On 2010\11\10 14:47, d wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 14:33:10 -0000
wrote:
No answer then?

I repeat - I am not responding to that ridiculous rant.

Yup, no answer.

B2003



Get a room, you too - you're holding up traffic.

"Ret." wrote in message
...
Mr Pounder wrote:
"bod" wrote in message
...
On 09/11/2010 16:12, Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 09/11/2010 11:17, d wrote:
Can someone explain to me why those retards with blue lights on
their heads had to close off 4 out of 5 lanes on the westbound
A406 at the M1 turn
off just because a 7.5 tonner had got stuck on a crash barrier?
The traffic
jams were epic and all they used the closed off lanes for was to
park their
plodmobiles in and stand around looking useless until presumably a
recovery truck turned up.

****ing morons.

B2003



On the face of it, that does appear to be very ott of the plod.

Bod

Years ago the police said that they would take drastic action on the
roads.
This being to teach us all a lesson in being more careful.

Mr Pounder



Kev? Any comment on Mr Pounder's statement above?

Bod

Seems not.
Also seems that the other posters have a shorter memory than I.
Or maybe they are just younger than I.

I have now responded to the query.

--
Kev

Who are you calling a query?????!!!!!

Mr Pounder

"Ret." wrote in message
...
bod wrote:
On 09/11/2010 16:12, Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 09/11/2010 11:17, d wrote:
Can someone explain to me why those retards with blue lights on
their heads had to close off 4 out of 5 lanes on the westbound
A406 at the M1 turn
off just because a 7.5 tonner had got stuck on a crash barrier? The
traffic
jams were epic and all they used the closed off lanes for was to
park their
plodmobiles in and stand around looking useless until presumably a
recovery truck turned up.

****ing morons.

B2003



On the face of it, that does appear to be very ott of the plod.

Bod

Years ago the police said that they would take drastic action on the
roads. This being to teach us all a lesson in being more careful.

Mr Pounder



Kev? Any comment on Mr Pounder's statement above?

Difficult to comment upon this particular incident without being in
possession of the full facts - but I can assure you that traffic police
will never close off a major route for any longer than necessary because
it simply causes more problems for them on surrounding roads.

I don't know what load this truck was carrying - but if it was hazardous -
or there had been a spill of load across the road, they are reasons for
for closing the road. Also - if people are killed, or so seriously injured
that they might die, then the scene has to be extensively photographed and
triangulation measurements taken for the production of accurate plans of
the accident scene. Also any skid marks will need to be measured and the
co-efficient of friction of the road surface calculated. This sort of
investigation cannot easily be done with other traffic streaming past.

The sort of heading on this thread is usually posted by people who are
simply ignorant of what is required in relation to accident investigation.

I repeat, however, that it is the intention of traffic police always to
get normal traffic moving again as quickly as possible. To suggest that
they block off major routes for no good reason is a nonsense.

--
Kev

Yeah, okay.

Mr Pounder

"Ret." wrote in message
...
d wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:37:35 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
And you qualifications for claiming this are?

25 years driving here and abroad.

I beat you by almost double. Not only have I been driving for almost
48 years - but I spent 30 of those years in the police, much of it
on traffic.

So what. 25 years is quite enough to know how the traffic police go
overboard with every minor incident.

I'm not responding to that ridiculous rant.

No answer then?

I repeat - I am not responding to that ridiculous rant.

--
Kev

I've seen traffic officers drive slowly past big fights outside nightclubs.

Mr Pounder

On Nov 10, 2:33*pm, "Ret." wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:37:35 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
And you qualifications for claiming this are?

25 years driving here and abroad.

I beat you by almost double. Not only have I been driving for almost
48 years - but I spent 30 of those years in the police, much of it
on traffic.

So what. 25 years is quite enough to know how the traffic police go
overboard with every minor incident.

I'm not responding to that ridiculous rant.

No answer then?

I repeat - I am not responding to that ridiculous rant.

--
Kev

I find the delays caused by overzealous policing infuriating and I
note that you find anyone commenting guilty of ridiculous ranting,
Why?

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:52:40 -0800, NM boggled us with:

On Nov 10, 2:33Â*pm, "Ret." wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:37:35 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
And you qualifications for claiming this are?

25 years driving here and abroad.

I beat you by almost double. Not only have I been driving for almost
48 years - but I spent 30 of those years in the police, much of it
on traffic.

So what. 25 years is quite enough to know how the traffic police go
overboard with every minor incident.

I'm not responding to that ridiculous rant.

No answer then?

I repeat - I am not responding to that ridiculous rant.

--
Kev

I find the delays caused by overzealous policing infuriating and I note
that you find anyone commenting guilty of ridiculous ranting, Why?


I find it's over zealous "highway officers" that cause the problems, not
plods


--
Mike P

NM wrote:
On Nov 10, 2:33 pm, "Ret." wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:37:35 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
And you qualifications for claiming this are?

25 years driving here and abroad.

I beat you by almost double. Not only have I been driving for
almost 48 years - but I spent 30 of those years in the police,
much of it on traffic.

So what. 25 years is quite enough to know how the traffic police go
overboard with every minor incident.

I'm not responding to that ridiculous rant.

No answer then?

I repeat - I am not responding to that ridiculous rant.

--
Kev

I find the delays caused by overzealous policing infuriating and I
note that you find anyone commenting guilty of ridiculous ranting,
Why?

Because neither you nor Boltar know what you are talking about.

--
Kev

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:02:55 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
I find the delays caused by overzealous policing infuriating and I
note that you find anyone commenting guilty of ridiculous ranting,
Why?

Because neither you nor Boltar know what you are talking about.

Yeah, thats right Kev. We see roads closed for no good reason time and again
yet "we don't know what we're talking about". I might not be a car
mechanic but I know if a garage has my car in for 3 days to change the oil
then someone is taking the ****. Same goes for plods. I might not be a
policeman but if 4 lanes out of 5 are closed, there is no debris and little
damage to the vehicle in question then its plainly obvious the jobsworth
mentality is in full force with the traffic plods that day.

B2003

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 07:02:55PM -0000, Ret. wrote:
NM wrote:
On Nov 10, 2:33 pm, "Ret." wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:37:35 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
[in response to Boltar saying that the police can't be arsed to
deal with "minor" crimes like burglary]
I'm not responding to that ridiculous rant.
I repeat - I am not responding to that ridiculous rant.
I find the delays caused by overzealous policing infuriating and I
note that you find anyone commenting guilty of ridiculous ranting,
Why?
Because neither you nor Boltar know what you are talking about.

Twice when I reported an assault, giving them the name and address of
the thug involved, the police did nothing straight away. In fact, the
second time they did nothing at all. The first time, they sent someone
round a couple of days later who simply asked the thug not to do it
again. This despite them being repeatedly told about him harrassing
one of my neighbours, and him having a record for carrying weapons.

They only bothered to do something about it when he damaged *property*
instead of attacking me personally.

Yes, I find it infuriating that they can find the time to stand around
chatting at railway stations and motorway hard shoulders but apparently
can't find the time to nick violent criminals. I do realise that it's
not the Met who hang around chatting at stations but the BTP, and that
it's traffic cops who hang around chatting on motorways, whereas its
local police stations that are responsible for dealing with violent
crazies, but this tells me that resources are wrongly allocated.

But I guess I don't know what I'm talking about either.

--
David Cantrell

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:54:51 +0000
David Cantrell wrote:
They only bothered to do something about it when he damaged *property*
instead of attacking me personally.

Money has always been more important than people in this country.
Rob a bank and you'll get 10 years. Rape someone and you'll probably get 5.

not the Met who hang around chatting at stations but the BTP, and that
it's traffic cops who hang around chatting on motorways, whereas its
local police stations that are responsible for dealing with violent
crazies, but this tells me that resources are wrongly allocated.

Don't forget a car is a lethal weapon and someone driving it 10mph over the
speed limit is potentially a far more dangerous violent offender than some
hoodie wandering around with a 6 inch knife tucked up his sleeve.

B2003