Letter in Advanced Driving Magazine - Winter 2005
Discussion
As a fire officer with many years experience for emergency driving in both fire appliances and cars I agree with Bob Hyde (Write to Reply, Summer 2005) that is it unacceptable for a police officer to be acquitted of driving at 159mph.
I am very concerned however regarding this comment that all emergency calls should be attended whilst keeping to the speed limit. Fire appliance drivers are highly trained dor driving to emergency incidents, and always drive with the utmose regard to the road type and layot, and prevailing conditions.
Many fire and rescue services have introduced policies which restrict their drivers from exceeding the stated speed limit by more than 20mph, even though the law does not require that.
Would Mr Hyde have a different view if it was his house that was on fire and his family were still inside, knowing that the fire service were on their way at only 30mph?
Mike O'Meara, Flintshire
Comments:
Fire appliance drivers trained to a high level? Is he not aware that Traffic Police drivers are trained to drive at much higher speeds that firn appliance drivers?
"Always drive with the utmost regard" - He cannot possibly know that.
Would Mr O'Meara have a different view if it was his family being assaulted, knowing that the police service were on their way at <insert any PC-correct speed that has been plucked out of this weeks hat>!
Clearly, Mr O'Meara wants free reign to drive his fire appliance at any speed HE thinks appropriate but doesn't see the need for better trained police drivers to be responding in vehicles which are specifically designed for higher speeds.
>> Edited by volvos70t5 on Friday 11th November 10:27
I am very concerned however regarding this comment that all emergency calls should be attended whilst keeping to the speed limit. Fire appliance drivers are highly trained dor driving to emergency incidents, and always drive with the utmose regard to the road type and layot, and prevailing conditions.
Many fire and rescue services have introduced policies which restrict their drivers from exceeding the stated speed limit by more than 20mph, even though the law does not require that.
Would Mr Hyde have a different view if it was his house that was on fire and his family were still inside, knowing that the fire service were on their way at only 30mph?
Mike O'Meara, Flintshire
Comments:
Fire appliance drivers trained to a high level? Is he not aware that Traffic Police drivers are trained to drive at much higher speeds that firn appliance drivers?
"Always drive with the utmost regard" - He cannot possibly know that.
Would Mr O'Meara have a different view if it was his family being assaulted, knowing that the police service were on their way at <insert any PC-correct speed that has been plucked out of this weeks hat>!
Clearly, Mr O'Meara wants free reign to drive his fire appliance at any speed HE thinks appropriate but doesn't see the need for better trained police drivers to be responding in vehicles which are specifically designed for higher speeds.
>> Edited by volvos70t5 on Friday 11th November 10:27
Here we go again... somebody has the wrong end of the stick firmly grasped...
Police / fire / ambulance etc on way to real emergency? I think most people would agree - yes exemption from speed limits, go as fast as you can, in the prevailing road conditions, I don't think anybody could argue with that.
Police / fire / ambulance attendant out for a jolly just to see how fast the car can go? Em, no, different story in my view. And that is what our 159 mph boy was doing, even he admitted that...
Police / fire / ambulance etc on way to real emergency? I think most people would agree - yes exemption from speed limits, go as fast as you can, in the prevailing road conditions, I don't think anybody could argue with that.
Police / fire / ambulance attendant out for a jolly just to see how fast the car can go? Em, no, different story in my view. And that is what our 159 mph boy was doing, even he admitted that...
tvrgit
I don't think so. The court has ruled that the exemption was being lawfully used.
You might not like it, he might not like and other PH's might not like it. The court has decided. Who are we to consider that he (the judge) made the 'wrong decision'? He was there, he saw the video, he listened to the expert evidence of the police driving school witnesses and formed his view.
I don't think so. The court has ruled that the exemption was being lawfully used.
You might not like it, he might not like and other PH's might not like it. The court has decided. Who are we to consider that he (the judge) made the 'wrong decision'? He was there, he saw the video, he listened to the expert evidence of the police driving school witnesses and formed his view.
I couldn't give a stuff.
I also wouldn't be writing to magazines complaining that emergency drivers should be made to stick to speed limits, or advocating that police drivers should be allowed to drive at any time at whatever speed they like:
My only point was that this particular driver wasn't training and he wasn't responding, that's all.
I also wouldn't be writing to magazines complaining that emergency drivers should be made to stick to speed limits, or advocating that police drivers should be allowed to drive at any time at whatever speed they like:
volvos70t5 said:
Clearly, Mr O'Meara... doesn't see the need for better trained police drivers to be responding in vehicles which are specifically designed for higher speeds.
My only point was that this particular driver wasn't training and he wasn't responding, that's all.
tvrgit
Can't you see that the anti-speed briage would love to jump on this type of issue and push for a wholescale review of police training and response methods? That can only bring the day closer where the police are restricted from responsing at speed.
I've no idea why we would want to criminalise a highly trained police officer who was on-duty driving a vehcile that he was lawfully permitted to drive while making use of a lawful exemption. Plus he did not injure or kill anyone during his run. I assume that his driving was not in anyway unsafe or dangerous else there would have been a different outcome to the case.
Can't you see that the anti-speed briage would love to jump on this type of issue and push for a wholescale review of police training and response methods? That can only bring the day closer where the police are restricted from responsing at speed.
I've no idea why we would want to criminalise a highly trained police officer who was on-duty driving a vehcile that he was lawfully permitted to drive while making use of a lawful exemption. Plus he did not injure or kill anyone during his run. I assume that his driving was not in anyway unsafe or dangerous else there would have been a different outcome to the case.
One thing I would add, if memory serves correct, was that the copper who did 159mph, wasn't it his colleagues who discovered that he'd accidentally recorded himself doing that speed (and he was unaware he was recording himself, which in itself raises some issues) and that they were unhappy enough about it that they shopped him?
volvos70t5 said:
Can't you see that the anti-speed briage would love to jump on this type of issue and push for a wholescale review of police training and response methods? That can only bring the day closer where the police are restricted from responsing at speed.
Then again, one could argue the police have brought this upon themselves with their firm support of the propoganda of speeding and how it leads directly to death.
Fortunately most people are reasonable enough to know its largely untrue which keeps the lentil munching hand wringers at bay.
I only add this as no one else has mentioned it upon my glace at the tread. The coppers reason for his excess speed was to 'familarise himself' with the car at high speed which I think is justified as everyone needs to know their car very well, how it will handle in a given situation etc etc. If he couldn't practice in his new car driving at emergency speeds, surely he would not be as safe in an emergency situation? He woulden't be as accustomed to his vehicle, its not as if he did it during the school run and he was a top grade traffic copper so I really can't see what everyone's beef is with this as the fireman said if your house was on fire with family inside, would you want the emergency services to keep to the limits or get there as quickly as safely possible?
DanH said:
Can't you see that the anti-speed briage would love to jump on this type of issue and push for a wholescale review of police training and response methods? That can only bring the day closer where the police are restricted from responsing at speed.
Then again, one could argue the police have brought this upon themselves with their firm support of the propoganda of speeding and how it leads directly to death.
Fortunately most people are reasonable enough to know its largely untrue which keeps the lentil munching hand wringers at bay.
The gneral opinion is that there is no need to familiarise yourself with a vehicle doing those kind of speeds. He thought no one was looking and put his foot down. The difference is, is that he is hiding behind the job, the on duty bit. The rest of us don't get that chance. It doesn't take any skill to go fast in a straight line and we all know it takes longer to stop the faster you go
no skill required to drive at high speeds in a straight line
id have to argue with that,ive seen many an accident caused by loss of control on a dead straight road,mostly in the states,there are also plenty of vids on the net to clarify this.
also,a few years back i seem to recall an ambulance driver in a volvo was rushing a heart to a transplant patient,clocked at about 130(average)i think,and he got prosecuted for it.Now surely he`s "on duty" and acting within the law for emergency services,so why should he get done and not the copper?????
theres a comparison for you all,just sticking me oar in.
russ
id have to argue with that,ive seen many an accident caused by loss of control on a dead straight road,mostly in the states,there are also plenty of vids on the net to clarify this.
also,a few years back i seem to recall an ambulance driver in a volvo was rushing a heart to a transplant patient,clocked at about 130(average)i think,and he got prosecuted for it.Now surely he`s "on duty" and acting within the law for emergency services,so why should he get done and not the copper?????
theres a comparison for you all,just sticking me oar in.
russ
bmw114 said:
"The court has ruled"
That only makes it legal. It doesn't make it right.
Parliament decides the law. I suggest you write to your MP if you are unhappy with it.
TVRGIT has got a point.
He may well have but the trouble is how do we translate what you, I and TVRGIT thinks into rules that the masses can easily understand?
Quick question for all the cops on here
If you were giving chase or attending an emergancy would you travel at 159mph of would you back off a bit to maybee 120 or 130mph?
is it safe to persue a veh at them speeds bearing in mind turbulance from the car infront, side winds etc or would you back right off and get the choppers out?
If you were giving chase or attending an emergancy would you travel at 159mph of would you back off a bit to maybee 120 or 130mph?
is it safe to persue a veh at them speeds bearing in mind turbulance from the car infront, side winds etc or would you back right off and get the choppers out?
volvos70t5 said:
tvrgit
I've no idea why we would want to criminalise a highly trained police officer who was on-duty driving a vehcile that he was lawfully permitted to drive while making use of a lawful exemption. Plus he did not injure or kill anyone during his run. I assume that his driving was not in anyway unsafe or dangerous else there would have been a different outcome to the case.
I agree that there is no need to criminalise a trained police officer but surely the best place to carry out vehicle "familiarisation" is NOT on the queens highways but at one of the many excellent proving grounds and test facilities that are available???
Maybe its just me but before I attempted to travel at 150mph+ i'd make sure I was already more than just "familiar" with it and its nuances?...just in case!
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff