? Respect of other property etc? Society's problems aren't there for the police to clean up on their own. There are other people responsible...as well you know it. You have my sympathy regarding your damaged vehicles, but it's a shame that the blame seems to have landed on the shoulders of the police. Presumably, it wasn't the cops that broke into your van? Very true..and it's ridiculous. The courts seem to view minor crime as 'petty' and juvenile crime even lower. Yet these crimes are the ones that matter to the vast majority of the public. The hard workers who don't know if their car is going to be safe when they return to it, or whether their Gran will be safe walking to the shops because of the rowdy 'hoodies' that congregate there. The courts are far too lenient on many criminals and it's the public that has to suffer. It's not on... The government might view you as that, but the police don't. If you knew your subject, and I'm sure that anger and frustration is clouding your opinion, but if you knew your subject, you'd know that fines raised from speeding offences either go direct to the Government or they go to the Safety Camera Partnerships. These are made up of local government and the police and several other agencies/partners. However, the funding doesn't go into crime prevention, but further speed enforcement. Most of the police officers that i've known over the years see motoring offences as the work of traffic officers only. Those traffic cops, are small in number and their workload doesn't really cause much of a dent in the public purse. So you'll find it's not the POLICE that see you as an easy target, but instead the Government. You clocked him? With a calibrated and accurate device to measure speed? Or did you match his speed just to see what he was doing? The copper in the riot van might have been attending an incident that required some urgency. Not enough to warrant blue and twos, but enough to exceed the speed limit. It could be that a violent prisoner required transporting...it could be many reasons. So you got done for 37 in a 30 a couple of weeks back did you? That's unfortunate. Of course your speedometer would have been showing nearly 40mph, for a true reading of 37mph. (As i'm sure you'll be aware). So you chose to speed at 37 in a 30mph zone and got caught? What exactly is your problem with that? Whilst I agree that it's not the worst crime in the world, and i've mixed views on camera enforcement, you were still breaking the law. I'm sure you wouldn't be so relaxed about the facts if your loved ones had been knocked down and killed on a road by someone doing 37 in a 30zone.... Would you be saying....well he only just creeped over the limit....no harm done? The points are active for 3 years incidentally. They remain on for 4, but are only countable for 3. Just so you know. So you got arrested for speeding did you? I think not. The police don't have "fine figures" as you eloquently put it. I'm sure you're still smarting from having been caught breaking the law......but you really need to write the facts rather than the opinion from the pub. Yeah, I agree.... There isn't enough punishment for the criminals...and often the public (ie: speeding drivers) are left with immediate justice in the form of fine/points. I don't like it any more than you. I deal with some really nasty individuals in the criminal world..and do so with the thought that people like yourself are sleeping better at night. It upsets me to read that you're not happy with your police force.

I dont think it's the police...i think the government is where the action needs to change.. Remember the police do what the government of the day tell them to do... The police do need the public on their side...and i'm glad to say that in my years of experience...and as at today...the vast majority of people are on the side of the police...especially when 'it matter'. Whenever I deal with an A**ehole, my feeling of anger is quickly replaced when I soon deal with a decent member of the public. I'm glad to say the latter is 95% of people in South Yorkshire.

Darbees, Like i've said in my above post.....there are very few traffic cops nowadays...as most of the 'enforcement' is done by cameras..... The reason why there are so many cameras could be that the public once whined and whinged about traffic police...so their numbers were replaced by cameras. Now a camera wont give you a telling off, it wont show discretion, it wont sympathise that you're late seeing your Mum in hospital, it wont tell if you're drunk or if the car is stolen etc.... So I'm of the opinion that the public dislike with cameras is very much it's own making..and that's sad. As for traffic cops in general, I think the idea that they are hated by the other cops is a very 1970s/80s idea. I personally, hold no dislike towards my colleagues in Traffic (or Road Policing) as it's now called. The very small numbers that are left do a good job of patrolling the roads and dealing with the blood, guts and tears that are left following 'law abiding people' whose driving has left devastation. How someone enforcing the law can give others a bad name, I don't know. But lets look at this attitude? Would you rather be given a telling off, be it sarcastic or whatever, or would you like 3 points and £60 fine etc. In my lengthy knowledge and experience of the subject, I can tell you that police officers (traffic included, if not moreso), are often more likely to use their discretion in the majority of occasions, for example with speeding. Things like seat belts and mobile phone use are usually ticketed every time, as it's hardly a slip of concentration to pick up a phone and engage in a conversation with someone.

Right, I wont berate you for your opinion..as I know you don't like that... But lets look at your post...above.. Firstly, 'Anyone' could do what the police do now? That's quite clearly a ridiculous statement and I'm sure you're kicking yourself for ever clicking SUBMIT REPLY. "Sitting in unmarked cars" with a speed gun? Well considering that SYP have in the region of 100 traffic cops versus 3000 other officers, it's hardly what you call the majority. Then when you see that those 100 traffic cops are spread over the whole of the county and separated into 5 different shifts, and that they include motorcyclist, accident investigators, road death investigators, motorway patrol officers etc etc.. The very people who you suggest might be hiding behind bushes number about 3. Then when you consider that 97% of speeding convictions are done by cameras and the people that operate these camera vans are now CIVILIANS.... Again your post seems to lack some accuracy. On the same ill informed and incorrect facts which you've spouted...the 'giving of crime numbers' is also done by CIVILIAN operators at the crime recording bureau. So again, you seem to be talking about a subject that you have little knowledge about... Please please please...read up and research a subject before spouting about it on the public forum. ..it really does show you up otherwise..

I'm sure your suggestion might have good meaning/intention...but i'm guessing you have given it little if no thought. So lets get this right, you'd prefer a police force where someone serves for 3 months, then doesn't do it again for over 2 and a half years..then does it again for 3 months. You think that would be better than the current system ? You're obviously a bit of a comedian...and I like that..