Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Andy B on 16 January 2009, 12:20:10
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1118186/Driver-snatched-bite-sandwich-wheel--swallow-60-fine.html
-
Hmmm ---- I must admit to having eaten while driving and will agree that it does take more attention away from the road than changing gear or tuning the radio (assuming that just involves pressing the pre-selects .... would never manually tune while driving!!).
TBH -- if t'were me caught eating while in full flight I would just take the points and shut up ...... I agree she wouldn't have been if full control of the vehicle.
-
have you never driven along the rds or motorway in rush hr and seen people reading the paper on the wheel, or shaving, or doing makeup cause there late again. i smoke while driving, eat chocoalate even still talk on the phone, through speaker of course. some things deserve points. i think it should be up to the officer in charge to decide if there was a risk involved and they should be fined, bit silly getting a £60 fine for picking yer noise and flicking it out the window
and i always thought they were flies on the windscreen ;D ;D ;D
-
Hmmm ---- I must admit to having eaten while driving and will agree that it does take more attention away from the road than changing gear or tuning the radio (assuming that just involves pressing the pre-selects .... would never manually tune while driving!!).
TBH -- if t'were me caught eating while in full flight I would just take the points and shut up ...... I agree she wouldn't have been if full control of the vehicle.
Why??? How many times do you actually have 2 hands on the wheel? It's not as if she was eating off a plate with a knife & fork!
-
I once saw a Polish wagon driver on the M56 eating a steaming plate of meatballs with a spoon... He's obviously heated them up whilst driving too... I was in such shock that I didn't get his number to report him...
-
Hmmm ---- I must admit to having eaten while driving and will agree that it does take more attention away from the road than changing gear or tuning the radio (assuming that just involves pressing the pre-selects .... would never manually tune while driving!!).
TBH -- if t'were me caught eating while in full flight I would just take the points and shut up ...... I agree she wouldn't have been if full control of the vehicle.
Why??? How many times do you actually have 2 hands on the wheel? It's not as if she was eating off a plate with a knife & fork!
i drive with 1 hand, other uselly rubbing me crotch, ;D ;D
-
Hmmm ---- I must admit to having eaten while driving and will agree that it does take more attention away from the road than changing gear or tuning the radio (assuming that just involves pressing the pre-selects .... would never manually tune while driving!!).
TBH -- if t'were me caught eating while in full flight I would just take the points and shut up ...... I agree she wouldn't have been if full control of the vehicle.
Why??? How many times do you actually have 2 hands on the wheel? It's not as if she was eating off a plate with a knife & fork!
i drive with 1 hand, other uselly rubbing me crotch, ;D ;D
;D ;D You & me too, more so with the auto Omega, gear changing doesn't get in the way.
Any way I think I'd have risked the grand in court as. If what she says was true, there seemed to be no reason to suggest she wasn't in control of the car and... so far as I know .. it isn't actually an offence to eat & drive.
-
bored cops, simple as that
-
Funny how people moan when nothing is done then moan again if something is done.....
Police cant win can they.......and I am glad they got her for it.
She deserves it........idiots like that kill people on the road....
If it wasnt a sandwich it would have been makeup, or having a fag, or doing her hair, or chatting on her phone.....
She got what she deserves.....end of.
:)
-
Sounds a bit harsh to me........But as she is a woman.......perhaps she was eating........putting on her make-up........reading the map......and changing the CD all at the same time.
Women always tell us that they can multi task. :y :y ;D ;D
-
.......
Police cant win can they.......and I am glad they got her for it.
She deserves it........idiots like that kill people on the road....
If it wasnt a sandwich it would have been makeup, or having a fag, or doing her hair, or chatting on her phone.....
She got what she deserves.....end of.
:)
but she wasn't doing make-up or doing her hair. It's still leagal to smoke both at & away from the wheel of a car. There is no law against eating either. You're either in control of the car or you're not, a butty makes no bloody difference, unles you've to make it first.
-
Hmmm ---- I must admit to having eaten while driving and will agree that it does take more attention away from the road than changing gear or tuning the radio (assuming that just involves pressing the pre-selects .... would never manually tune while driving!!).
TBH -- if t'were me caught eating while in full flight I would just take the points and shut up ...... I agree she wouldn't have been if full control of the vehicle.
Why??? How many times do you actually have 2 hands on the wheel? It's not as if she was eating off a plate with a knife & fork!
Being in full control of the vehicle isn't all about having two hands on the wheel ---- would you say someone was in full control with both hands nicely on the wheel and both eyes firmly shut?? 8-)
Bottom line. of course, is that none of us were there and none of us saw exactly what she was up to --- and in her defence she is hardly going to say she was stuffing her face with half a chicken, is she !!!!!!
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Totally agree -- your response IS b*ll*cks :D
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Totally agree -- your response IS b*ll*cks :D
I don't think gwa is that far from the truth! :-?
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Totally agree -- your response IS b*ll*cks :D
OK, I'll accept your opinion. However, how many people do you know that have successfully challenged in court?. How many people do you know that have argued their innocence and got rougher justice. None.? When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
-
..... When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
About 18 mths back when I was on my bike .... but that kind of policing is becoming rare. ;)
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Hear, Hear!!!
I'm over in Germany just know, and it's great to just get on to the Autobahn and not have to worry about the police, unless you are driving in a restriced part then you stick to the limit :y
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Totally agree -- your response IS b*ll*cks :D
OK, I'll accept your opinion. However, how many people do you know that have successfully challenged in court?. How many people do you know that have argued their innocence and got rougher justice. None.? When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
I would say about ... hang on .... middle of November .... 8 weeks ago. I was stopped doing ...erm ... 40 just inside a 30 zone. Officer asked if I knew why he had stopped me. I said, I am guessing I was a tad too fast.
He asked me what speed I thought I was doing and I said 35-ish. Was given a little lecture on how to tell I was in a 30 zone and told to be more careful ......... then let on my way.
Now .... if I had been full of attitude and ..... in your words ARGUED ... I would have been ticketed. But I was polite, and he was courteous in response. Police Officers are only human --- p*ss them off and they will react accordingly!
-
..... When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
About 18 mths back when I was on my bike .... but that kind of policing is becoming rare. ;)
Precisely my point!
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Totally agree -- your response IS b*ll*cks :D
OK, I'll accept your opinion. However, how many people do you know that have successfully challenged in court?. How many people do you know that have argued their innocence and got rougher justice. None.? When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
I would say about ... hang on .... middle of November .... 8 weeks ago. I was stopped doing ...erm ... 40 just inside a 30 zone. Officer asked if I knew why he had stopped me. I said, I am guessing I was a tad too fast.
He asked me what speed I thought I was doing and I said 35-ish. Was given a little lecture on how to tell I was in a 30 zone and told to be more careful ......... then let on my way.
Now .... if I had been full of attitude and ..... in your words ARGUED ... I would have been ticketed. But I was polite, and he was courteous in response. Police Officers are only human --- p*ss them off and they will react accordingly!
I quite agree, pi$$ me off and I'd get my revenge somehow. But in the majority of stops I bet theres a ticket. I guess someone needs to do a freedom of information request for the answer.....
I still enjoy the debate and provoking discussion though ;)
-
..... When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
About 18 mths back when I was on my bike .... but that kind of policing is becoming rare. ;)
Precisely my point!
But it is also changing t'other way about --- when was the last time you heard a guy who had just beaten the hell out of his girlfriend say "Sorry Officer, I did wrong and accept that I have to be dealt with "
Or the kid stopped on his hairdryer for running a red light, and incidentally having no tax and insurance, let alone a licence, taking it on the chin --- nah THEY fight argue and scream, spit out their dummies ... no way is it all one sided !!!!!
-
Nah, Nah, Nah ... 'tis b0ll0cks. We live in a Police State, and the sooner you all recognise it the faster you'll understand. Any Police Officer can say what he/she likes and 99% of anybody will take their word against yours (especially a Court, but not necessarily a Jury). If thats not a Police State I don't know what is! If you argue your innocence they'll arrest you for obstructing an Officer in the course of his duty or get you on a public order offense. Thanks Tony, Thanks Gordon.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Totally agree -- your response IS b*ll*cks :D
OK, I'll accept your opinion. However, how many people do you know that have successfully challenged in court?. How many people do you know that have argued their innocence and got rougher justice. None.? When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
I would say about ... hang on .... middle of November .... 8 weeks ago. I was stopped doing ...erm ... 40 just inside a 30 zone. Officer asked if I knew why he had stopped me. I said, I am guessing I was a tad too fast.
He asked me what speed I thought I was doing and I said 35-ish. Was given a little lecture on how to tell I was in a 30 zone and told to be more careful ......... then let on my way.
Now .... if I had been full of attitude and ..... in your words ARGUED ... I would have been ticketed. But I was polite, and he was courteous in response. Police Officers are only human --- p*ss them off and they will react accordingly!
I quite agree, pi$$ me off and I'd get my revenge somehow. But in the majority of stops I bet theres a ticket. I guess someone needs to do a freedom of information request for the answer.....
I still enjoy the debate and provoking discussion though ;)
And why not -- that is one freedom we can enjoy (well mostly) in this country :)
-
.......
I would say about ... hang on .... middle of November .... 8 weeks ago. I was stopped doing ...erm ... 40 just inside a 30 zone. Officer asked if I knew why he had stopped me. I said, I am guessing I was a tad too fast.
......
Now .... if I had been full of attitude and ..... in your words ARGUED ... I would have been ticketed. But I was polite, and he was courteous in response. Police Officers are only human --- p*ss them off and they will react accordingly!
The difference bewteen your case & the original post is that you were breaking a law 40 in a 30, like when the bike copper stopped me on my bike, I had no arguement - I was doing more than 30. The girl in the original post was not actually breaking a law .... so far there is no law against eating & driving. In the opinion of the copper she wasn't in contro of the car cos she was using one hand. She was allegedly asked "what if a kid had stepped out in front of her?" In my car the brakes are operated by my feet ... f*** all to do with a butty in my hand.
-
..... When was the last time you heard of an Officer saying "naughty boy, don't do it again"?. Nah, its all about Nick Em and keep the stats up and the income coming in!
About 18 mths back when I was on my bike .... but that kind of policing is becoming rare. ;)
Precisely my point!
But it is also changing t'other way about --- when was the last time you heard a guy who had just beaten the hell out of his girlfriend say "Sorry Officer, I did wrong and accept that I have to be dealt with "
Or the kid stopped on his hairdryer for running a red light, and incidentally having no tax and insurance, let alone a licence, taking it on the chin --- nah THEY fight argue and scream, spit out their dummies ... no way is it all one sided !!!!!
Nope, didn't say it was but agree with Holy Counts post; its becoming rare (common sense and reason). But hey, I like to think I'm a good honest, upright citizen who occasionally misjudges the speedo (by a tad). :y
-
.......
I would say about ... hang on .... middle of November .... 8 weeks ago. I was stopped doing ...erm ... 40 just inside a 30 zone. Officer asked if I knew why he had stopped me. I said, I am guessing I was a tad too fast.
......
Now .... if I had been full of attitude and ..... in your words ARGUED ... I would have been ticketed. But I was polite, and he was courteous in response. Police Officers are only human --- p*ss them off and they will react accordingly!
The difference bewteen your case & the original post is that you were breaking a law 40 in a 30, like when the bike copper stopped me on my bike, I had no arguement - I was doing more than 30. The girl in the original post was not actually breaking a law .... so far there is no law against eating & driving. In the opinion of the copper she wasn't in contro of the car cos she was using one hand. She was allegedly asked "what if a kid had stepped out in front of her?" In my car the brakes are operated by my feet ... f*** all to do with a butty in my hand.
I see what you mean .. but ... ( there's always a but!) .... she could use the same arguement about using a mobile phone -- she can still see the brakes !!! The point the copper was making ( I believe) was that her full attention was not on the road ahead. Yes, she could still brake -- but maybe a few seconds too late ... a few potentially fatal seconds. As I said before, we were not there, so don't know the amount of attention she was paying to her "bit of bread" .... so not in a position to definatively say who was right or wrong!
Oh, and the response from me quoted was not about breaking the law or not -- it was about the way you get treated when stopped -- so taken completely out of context
-
And another thing ..... :D :D I think, to a certain extent gwa has a point ----- I think that respect for the law, along with common sense in applying it, IS going down the toilet on both sides !!!! And one feeds the other.
-
.....
Oh, and the response from me quoted was not about breaking the law or not -- it was about the way you get treated when stopped -- so taken completely out of context
:-? :-? :-? I suppose it depends whether you know you're in the wrong or think you're in the right! As you say, argueing with a copper who's just pulled you for doing 47 in a 30 (me not you ::)) wouldn't exactly be a good move! :y :y
-
Not saying the Officer was and not saying she was either. Its a matter of perception, how (we'll call the officer He) he perceived she was driving, behaving and more importantly how he perceived she was in control or not.
Point is; its a £60 fine and 3 points, fair do's. But, if you challenge and go to Court, put up a good fight, deliver a good defense etc, they (the authorities) will still take the word of the Office against yours. Then they have the audacity to increase the fine and/or points. And this is NOT a Police State! :-[ :-/ :'( :-? :o
Oh, I actually believe she should have got more, cos it was well published in the media about girl getting nicked for eating a Mars Bar some years ago..... :y
-
.....
Oh, and the response from me quoted was not about breaking the law or not -- it was about the way you get treated when stopped -- so taken completely out of context
:-? :-? :-? I suppose it depends whether you know you're in the wrong or think you're in the right! As you say, argueing with a copper who's just pulled you for doing 47 in a 30 (me not you ::)) wouldn't exactly be a good move! :y :y
True, and it was 40 Occifer ;D
-
And another thing ..... :D :D I think, to a certain extent gwa has a point ----- I think that respect for the law, along with common sense in applying it, IS going down the toilet on both sides !!!! And one feeds the other.
Agreed!
If you watch any of the many Traffic Police etc as well as the many 4r$e holes pulled by coppers I think that by having a camera behind them, a lot of coppers act up to it and act like John Wayne .. the law is the law .....
-
Not saying the Officer was and not saying she was either. Its a matter of perception, how (we'll call the officer He) he perceived she was driving, behaving and more importantly how he perceived she was in control or not.
Point is; its a £60 fine and 3 points, fair do's. But, if you challenge and go to Court, put up a good fight, deliver a good defense etc, they (the authorities) will still take the word of the Office against yours. Then they have the audacity to increase the fine and/or points. And this is NOT a Police State! :-[ :-/ :'( :-? :o
Oh, I actually believe she should have got more, cos it was well published in the media about girl getting nicked for eating a Mars Bar some years ago..... :y
Yes, it would be interesting to see the stats on the outcomes ---- but TBH, if it gets to court, past the CPS, then th3e chances are you are on a loser evidence wise anyway ..... I say this because I know the CPS won't take a case to court unless they are dam sure of winning ( it make THEIR stas look better !!!!!! And that is a real ball-ache to an officer who KNOWS dam well the offender is guilty, but CPS don't have the balls to go to court.
It is an unfortunate fact that morotists make the best and easiest targets because evidence is usually so black and white ( am I allowed to say "black and white " ???? ::) ::) )
-
.....
Oh, and the response from me quoted was not about breaking the law or not -- it was about the way you get treated when stopped -- so taken completely out of context
:-? :-? :-? I suppose it depends whether you know you're in the wrong or think you're in the right! As you say, argueing with a copper who's just pulled you for doing 47 in a 30 (me not you ::)) wouldn't exactly be a good move! :y :y
True, and it was 40 Occifer ;D
To me, if you're doing over 40 in a 30 I think you've just got to take it on the chin.
BUT, if it's some other offense where where discretion, common sense, flexibility and a degree of sympathy etc can be used as factors to keep a generally ' good citizen' on the side of the law with a 'ticking off', they should be used. Unfortunately, the Officers that were around when I was younger who used these 'tools' are no longer around. Its all down to quota's, targets and revenue.
Sorry to Labour the point (no pun intended) but Policing is changing and has been for a number of years and its only gonna get worse. There was recently a poll and the question was "would you step in to help a police officer in trouble" the NO count was high. So you need to ask why?. Speeding ticket, Parking etc etc.... General Public pi$$ed off.......
But Hey, we pay their wages!!! thats another thread though ... :y
-
Not saying the Officer was and not saying she was either. Its a matter of perception, how (we'll call the officer He) he perceived she was driving, behaving and more importantly how he perceived she was in control or not.
Point is; its a £60 fine and 3 points, fair do's. But, if you challenge and go to Court, put up a good fight, deliver a good defense etc, they (the authorities) will still take the word of the Office against yours. Then they have the audacity to increase the fine and/or points. And this is NOT a Police State! :-[ :-/ :'( :-? :o
Oh, I actually believe she should have got more, cos it was well published in the media about girl getting nicked for eating a Mars Bar some years ago..... :y
Yes, it would be interesting to see the stats on the outcomes ---- but TBH, if it gets to court, past the CPS, then th3e chances are you are on a loser evidence wise anyway ..... I say this because I know the CPS won't take a case to court unless they are dam sure of winning ( it make THEIR stas look better !!!!!! And that is a real ball-ache to an officer who KNOWS dam well the offender is guilty, but CPS don't have the balls to go to court.
It is an unfortunate fact that morotists make the best and easiest targets because evidence is usually so black and white ( am I allowed to say "black and white " ???? ::) ::) )
Ooooh, you are soooooo right! :y
-
.....
Oh, and the response from me quoted was not about breaking the law or not -- it was about the way you get treated when stopped -- so taken completely out of context
:-? :-? :-? I suppose it depends whether you know you're in the wrong or think you're in the right! As you say, argueing with a copper who's just pulled you for doing 47 in a 30 (me not you ::)) wouldn't exactly be a good move! :y :y
True, and it was 40 Occifer ;D
To me, if you're doing over 40 in a 30 I think you've just got to take it on the chin.
BUT, if it's some other offense where where discretion, common sense, flexibility and a degree of sympathy etc can be used as factors to keep a generally ' good citizen' on the side of the law with a 'ticking off', they should be used. Unfortunately, the Officers that were around when I was younger who used these 'tools' are no longer around. Its all down to quota's, targets and revenue.
Sorry to Labour the point (no pun intended) but Policing is changing and has been for a number of years and its only gonna get worse. There was recently a poll and the question was "would you step in to help a police officer in trouble" the NO count was high. So you need to ask why?. Speeding ticket, Parking etc etc.... General Public pi$$ed off.......
But Hey, we pay their wages!!! thats another thread though ... :y
Straying slightly off the point -- this target and quota driven mentality is the root of many, many troubles today --- instead of just letting people get on with their lives and do their jobs, some little bean counter somewhere needs boxes ticked and quotas met ----- "get twice as many done, doesn't matter if they fall apart ".
The worse part is that, nine times out of ten, the people setting targets and quotas have never actually done the job they are interfering with and just don't understand what they are doing !!!!
Rant over .... gonna fall off me horse now :D
-
the council , police are not accountable for there actions! however we all are , it is a nanny state!
-
the council , police are not accountable for there actions! however we all are , it is a nanny state!
Now thats another thread/discussion ;D ;D ;D :y :y :y :y
-
What! Given up have you..... I really enjoyed this thread. I'm even contemplating coming home from work early more often ;D :y