Speeding cops

[Toaster]

Geez there are some utter morons on this site.

[BoristheBiter]

Okay, so I gave it a few days just to see what the responses would be.

So let me describe the scene again. It's a blind corner with a dozen or so drives issuing onto the road around this corner.

Around the corner comes the cop doing 80ish. Mercifully, no child or adult or vehicle just happened to be in the way. But has such been the cop could not have stopped in time.

So now let's get to the cause. Remember, I mentioned a whole raft of probables.

What I purposefully failed to mention was that I found a space and did a Uey and followed the cop, having felt more than mildly outraged at the speed at which he was traveling.

They were attending a simple, minor damage, nose-to-tail just two clicks further on. No bad men with guns. No fleeing child-molesters or rapists, elderly beaters, or other such heinous hoons. A simple nose-to-tail.

Now tell me they were justified to drive at such crazy speeds, in a built-up area, around a blind corner, just to get to such a minor accident in such a hurry.

what a complete tit, what planet is your head at?

you complain about cops speeding around a blind corner then you go and pull a Uee, on said corner, then speed to catch up to the police and keep up with them. if you think is was your duty to find out why they were speeding then good for you but to have a rant while you were speeding to catch up just shows what a small man you are.

if you or anyone you know is in a crash or needs any help in a hurry i hope you remeber what you have posted here.

[Toot Toot]

A simple nose-to-tail.

Now tell me they were justified to drive at such crazy speeds, in a built-up area, around a blind corner, just to get to such a minor accident in such a hurry.

Maybe last week when they went to a minor taxi vs wall to find a homicide??

[vifferman]

^Yeah,exactly,so when you see a speeding cop,he/she is doing so for good reason,so get outta the way!!

Yes.
Except when they aren't, like a few years back when too many cops were caught out for using their sirens to get home for a lunch in a hurry (or other spurious reasons), and ended up in a power of shit for it. IIRC, as a result they were banned from using them for a while, except in VERY dire emergencies.

[Toaster]

Yes.
Except when they aren't, like a few years back when too many cops were caught out for using their sirens to get home for a lunch in a hurry (or other spurious reasons), and ended up in a power of shit for it. IIRC, as a result they were banned from using them for a while, except in VERY dire emergencies.

The poor actions of a few unfortunately always taint the reputation of the many.

[Ixion]

Why is it such a big deal? So, some cops speed. Ho hum. Some non cops have been known to do it too. Most cops likely to be in marked cars are fairly sensible (the ones with silver braid are another matter). Personally, I couldn't give a stuff how or when they speed. Less of a risk to me, I'm sure, than 50% of the doddering idiots out there.

And a lot of coppering must be bloody boring. Seems only fair that they get the chance to have a bit of a fang now and then. (On the Chritsmas Nice and Nasty ride, one of the bikey cops shepherded us up Queen St. Which involved him waiting until we had all passed him, then blasting past full gauntlet to the head of the ride, to get to the next set of traffic lights ahead of the ride, so he could wave it through. Rinse, lather, repeat. He had the BIGGEST grin on his face!. Good for him )

[red mermaid]

You've only got half the story right here (what a surprise on KB!)

It was in the late 70's. A cop in the south island was caught using his siren to clear traffic so he could get home for tea in time.
Consequently sirens were taken out of police cars until the mid 80's, although we in the MoT kept ours.

Yes.
Except when they aren't, like a few years back when too many cops were caught out for using their sirens to get home for a lunch in a hurry (or other spurious reasons), and ended up in a power of shit for it. IIRC, as a result they were banned from using them for a while, except in VERY dire emergencies.

[Littleman]

What does dpex murmur in your ear when hes inside you vifferman?

[Patrick]

Geez there are some utter morons on this site.

Sure are... But then there are some pearlers too... Like the donut special call.... and Littlemans call above.....

[Mikkel]

And surely this is just a wind up. You must be quite bored to have tapped that all out just to do some fishing.

It does raise a valid point though. Especially in regards to traffic policing.

If speed kills - then surely two vehicles speeding are twice as dangerous as one vehicle speeding. So, by extrapolation, speeding in relation to traffic enforcement is counter-productive... IF, and only if, the main goal is road safety.

...but then, I never truly believed it to be about road safety. Revenue gathering, probably. Controlling the population, most definitely. Anyway, I can't complain about the cops speeding, after all I do it myself from time to time!

And yes, I am only half-serious. We do need road rules and they do need to be enforced - but they need to be enforced sensibly and honestly.

[grusomhat]

It does raise a valid point though. Especially in regards to traffic policing.

If speed kills - then surely two vehicles speeding are twice as dangerous as one vehicle speeding. So, by extrapolation, speeding in relation to traffic enforcement is counter-productive... IF, and only if, the main goal is road safety.

...but then, I never truly believed it to be about road safety. Revenue gathering, probably. Controlling the population, most definitely. Anyway, I can't complain about the cops speeding, after all I do it myself from time to time!

And yes, I am only half-serious. We do need road rules and they do need to be enforced - but they need to be enforced sensibly and honestly.

http://xkcd.com/605/

[swbarnett]

A question for those that have bought in to the "Speed Kills" message. If this is true how come the number of speeding tickets issued annually far exceeds the death toll?

From November 1 2008 to October 31 2009 340,368 speed camera tickets were issued, yet the death toll was in the reagion of 3 or 400. A ratio of 0.1%. And that's only from cameras, not to mention the number of times people speed and don't get caught. Obviously there is no correlation between speed and death.

On a totally unrelated note (although relevant to the original post). I have no problem with cops engaging in risky activities in the pursuit of criminals. I'd rather loose a few innocents by accident (myself and mine included) than create a culture where crims know they can escape simply my engaging the police in something that is likely to result in a member of the public coming to harm.

[Virago]

A question for those that have bought in to the "Speed Kills" message. If this is true how come the number of speeding tickets issued annually far exceeds the death toll?...

A rather spurious and illogical argument.

The number of people ticketed for drink-driving will far exceed the number who die as a result of the act. Does that prove that drink-driving is not dangerous?

The number of people ticketed for failing to wear a seat-belt will far outweigh to number who die as a result of not wearing one.

The number of cigarettes smoked will exceed the number of people who die from smoking related illness.

How far do you want to take a silly viewpoint?

[swbarnett]

A rather spurious and illogical argument.

The number of people ticketed for drink-driving will far exceed the number who die as a result of the act. Does that prove that drink-driving is not dangerous?

The number of people ticketed for failing to wear a seat-belt will far outweigh to number who die as a result of not wearing one.

The number of cigarettes smoked will exceed the number of people who die from smoking related illness.

How far do you want to take a silly viewpoint?

What is at issue here is the probability to any given individual. We are supposed to believe that "speed kills", "you will die if you don't wear a seat belt" and "if you smoke it will kill you". These are absolute statements and are only true for a very narrow set of curcumstances. Yes, without speed an impact will be less harmfull, likewise wearing a seat belt will mitigate some of the concequences and if you don't smoke then you are likely to be healthier. However, the probability of this happening to a given individual is infinitesimal and, in my opinion, not worth worrying about. I perfer to get on with life and worry about things that actually have a good chance of happening.

[Virago]

... I perfer to get on with life and worry about things that actually have a good chance of happening.

I'm sure that's what drunk-drivers think too. However, when we speed, we put others at risk too - just like the drunk.

Playing around with statistics doesn't mitigate the risks. Social responsibility must be weighed against individual choice.