What's wrong with these people, power crazed?
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Road Casualties Q1 2010
Next: Nexen tyres
From: GT on 7 Aug 2010 15:20 "Steve Walker" <spam-trap(a)beeb.net> wrote in message news:8c4ivtFlj2U1(a)mid.individual.net... > GT wrote: > > || but I think they could have tried a little harder to stop the > || vehicle - 17 miles and they couldn't get in front of a car doing > || 30mph??? > > I wouldn't try to overtake a hostile RangeRover on a narrow road certainly not from 200 yards behind, you wouldn't
From: GT on 7 Aug 2010 15:21 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:8c2p6pF8d0U6(a)mid.individual.net... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >>> Another relative-in-law died >>> the other year in his early '90s - in the gym, practicing the discus. > >> Practicing the discus - in a gym? Was he throwing or catching? > > Ever seen a cricket net? That kind of thing. In Sweden, they can't > exactly rely on the weather being good enough to practice outside. I was just ;-)
From: NM on 7 Aug 2010 17:38 On 7 Aug, 14:29, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "NM" <nik.mor...(a)mac.com> wrote in message > > news:9406553c-28e5-4a21-b31f-abec62d16ca3(a)v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On 7 Aug, 11:10, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >> "NM" <nik.mor...(a)mac.com> wrote in message > > >>news:73f971cf-4c87-4e10-ac53-601d752bafe4(a)5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On 6 Aug, 22:54, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >> >> "NM" <nik.mor...(a)mac.com> wrote in message > > >> >>news:186a40ce-eec0-4e43-a9d3-86440a891be5(a)x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> > On 6 Aug, 15:20, Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.trac...(a)hotmail.co.uk> > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 14:54:01 +0100, GT wrote: > >> >> >> >> as in the other post, his RR will almost certainly be the same > >> >> >> >> as > >> >> >> >> my > >> >> >> >> LR. > >> >> >> >> Stays locked. > > >> >> >> > Fair enough - they'll need to smash the windows and jump on the > >> >> >> > bonnet > >> >> >> > like > >> >> >> > gorillas then!! > > >> >> >> I suspect they are trained to go in fast, after all the average > >> >> >> person > >> >> >> who > >> >> >> fails to stop is going to be trouble. Put yourself in the coppers > >> >> >> position, > >> >> >> this old gaffer in a *Range Rover* (plenty of villans drive them) > >> >> >> has > >> >> >> driven off mid interview. Is he carrying drugs? A firearm? Just > >> >> >> because > >> >> >> he > >> >> >> is 70 does not been he cannot be an armed criminal or a madman like > >> >> >> that > >> >> >> bloke who recently shot and blinded a copper in the Lake District > >> >> >> for > >> >> >> no > >> >> >> rational reason at all. > >> >> >> He was being followed by a car with blue lights, (the idea of a > >> >> >> police > >> >> >> escort is ridiculous) even if he thought it nothing to do with him > >> >> >> (even > >> >> >> though he had just been speaking to the coppers) he should have > >> >> >> pulled > >> >> >> over > >> >> >> to let it through. > >> >> >> -- > > >> >> > So you smash his car up and assult him just to be on the safe side? > > >> >> Who is claiming he was assaulted? > >> >> I saw him being led out of his car. > > >> > that is an assault on his person. > > >> Your implication was that a criminal assault had occurred. > >> It didn't. > >> While I would grant that the officer smashing the window didn't give the > >> gent much opportunity to open the door, it is important to note that he > >> had > >> been engaged on a low speed pursuit for 17 minutes, had failed to stop, > >> had > >> previously struck another officer either deliberately or accidentally, > >> and > >> only stopped because a stop stick was deployed in front of him. > >> The officer would have no way of knowing if the driver was about to make > >> off > >> again, so his actions were fairly reasonable. > >> Not too sure why the other officer felt it necessary to jump on the > >> bonnet > >> as this would be quite unsafe to do while the driver still had control of > >> the car. > >> I doubt if that one is in the manual. > > > But really they were enjoying a bit of legalised bullying, as you well > > know and can be seen in the video. > > Why would you call it bullying? What would you call several fit active thugs in uniform terrorising an OAP? > Do you have any other suggestions as to how the vehicle could be stopped? He did the stopping by himself. there was no need for the thugs. > Or do you think that motorists who fail to stop for the police after > striking one of them should be allowed to go about their business? He wasn't charged with striking one. Behaviour worthy of 1930's Nazi's in Germany.
From: Steve O on 7 Aug 2010 21:33 "NM" <nik.morgan(a)mac.com> wrote in message news:818cfe14-a4d5-448b-b6fa-f947c170ea87(a)v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com... > On 7 Aug, 14:29, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >> "NM" <nik.mor...(a)mac.com> wrote in message >> >> news:9406553c-28e5-4a21-b31f-abec62d16ca3(a)v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On 7 Aug, 11:10, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >> >> "NM" <nik.mor...(a)mac.com> wrote in message >> >> >>news:73f971cf-4c87-4e10-ac53-601d752bafe4(a)5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > On 6 Aug, 22:54, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >> >> >> "NM" <nik.mor...(a)mac.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >>news:186a40ce-eec0-4e43-a9d3-86440a891be5(a)x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On 6 Aug, 15:20, Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.trac...(a)hotmail.co.uk> >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 14:54:01 +0100, GT wrote: >> >> > But really they were enjoying a bit of legalised bullying, as you well >> > know and can be seen in the video. >> >> Why would you call it bullying? > > What would you call several fit active thugs in uniform terrorising an > OAP? They weren't terrorising anyone- they were trying to stop a driver who would not comply. > >> Do you have any other suggestions as to how the vehicle could be stopped? > > He did the stopping by himself. there was no need for the thugs. No, he stopped because the police had deployed a stop stick across the road. He could have even performed a u-turn, unless he was stopped by the officer who "opened" his window. > >> Or do you think that motorists who fail to stop for the police after >> striking one of them should be allowed to go about their business? > > He wasn't charged with striking one. > But that is exactly what he did. I assume the police accepted that it was not deliberate, and therefore did not charge him with that offence. > Behaviour worthy of 1930's Nazi's in Germany. Reasonable behaviour, in my opinion. The old duffer was lucky - in the US he'd had been fishtailed off the road.
From: Steve O on 7 Aug 2010 21:36
"Brimstone" <brimstone520-ng08(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:FaqdnfscLoIABcDRnZ2dnUVZ7rWdnZ2d(a)bt.com... > > "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message > news:8c55jpF10qU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> >> >> "Mortimer" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message >> news:m_2dnQaXwoEKosDRnZ2dnUVZ7qidnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk... >>> "Steve Walker" <spam-trap(a)beeb.net> wrote in message >>> news:8c4rvcF954U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>> NM wrote: >>>> | On 6 Aug, 17:17, Chelsea Tractor Man mr.c.trac...(a)hotmail.co.uk >>>> >>>> || breaking the windows to get in and pulling him out? If somebody >>>> || drives off while being interviewed, knocking aside a policeman, >>>> || fails to stop or pull over for 17 miles in front of twos and >>>> || blues and only stops at a stinger its his own stupid fault. The >>>> || US would have pulled him to the ground and handcuffed him from >>>> || behind while lying on his face, if they hadn't shot him already. >>>> | >>>> | And you think thats OK? >>>> >>>> In the circumstances described, I think it would be reasonable. >>> >>> I think what we need to know is what happened just *before* the video >>> that has been released. Was the officers' *first* response on getting >>> out of the car to jump on the bonnet and to smash the window with a >>> truncheon, >> >> The officer on the bonnet did not smash the window. >> The officer at the side smashed the drivers window, but not with a >> truncheon. >> Were you actually watching the video? >> > You obviously didn't. What do you imagine he smashed it with? Clue- it was expandable, it was made of metal, not wood, and it was not a truncheon. > > |