David Jenkins
|
 posted on 17/2/10 at 07:51 AM |
|
|
One law for us, and different laws for...
The Prime Mentalist
|
|
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 07:56 AM |
|
|
... obviously a slow news morning!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
dan8400
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 08:04 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
... obviously a slow news morning!
x2
Nothing better to write about.....
Tomorrow: 'Cat in tree' exclusive report 
Dan
[Edited on 17/2/10 by dan8400]
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 08:05 AM |
|
|
Do we really care? So a specialist advanced driver was driving slightly over the speed limit in a marked vehicle with blue lights flashing. Would
you complain if that specialist driver was driving an ambulance with you in it. It's not as if Brown himself was driving at that speed just
going to see a friend.
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 08:14 AM |
|
|
Spurious arguments there! 
It's a stretch of road with fairly complex roadworks that change almost every day, contraflow, and many averaging speed cameras.
An ambulance (or fire engine, or police car going to a life-threatening incident) has a duty to go as fast as he can safely manage. This was just a
politician going from point A to point B - no more, no less. Not in the least bit life threatening or urgent...
I wonder how they'll sweep the speed tickets under the mat...
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 08:34 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
Do we really care? So a specialist advanced driver was driving slightly over the speed limit in a marked vehicle with blue lights flashing. Would
you complain if that specialist driver was driving an ambulance with you in it. It's not as if Brown himself was driving at that speed just
going to see a friend.
So if someone has got an advanced driving qualification they can drive more quickly? The police spokesperson said "Police drivers who drive and
escort VIPs receive additional training and work under the guidance of a trained convoy supervisor.
“The decisions taken are risk managed and are to prevent any deliberate or accidental interference with the convoy, which may occur if the convoy
vehicles were to mingle with normal traffic. "
On that basis if ten Locost racers were driving in convoy to the latest race on the basis that they all had a license (proof of advanced driving) and
wanted to avoid 'deliberate or accidental interference with the convoy' it's derestricted apparantly...
Anyway, it was worse than as if he was visiting a friend he was going to have his photos with some children in the hope that it might reduce the level
of the upcoming crushing defeat!!!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 09:05 AM |
|
|
The point is that a convoy carrying a PM or senior Royal will always seek to make progress and avoid non-essential stops or queuing traffic.
It's not done as a perk of being a VIP, it's done purely for their personal safety and protection.
What the paper has described is the absolutely normal way for such a convoy to be traveling... and the way it's been done for decades!
They know this perfectly well, but are sh*t-stirring just for the sake of a story!
As for the speed element... they say that 'eyewitnesses' (presumable the one saddo who felt the need to phone the news-desk as it was the
single-most exciting experience of their lonely dreary life) estimated the convoys speed at 60mph. Of course, that must be accurate because they said
so! I know from experience that if you ask 10 different people what speed a vehicle was doing, you'll get 10 (often very) different answers!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
matt_claydon
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 09:09 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
The point is that a convoy carrying a PM or senior Royal will always seek to make progress and avoid non-essential stops or queuing traffic.
It's not done as a perk of being a VIP, it's done purely for their personal safety and protection.
What the paper has described is the absolutely normal way for such a convoy to be traveling... and the way it's been done for decades!
They know this perfectly well, but are sh*t-stirring just for the sake of a story!
As for the speed element... they say that 'eyewitnesses' (presumable the one saddo who felt the need to phone the news-desk as it was the
single-most exciting experience of their lonely dreary life) estimated the convoys speed at 60mph. Of course, that must be accurate because they said
so! I know from experience that if you ask 10 different people what speed a vehicle was doing, you'll get 10 (often very) different answers!
Totally agree ^
|
|
|
r1_pete
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 09:25 AM |
|
|
The quicker he got there the quicker he spouted more crap and got back in his car a f***ed off again!!
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 09:26 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
Do we really care? So a specialist advanced driver was driving slightly over the speed limit in a marked vehicle with blue lights flashing. Would
you complain if that specialist driver was driving an ambulance with you in it. It's not as if Brown himself was driving at that speed just
going to see a friend.
So if someone has got an advanced driving qualification they can drive more quickly?
They can drive more safely, having been trained for better observation and assessed for better driving skill. That will translate into being able to
drive faster on a given road whilst maintaining a good level of safety. I'd say a police driver selected for escorting the PM would be a far
better driver than the average member of the public.
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 09:27 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by matt_claydon
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
The point is that a convoy carrying a PM or senior Royal will always seek to make progress and avoid non-essential stops or queuing traffic.
It's not done as a perk of being a VIP, it's done purely for their personal safety and protection.
What the paper has described is the absolutely normal way for such a convoy to be traveling... and the way it's been done for decades!
They know this perfectly well, but are sh*t-stirring just for the sake of a story!
As for the speed element... they say that 'eyewitnesses' (presumable the one saddo who felt the need to phone the news-desk as it was the
single-most exciting experience of their lonely dreary life) estimated the convoys speed at 60mph. Of course, that must be accurate because they said
so! I know from experience that if you ask 10 different people what speed a vehicle was doing, you'll get 10 (often very) different answers!
Totally agree ^
+1, a few years ago I overheard someone giving a statement to a copper that a car was reversing at "about 45 mph"
I had to stick my nose in!
VIPs will get this kind of treatment, if you was in charge of this country would you want to sit in a contraflow for an hour when you can get the
police to shift all the peasants?
|
|
|
Fozzie
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 09:46 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
The point is that a convoy carrying a PM or senior Royal will always seek to make progress and avoid non-essential stops or queuing traffic.
It's not done as a perk of being a VIP, it's done purely for their personal safety and protection.
What the paper has described is the absolutely normal way for such a convoy to be traveling... and the way it's been done for decades!
They know this perfectly well, but are sh*t-stirring just for the sake of a story!
As for the speed element... they say that 'eyewitnesses' (presumable the one saddo who felt the need to phone the news-desk as it was the
single-most exciting experience of their lonely dreary life) estimated the convoys speed at 60mph. Of course, that must be accurate because they said
so! I know from experience that if you ask 10 different people what speed a vehicle was doing, you'll get 10 (often very) different answers!
Totally agree +3 ....
Very well put Scootz ... 
Fozzie
'Racing is Life!...anything before or after is just waiting'....Steve McQueen
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 10:02 AM |
|
|
yes, but as the OP states, one law for them, one for us.
the fact that the convoy was breaking the law and got a way with it but if me or anyone else tried that, we'd be getting points and fines.
|
|
|
designer
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 10:20 AM |
|
|
Yes, and it's NEVER going to change.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 10:43 AM |
|
|
I would (not!) recommend that you peruse the entire criminal law and statute books of Scotland, Ni and England / Wales... then travel the length and
breadth of the UK to study the individual local by-laws and Crown Office / PF's guidelines.
Once you're finished (in a few weeks time), then it will become abundantly clear that the 'law' is not holistic... it is very
specific and does indeed treat people and circumstances differently. Again, it always has done... and more often than not, for good reason!
I cannot understand why anyone would have a problem with the circumstances described.
It doesn't matter if he was on his way for tea with his Auntie Jessie in Kirkcaldy or heading to the Command Centre in his Nuclear Bunker. When
the PM is on the move, these things will happen as he is particularly vulnerable to attack when traveling by car.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
JeffHs
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 10:58 AM |
|
|
Many years ago when following the RAC rally in my Mk2 Mexico, I was in traffic with the tail end of the competitors on a road section through
Cheshire. We were escorted by a flashing blue bike at speeds well over the limit. Did I complain - of course not!
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 11:32 AM |
|
|
The Road Traffic Regulation Act is pretty clear about exemptions to speed restrictions:
quote:
87. No statutory provision imposing a speed limit on motor vehicles shall apply to any vehicle on an occasion when it is being used for [F347 fire
and rescue authority], ambulance or police purposes, if the observance of that provision would be likely to hinder the use of the vehicle for the
purpose for which it is being used on that occasion.
Nothing about unelected one eyed liabilities that I can see in there.
quote:
89. A person who drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a limit imposed by or under any enactment to which this section applies shall
be guilty of an offence
And, in this case, of being offensive.
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
I cannot understand why anyone would have a problem with the circumstances described.
Simply because hundreds of people are fined everyday for minor speed infractions which are allegedly set in the name of safety. So either the beloved
leader of our country was being exposed to unnecessary danger, or the safety aspect is bullplop. Can't have it both ways I'm afraid.
[Edited on 17/2/10 by MikeRJ]
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 12:09 PM |
|
|
Offensive??? You must be a sensitive wee soul! I suppose defining someone by their disability as you did (the 'one-eyed remark' ), is
not offensive... well, each to their own I suppose!
Anyway, you can be pedantic and quote all the selected bits of legislation that you like to support your absolute horror of the situation... if you
can't accept that there are exemptions that cover the reported incident, then I'm afraid you'll just have to stew in your anger at
the whole injustice.
Me... ??? I'll happily dismiss it as the non-news story that it is!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
Steve G
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 12:13 PM |
|
|
Speed kills - so we keep getting told............. so of Gordon's car is in a crash then there's a better chance we'll be rid of the
bugger a few month's earlier!!
Go faster I say!!
(to be taken tongue in cheek) 
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 12:32 PM |
|
|
I APOLOGISE!
I posted this article this article while in a mischievous mood, just to see what the reaction was...
...but I still don't see why a lard-arsed politician with a slim grasp of reality should get priority over the general public!
(Normal service will resume shortly... )
|
|
|
A1
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 12:33 PM |
|
|
they should practice what they preach. theyre essentially saying that if youre a good driver you can speed.
there are 2 sets of rules, take the whole benefit fraud thing. the politicians get away with it, then have the cheek to say 'were coming for
you'
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 12:43 PM |
|
|
Then next thing they'll want is dedicated lanes for the Politbureau members to speed along on the way to their office...
(Sorry - can't stop stirring today... )
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 12:44 PM |
|
|
Actually Mike has a point, if speed kills as much as his party say doesn't that mean he was being put in danger?
However with it being a Police escort it's covered under "Police business"
It would be good if they trialled a scheme that allowed holders of an advanced licence an extra 10% over the speed limit. See just how much speed does
kill when compared to the skill of the driver
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 01:03 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Jenkins
...but I still don't see why a lard-arsed politician with a slim grasp of reality should get priority over the general public!
The simple reason is that the general public do not live with the daily threat of assassination. The PM does. Not only that, assassinations tend to
be quite messy affairs, so those surrounding him (including the police) are also at daily risk. Therefore they will drive in a manner that will
minimise this risk.
There seems to be a suggestion that he shouldn't be driven this way because he is incompetent at his job... frankly, political views belong to
the individual, but as a country it would be a huge embarrassment for our PM to be assassinated and a major coup for whichever group carried it out.
Our security services would be ridiculed and it would undoubtedly encourage further attacks.
At the risk of repeating myself, vehicle movement increases vulnerability. Thus, the staff are trained and instructed to drive in that manner... not
on the hoof, but following a high degree of planning (the same for every journey he makes!).
Crikey, the drivers are even trained at how best to plough through vehicle roadblocks - that's how seriously it is. During their training they
will smack their way through a 2 car roadblock in a 3 vehicle convoy, each traveling at speed and within a few feet of each other.
There will hardly be a leader on the planet who doesn't get transported in this manner. Would you rather they did it like many other
countries... a convoy of at least a dozen vehicles all with blue lights flashing, or a discreet 3 car convoy as we do here in the UK? I know what I
would prefer!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 17/2/10 at 01:03 PM |
|
|
Lets twist this another way - would you prefer the person in charge of the country to spend an hour in a traffic jam or an hour governing the
country?
Ignore the fact he may be (in your opinion) useless or the visit (in your opinion) pointless.
Answer based on the principle. Do you want the man with his finger on the nuclear button, the man in charge of the entire country, sat in a traffic
jam twiddling his thumbs not working and potentially open to assassination or kidnap?
Whilst I may not (or may) agree with the unelected person in charge of our country, i can see the advantage of making sure he gets to places quickly
and securely. Although if i was in a traffic jam as he went past i may also utter a few choice words.
|
|
|
