Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Auto Addict]

Obviously were talking Motorways here, received this via email recently, I read it as, Fixed Penalty rather than a Court Hearing, any thoughts or real life experiences of it?
 :-/

“Hi Chris,

Did you know that that ACPO (the Association of Cheif Police Officers) advise Police who stop speeding Motorists on motorways only to prosecute if they are exceeding 96mph?

It's not a well known fact, and we know that on some occasions Police don't follow this guideline.

However, on many occasions they do follow it...

If you are polite and courteous to the Officer and mention something in friendly banter along the lines of:

"Is it true that the ACPO (pron. "ack-poe") guideline is to only summons drivers to court if they are driving at 96mph or more?"

...then you'll be significantly more likely to get a 'slap on the wrist' and simply get a ticket.

...which is surely better than facing a ban and a big fine.

All the best,

Adam
Adam Blair Managing Director, DriveProtect “

This guy seems to encourage speeding and offering ideas how you can get around the law, he's in my blocked senders list now, the guys an idiot.

[tonyyeb]

My late brother-in-law was a traffic officer here in Wiltshire, and my wife's ex-hubby was also a copper.
Although both were careful not to endorse routine motorway speeding, they both said independently of each other that traffic officers are not especially interested in speed per se, but take a dim view of speed combined with any of the following:-
Poor road conditions / traffic conditions / visibility;
Apparent inattention to surrounding traffic conditions, highlighted by lack of lane discipline, lack of indication, lack of awareness of following traffic;
Any distraction consuming the drivers attention, like mobile phones, putting on make-up, turning to scream at kids in the back, etc;
tail-gating;
Under-taking;
any attempts to intimidate other drivers to move over.

None of the above means that a motorist behaving sensibly at 85 mph on the motorway won't get pulled, but most traffic officers are motoring / car enthusiasts (thats why the majority of them do the job), and only want to catch and deter the idiots.
The above absolutely chimes with my own personal experience - I frequently travel at 90 mph and occasionally (and for short distances) more on motorways, but I drive in accordance with the list of 'dont's' above. I have NEVER been stopped for speed on a motorway.

Why not just drive at the posted limit T?

That's a perfectly fair question, Zulu.
Here's my self-justification, which isn't intended to be bullet-proof, merely honest like my original post....
First of all, almost nobody in a modern-ish car drives at the posted limit on a motorway, so I'd suggest that those that do may be posing a more significant hazard than those keeping up with the general velocity on such roads, i.e 80-85 mph.
Secondly, I find I'm less alert in the sense of being less aware of whats going on around me when travelling at or near 70ish on motorways. I ease off mentally in the same degree that I ease off the accelerator. I know, that's my failing, but I'm super-aware when travelling quicker. 
Thirdly, as Albs says, why have a large-engined motor designed to chew up motorway miles in comfort if you're never gong to extend it a little now and again?
If we all accept that motorways are the UK's safest roads, with all traffic heading in the same direction, without junctions or traffic lights, without pedestrians, without cyclists, then surely the motorway is the place for that speed (notwithstanding the caveats in my original post).

I'm not saying I'm right, but this is how it is for me. Am I attempting to justifying the unjustifiable? No. Really, I'm not - this is just an honest answer to an honest question.

[Dishevelled Den]

In 36 years on the roads Z, its only in the last year that I have for some reason (middle age ?) reached the point where I can bring myself to do that - in a car at least, the bike is still a bit different. I think that most people are the same - like to feel the enjoyment of using the performance of their engine etc.
I dont have a problem with that as long as its done without reckless disregard for safety, which imo isnt the same thing as speeding.

Yes I see that son and I agree - it’s a pain in the arse to drive to limits - but in practical terms if people choose which regulations to obey and which ones to ignore where will this stop?

Behaving as One wishes, particularly in the interpretation of traffic laws, has led to an alarming decline in driver responsibility.

In overall terms the road system in this country is populated by an ever increasing number of drivers who are, as Tony rightly pointed out, doing everything but attending to the task in hand.  This in my estimation simply makes the use of excess speed ever more liable to the threat of interference from these people - why would anyone wish to take that risk.

Times have changed dramatically to the point where One's desire to express an individual inclination must be tempered by the realisation that One isn’t necessarily the person to cause the problem but rather, in most cases, it's the other individual - ploughing their very own furrow while ignoring the rules to satisfy their own inclinations in the process - who will invariably be the cause of any problem.

[TheBoy]

I wouldn't bother trying to be clever... I am always courteous to the Police, especially if stopped, and can assure you that it's worthwhile

Man after my own heart

[Dishevelled Den]

That's a perfectly fair question, Zulu.
Here's my self-justification, which isn't intended to be bullet-proof, merely honest like my original post....
First of all, almost nobody in a modern-ish car drives at the posted limit on a motorway, so I'd suggest that those that do may be posing a more significant hazard than those keeping up with the general velocity on such roads, i.e 80-85 mph.
Secondly, I find I'm less alert in the sense of being less aware of whats going on around me when travelling at or near 70ish on motorways. I ease off mentally in the same degree that I ease off the accelerator. I know, that's my failing, but I'm super-aware when travelling quicker. 
Thirdly, as Albs says, why have a large-engined motor designed to chew up motorway miles in comfort if you're never gong to extend it a little now and again?
If we all accept that motorways are the UK's safest roads, with all traffic heading in the same direction, without junctions or traffic lights, without pedestrians, without cyclists, then surely the motorway is the place for that speed (notwithstanding the caveats in my original post).

I'm not saying I'm right, but this is how it is for me. Am I attempting to justifying the unjustifiable? No. Really, I'm not - this is just an honest answer to an honest question.

I can understand that rationale T and I have said in a reply to Albs that I do find constant speed checking (to remain within the posted limit) to be a pain in the arse and in many cases can be dangerously distracting in lower limit areas. (Where there are usually more hazards to negotiate)

The whole issue of speed is quite a vexed one and I do feel that on motorways where the topography supports it there is a case to be made for the increase of the maximum limit to 80/85 mph providing those travelling in excess of the new limit would by adequately sanctioned for doing so.

It is difficult to be realistic where this matter is concerned as many things now conspire to prevent the use of the speeds we enjoyed driving at one time, but with the deterioration in the physical condition of the road network, the marked increase in traffic density and the appalling standard of driving now being seen there must surely be a point at which we have to say that for a driver to decide the speed at which they drive (in excess of the posted limit ) is fast becoming untenable.

[Lazydocker]

I wouldn't bother trying to be clever... I am always courteous to the Police, especially if stopped, and can assure you that it's worthwhile

Man after my own heart

Why thank you

At the end of the day, if I get stopped for speeding I'm in the wrong... Being polite has (on more than one occasion) been the right course of action

[Dishevelled Den]

Anyway in relation to Zirk's OP, ACPO has been an increasing problem within policing for some time now.

The strategic case for the necessity or otherwise to have a national command structure and a unified or more closely linked constabulary for the nation should be a matter for the Home Office and Parliament not ACPO.

The sooner that chief officers within the existing constabulary arrangements concentrate on getting professional, dedicated and capable officers on the ground doing the (realistic) job we're paid to do, the better.

[Entwood]

If memory serves .. ACPO is actually a registered business ... although they try to portray themselves as the "font of all knowledge".. they are little more than a cosy "trade union" of senior officers.

IMHO should be banned .. the Home Office / Government (should) run the police .. NOT ACPO


http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/ArticlesofAssociation.pdf

and this part is the most worrrying ...

ACPO Doctrine
91. Once the Chief Constables[ch8223] Council or the Cabinet have agreed an item of policing doctrine (Guidance/Practice Advice) it shall be issued to each Chief Constable with the recommendation that he/she should adopt the doctrine and implement it as appropriate in his/her force.
92. The Chief Executive shall maintain a register of current doctrine decisions.
93. A Chief Constable who, for reasons peculiar to his/her force or on other grounds, does not intend or is unable to adopt any agreed ACPO doctrine shall formally notify the President of the fact, with reasons, in writing.

[ffcgary1]

Chris  the letter that you recived uses the word advices the police not let them off willy niliy, so to back up what others have said already, if you get stopped speeding and your in the wrong hold your hands up to it and apologise.
I was stopped last year on the M23 near gatwick annd i was clocked at 91mph. it was 3 in the morning and i was vertually the only car on the road, the copper who stopped me showed me the video of me at speed and asked me to slow down and to use his words "chill out". He said that although i was speeding he thought that mt driving was very good and he would take it no further.
Then we had a converstion about how they used to drive 3.2 omegas and wish that they could have them back as the diesel volvo he was driving was just a bag of s###.
 Lesson learnt.

[albitz]

If memory serves .. ACPO is actually a registered business ... although they try to portray themselves as the "font of all knowledge".. they are little more than a cosy "trade union" of senior officers.

IMHO should be banned .. the Home Office / Government (should) run the police .. NOT ACPO

http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/ArticlesofAssociation.pdf

and this part is the most worrrying ...

ACPO Doctrine
91. Once the Chief Constables[ch8223] Council or the Cabinet have agreed an item of policing doctrine (Guidance/Practice Advice) it shall be issued to each Chief Constable with the recommendation that he/she should adopt the doctrine and implement it as appropriate in his/her force.
92. The Chief Executive shall maintain a register of current doctrine decisions.
93. A Chief Constable who, for reasons peculiar to his/her force or on other grounds, does not intend or is unable to adopt any agreed ACPO doctrine shall formally notify the President of the fact, with reasons, in writing.

I agree 100% Nige. This to me is a worrying and at times sinister organistion/company, which as far as I can see has been at the forefront of the politicisation of our police.
They also act as a quasi policy making unit for the govt (as well as the functions you mentioned) and charges the taxpayer a fortune for the privilige.

[Entwood]

This is a very interesting little article ....

http://www.waspsnest.com/2010/01/28/acpo-oversight-or-deliberate-omission


Now .. how do you refer that to the powers that be ....   

[Lazydocker]

Chris  the letter that you recived uses the word advices the police not let them off willy niliy, so to back up what others have said already, if you get stopped speeding and your in the wrong hold your hands up to it and apologise.
I was stopped last year on the M23 near gatwick annd i was clocked at 91mph. it was 3 in the morning and i was vertually the only car on the road, the copper who stopped me showed me the video of me at speed and asked me to slow down and to use his words "chill out". He said that although i was speeding he thought that mt driving was very good and he would take it no further.
Then we had a converstion about how they used to drive 3.2 omegas and wish that they could have them back as the diesel volvo he was driving was just a bag of s###.
 Lesson learnt.

Exactly my point... I was going, well, faster than that when I got a warning from Kent Police in similar circumstances some 11 years ago and should, by rights, have been banned 

I was polite, courteous, and had a genuine reason that I was speeding... Result was a talking to and I missed the ferry It made me more sensible behind the wheel and taught me to be respectful when in the wrong... Something that has served me well since

[Dishevelled Den]

If memory serves .. ACPO is actually a registered business ... although they try to portray themselves as the "font of all knowledge".. they are little more than a cosy "trade union" of senior officers.

IMHO should be banned .. the Home Office / Government (should) run the police .. NOT ACPO


http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/ArticlesofAssociation.pdf

and this part is the most worrrying ...

ACPO Doctrine
91. Once the Chief Constables[ch8223] Council or the Cabinet have agreed an item of policing doctrine (Guidance/Practice Advice) it shall be issued to each Chief Constable with the recommendation that he/she should adopt the doctrine and implement it as appropriate in his/her force.
92. The Chief Executive shall maintain a register of current doctrine decisions.
93. A Chief Constable who, for reasons peculiar to his/her force or on other grounds, does not intend or is unable to adopt any agreed ACPO doctrine shall formally notify the President of the fact, with reasons, in writing.

Yes you're right to be concerned about that E - there is no room for a de facto Star Chamber in the design and implementation of strategic policy where policing is concerned.

[albitz]

I had a similar, well documented experience a couple of years ago. I was certain that I was looking at a very long ban, but was polite to the officer, told him I knew the score and was prepared to take what was coming etc.
After he scared the bejaysus out of me, he let me off with 3 points and £60 fine, which in the circumstances I was very happy with.
They arent uniforms, they are human beings, and if given some respect and courtesy, very often respond accordingly.

[Banjax]

I find £1.42 a litre keeps my speed in check more effectively than any other deterrent