Not the laws apple of your eye

[LadyInBed]

Caught the tail end of the Radio 4 ‘PM’ prog article - Woman fined for holding an apple whilst driving.
To my mind, obviously stupid to prosecute, but if it is left to stand, think of all the prosecutions that could be brought for people smoking whilst driving!

 

[Parsonsheath]

Police have said they will prosecute if they see you eating sandwich etc, where do we draw the line?

In the days when I smoked no one fined me for lighting up at the wheel, and I reckon the days when we had the kids bickering in the back were the time when I was driven to distraction.

If we cannot eat a sandwich at the wheel will they stop us for listening to the radio, or talking to passengers?

Weird old world.

 

[sailorman]

police their own worst enemy /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[TonyMS]

Some years ago, a man in Peterborough was had up for eating cornflakes. His defense was that it was only toast.

He was fined anyway, I forget what for exactly

 

[TheBoatman]

I noticed that this law does not apply to police officers who, whilst driving have to let go of the wheel with one hand to press the transmit-to-talk button on their radio's, hardly "hands free" is it, when you consider that most police cars are manual gear boxes and not automatic?
It is also an accepted fact that police officers are more likely to have an accident, sorry wrong terminolgy, "incident", whilst driving than thee or me.
IMHO this is a case of lets book the b***gers and keep our stats up, nice easy Middle England man/woman target that will pay without any fuss, oh BTW never mind that Ford transit tipper we just passed with no tax disc, towing a caravan, cutting the lock off that gate to get into a poor farmers field, blind eye, didn't see that, never mind, thats definately a local rate-payers problem?

Sometimes I just dispair!!!! /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[oldharry]

Have a break - have a £30 ticket, sir.

Latest reports are that she was first given an FP £30 notice for not being in proper control, being stopped because a Policeman thought she was using a Mobile Phone (Hand up to face). She challenged and Police spent £10k proving their case. Result £60 fine +£100 costs....

The Police involved are quoted as saying they will 'prosecute anyone who is not in proper control of their vehicle, whether using a mobile phone, or eating a sandwich.'

What about all those motorists driving round with a ciggie on...? Nice bit of revenue to be had there Mr Blair...

How many of you, like me, have had your boat broken into, damaged and £100s if not £1000s of gear stolen (twice in a few days in my case - they came back for a second load a few days later), but the Policer never even investigated the crime report?

But then of course, if I took the law into my hands to attempt to protect my property effectively (like, say, a large loaded bungee to knock the b******* o/b and drown him, or something sensible like that) then I would be in the wrong.

If someone places themselves outside the law by criminal intent, they they should not expect the law to protect them.

But having a snack at the wheel? The same report commented that even if your passeneger unwraps a Kit kat and gives it to you while you are driving you will still be prosecuted...

I think I will just go down to the Police Station and give myself up.. I do not know what I have done while I was driving yesterday, but they are sure to find something they can charge me with. I am sure I did 31mph down the village street officer....

 

[doris]

To say nothing about the woman in a golf who was killed a couple of days ago by a police 4x4 when it jumped a red light with no siren/lights etc. We have to learn our place in the world. In any self respecting 3rd world county the police have total powers, we qualify don't we?

 

[capricorn]

I flagged down a police car in the street recently after I witnessed a break in in progress.

The 2 officers told me to call 999 and drove off.

 

[steve_cronin]

What about policemen (& private hire cars) who....

use radio telephones whilst at the wheel? then there's changing gear - how do they see that?

Unless you want to have power over your fellow man, you don't become a police officer.

Steve Cronin

 

[Stemar]

Re: What about policemen (& private hire cars) who....

"Unless you want to have power over your fellow man, you don't become a police officer"

Why on earth else would anyone do it these days?

I did it many years ago, when it was still possible to be a bit idealistic about the job, but I have little respect for the service now, fo all the reason mentioned above

 

[steve_cronin]

Re: What about policemen (& private hire cars) who....

Indeed.

I have a cousin who is a retired officer married to a retired officer and we are both nephews of a past (dec'd) DCI. He and she are both of the same opinion.

Around here is a retired station sergeant doing the after dinner rounds on the very topic of "Old bobby vs. current recruit".

Progress?

Steve Cronin

 

[kds]

Re: What about policemen (& private hire cars) who....

You may be right - but they are the best that we have got.

Tired of all the whinging. Why do people think it is OK to drive a car without giving it 100% full attention. More people killed by cars monthly than by murderers annually.
For pity's sake grow up.
Ken

 

[steve_cronin]

Re: What about policemen (& private hire cars) who....

Who the f... do you think you're tallking to?

Grow up yourself and realise what plonkers are joining the police force these days. Why is it legal to operate an RT handset but not eat an apple?

And don't give me the crap that the police are "highly trained" and therefore capable of dual attentiveness. You aren't giving mental attention to the task when eating an apple.

This girl became a must win target when they realised that she wasn' actually using a phone. All they had to do was stop her and have a little word. You may remember that this is the arguement, that they were OTT in using twin engined aircraft, a helicopter and several patrol cars when a ticking off is all that was required. Disproportionality is the complaint.

OK?



Steve Cronin

 

[Peppermint]

Re: If we all

say no to fixed penalty fines. We want to go to court. We'd shake the system up more than a little bit. At the moment speed cameras are profitable. Not if everyone goes to court though. OK it's likely to cost you a bit more but it's the only way for the silent majority to fight back.

 

[CharlesM]

Re: What about policemen (& private hire cars) who....

>> Who the f... do you think you're tallking to? <<

and exactly who and what are you that kds cannot have his say? Seems a little self inflated statement IMO.

Charles

 

[AlexL]

Re: If we all

Just how profitable speed cameras are has just been revealed in the latest audit office report. The claim that all the monies kept by the police are used for road safety has been found to be a blatant lie (suprise, suprise). In essex last year most of the money was apparently used for officers overtime and renovating police buildings. So the more speed cameras get used the more salary the police get in overtime. Vested interest? I think so.
On a similar note I was on the M25 yesterday and watched a patrol car doing 70mph on the dot, swerve into the outside lane, from the inside lane, in front of some one doing about 80, causing them to brake hard and then the police flashed his little dot matrix "70mph limit" sign. I know the other guy shouldn't have been speeding, but If I had pulled that manouevre I would have been quite rightly nicked for dangerous driving. Its about time the ar**holes in blue realised that the laws of the land actually apply to them too.

I quite agree - refuse fixed penaltys, make the prat go to court and prove his usually very flimsy case. As there are 65 million people ini this country and only a few thousand policemen, the rule of law relies on the consent of the population - a consent which the police are loosing, by their own actions.
Terry pratchet, that wonderfully funny observer of the human condition, remarked in one of his novels that the police are supposed to take criminals and try to turn them into honest citizens, unfortunately it is more usuall and alot simpler to take honest citizens and turn them into criminals!

 

[CharlesM]

Re: If we all

<<<<>>>>>>
supposed to take criminals and try to turn them into honest citizens, unfortunately it is more usuall and alot simpler to take honest citizens and turn them into criminals!
<<<<<>>>>>

As OFCOM and co are doing re SSB and such!!

Charles

 

[silvertop]

Re: If we all

Ive lost my way. Can anyone point me to the boating forum.

 

[kds]

Re: If we all

Ask a policeman !
Ken

 

[jfm]

100% is not realistic

Kds, this is the real world. It actually is ok to drive without 100% attention. I do it, we pretty much all do it, and I suspect you do it. I drive while changing the CD, talking to passengers, talking on phone (h/free), and eating apples. There is a balance here- I have a wish to do other things while driving, my fellow citizens have a wish for me to drive with maximum attention so I dont smash into them. The right balance imho is that I should be allowed to eat an apple and talk to my passengers, but not do jigsaws, knitting, welding, or use a handheld phone. It is absurd to suggest the right answer is an extreme like 100% attention, becuase you might as well then argue for a speed limit of 0mph.

This prosecution was -if coprrectly reported in the press- quite absurd and a misdirection of publicly paid for resources