Bike coppers are Kind.

[Bluefish]

A special thanks to the two nice motorcycle policemen who put on their flashing lights and siren for me today cos they wanted to have a chat with me. was heading along the fence bypass which used to be a 60 and is now a 50 limit, straight bit of road, they must of come from the roundabout behind us. Anyhow pulled over and asked if i knew what speed i was doing, course i did but wasn't about to admit it, over 50 asked i, just a bit he said, i clocked you at 80 but didn't get the required distance of .2 of a mile as i had slowed down behind a car to the limit, so he let me off with a warning, after that i went home feeling rather lucky, very lucky as my clock may have been reading a bit more than he said.

[Shellywoozle]

all coppers are kind ;)

[Bluefish]

Lol, if you say so :rolleyes:

[Bluepete]

I had my kindness removed in a small operation when my white hat was issued.

Also, my sense of humour was cut out during basic training.

Pete ;)

[tactcom7]

Hmmm I disagree, 3 points and 60 quid for crossing a teeny tiny white line :(

[Jabba]

Hmmm I disagree, 3 points and 60 quid for crossing a teeny tiny white line :(

That's lenient when you think what happened to Ricky Hatton for doing something similar ;-)

[beabert]

A special thanks to the two nice motorcycle policemen who put on their flashing lights and siren for me today cos they wanted to have a chat with me. was heading along the fence bypass which used to be a 60 and is now a 50 limit, straight bit of road, they must of come from the roundabout behind us. Anyhow pulled over and asked if i knew what speed i was doing, course i did but wasn't about to admit it, over 50 asked i, just a bit he said, i clocked you at 80 but didn't get the required distance of .2 of a mile as i had slowed down behind a car to the limit, so he let me off with a warning, after that i went home feeling rather lucky, very lucky as my clock may have been reading a bit more than he said.

That aint kind.

Kind would of been 'slow down mate' Like a couple did at 4am to me few weeks back. It was them up my **** that made me speed up in the first place! Hate cars sitting right behind me at night on unlit roads.

[Specialone]

That aint kind.

Kind would of been 'slow down mate' Like a couple did at 4am to me few weeks back. It was them up my **** that made me speed up in the first place! Hate cars sitting right behind me at night on unlit roads.


Yep, a few naughty ones will do that, so if your spidey sense tingles, slow down.
Late at night or early morning i wouldnt trust anyone not to be a cop right behind me so wouldnt speed away.

[appollo1]

That's lenient when you think what happened to Ricky Hatton for doing something similar ;-)

:smt046 :smt046

[beabert]

Yep, a few naughty ones will do that, so if your spidey sense tingles, slow down.
Late at night or early morning i wouldnt trust anyone not to be a cop right behind me so wouldnt speed away.

Yep i was crusing at 50 in 60 until they came along, only went over by 10mph and straight down to 30mph as i entered the zone. Pulled over to let em pass, they pulled over with me lol.

[454697819]

they were not kind, they had no evidence to prosecute you but they still gave you a tug...

screams haven't got anything better to do...

*lobs grenade and stands well back*

[Bluefish]

Lol at no's, but if they had followed me for a bit longer they may have got said evidence, anyhow recon I was a bit lucky.

[454697819]

Lol at no's, but if they had followed me for a bit longer they may have got said evidence, anyhow recon I was a bit lucky.

granted, don't get me wrong in your shoes I would also be v grateful, however im glad you can see my point, a lot of people get very arsey over my opinion that if they didnt have the evidence, they had no reason to pull you per say.

[keith_d]

Hmm, late at night and pushing the speed limits a bit. Worth a pull. If your legit they'll have a discreet word and send you on your way. But if it's a stolen bike or you smell of booze you're nicked.

IMO, perfect use of their discretion.

Keith.

[Messie]

Don't need the 'evidence' to pull someone over, just a 'suspicion' (or whatever the correct term is). And in my opinion that's good enough.

[Jayneflakes]

You were very naughty... Fancy speeding on your bike! :shock:

I would never do that, oh no, not ever, not me. I am a good girl... *snigger*


:smt026

[454697819]

Don't need the 'evidence' to pull someone over, just a 'suspicion' (or whatever the correct term is). And in my opinion that's good enough.

Granted

I'm not saying the coppers were wrong, I'm saying they were iffy about it.

Unless they can prove he was speeding, no offence has been committed, technically speaking, and unless there was an obvious defect with the vehicle, or the Reg came back with issues which needed investigating the only other reason for stopping him would be how he was riding, which fair enough I guess "going a bit quick" would come under..

However a to pull him over, give a ticking off re speeding with no evidence per say is daft IMHO if I am playing devils advocate.

Dont get me wrong, Id be screaming blue murder if they had let me ride on to speed again just so they could issue a ticket.

It was the same when my mate got done for doing 89 in a 70, he knew as well as they did he was going much faster than the speed on the ticket, but they had no tangible evidence to prosecute him on, (they had no radar or vascar) they knew they could issue him a ticket and he would accept it because they knew he knew he was in the wrong.... and that imho isnt correct.

[keith_d]

Don't need the 'evidence' to pull someone over, just a 'suspicion' (or whatever the correct term is). And in my opinion that's good enough.

AFAIR they still only need the opinion of two constables to do you for speeding, though these days they are usually expected to provide evidence to support that opinion. So they were well within their 'rights' to pull bluefishman over, then use their discretion to have a few words with him rather than issuing a ticket.

Strange as it may sound on this forum, I'm with the cops on this one. I'd rather they use their judgement to determine whether someone was riding dangerously, then issue tickets appropriately. Naturally, that means there's some scope for personal bias, but that's more likely to get people riding sensibly than ticketing every infraction.

Just my thoughts,

Keith

[454697819]

AFAIR they still only need the opinion of two constables to do you for speeding, though these days they are usually expected to provide evidence to support that opinion. So they were well within their 'rights' to pull bluefishman over, then use their discretion to have a few words with him rather than issuing a ticket.

Strange as it may sound on this forum, I'm with the cops on this one. I'd rather they use their judgement to determine whether someone was riding dangerously, then issue tickets appropriately. Naturally, that means there's some scope for personal bias, but that's more likely to get people riding sensibly than ticketing every infraction.

Just my thoughts,

Keith

true true true...

I am also with the coppers... I was throwing the other side of the coin in..

[Milky Bar Kid]

Granted

I'm not saying the coppers were wrong, I'm saying they were iffy about it.

Unless they can prove he was speeding, no offence has been committed, technically speaking, and unless there was an obvious defect with the vehicle, or the Reg came back with issues which needed investigating the only other reason for stopping him would be how he was riding, which fair enough I guess "going a bit quick" would come under..

However a to pull him over, give a ticking off re speeding with no evidence per say is daft IMHO if I am playing devils advocate.

Dont get me wrong, Id be screaming blue murder if they had let me ride on to speed again just so they could issue a ticket.

It was the same when my mate got done for doing 89 in a 70, he knew as well as they did he was going much faster than the speed on the ticket, but they had no tangible evidence to prosecute him on, (they had no radar or vascar) they knew they could issue him a ticket and he would accept it because they knew he knew he was in the wrong.... and that imho isnt correct.

I frequently pull over vehicles that are speeding, I am not traffic so don't have the correct equipment, but I have a quiet word in their ear. I would rather, even if I had the means, stop someone and have a quiet word.

Just because they didn't have the "evidence" as you put it, doesn't mean to offence is not complete. Technically, they could have still given a ticket for it.

As mentioned above, anything like that gives reason for us to pull a vehicle and sometimes, (quite a lot of the time), we find further offences such as drugs, drug driving/riding, drink driving/riding, no insurance, unsafe vehicle etc etc etc.

[martin15s]

granted, don't get me wrong in your shoes I would also be v grateful, however im glad you can see my point, a lot of people get very arsey over my opinion that if they didnt have the evidence, they had no reason to pull you per say.

disagree - they have every right to stop you to warn of your speed - just not enough evidence to support a successful prosecution, unless both officers independently agree that the speed was excessive and can estimate the speed. I did this many years ago in Oxford street, London with an E-type Jaguar - the court happily accepted our estimate of speed as around 70mph.....

And ultimately I was a traffic sergeant on bikes and cars, and probably gave an equal amount of tickets and warnings.

Lets be honest, no one likes being reported - everybody would prefer a warning, then of course no police officer would be a ba***rd.

[454697819]

disagree - they have every right to stop you to warn of your speed - just not enough evidence to support a successful prosecution, unless both officers independently agree that the speed was excessive and can estimate the speed. I did this many years ago in Oxford street, London with an E-type Jaguar - the court happily accepted our estimate of speed as around 70mph.....

And ultimately I was a traffic sergeant on bikes and cars, and probably gave an equal amount of tickets and warnings.

Lets be honest, no one likes being reported - everybody would prefer a warning, then of course no police officer would be a ba***rd.

thats ok, you had the evidence to prosecute, this officer admitted to the OP that he didn't have enough evidence to prosecute, so different scenario...

Im not saying they were wrong to stop you, I am making the point that whilst on one hand they were "doing the op a favour" on the flip side they were being pedantic..

[martin15s]

thats ok, you had the evidence to prosecute, this officer admitted to the OP that he didn't have enough evidence to prosecute, so different scenario...

Im not saying they were wrong to stop you, I am making the point that whilst on one hand they were "doing the op a favour" on the flip side they were being pedantic..

they were merely giving advice - they had more than sufficient "evidence" or reason for this.

[Specialone]

Yep, a few naughty ones will do that, so if your spidey sense tingles, slow down.
Late at night or early morning i wouldnt trust anyone not to be a cop right behind me so wouldnt speed away.

Should have added to this, i wouldnt speed now with suspicious vehicles behind, not since my incident when exactly this happened earlier this year going home from a bike meet and a unmarked bike followed me, i thought i was holding aanother bike up so gunned it coming off an island then slowed down, turns out it was a bike cop :(
Didnt get done though cos his bike wouldnt start when he told me to follow him to a safer layby, damn lucky myself that night and has changed my habits for the better.