bod wrote:

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.

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

The statement that I recall was only made by one Chief Constable in some
god-forsaken Northern ********[1]. They implemented the policy for a few
years, which included prosecuting for as little as 1mph over the speed
limit. I was told that the local response was what might be expected
with speed camera operators find that gangs of yooves turned their vans
onto their side and nicked their cameras, which were usually positioned
on a small black tripod by the side of the road with a wire running to a
van around the corner or parked up on the wide grass verges.

It got so bad that plod would only run out the camera vans to the "posh"
areas where the footballers live.

Oddly enough the next northern ******** [2] had a more enlightened
policy on aggravating the motorist and actually had a better road safety
record.


IIRC Pounder lives in a northern cesspit so that could be the reason
that he's heard of it and few other people have.


[1] Cleveland which actually incorporates some of the ****tiest of the
********s[3].
[2] Durham
[3] I mentioned before that someone I knew was done for 31mph in
Cleveland, I can recall the angry yells here that it couldn't possibly
be true.

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

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

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Mr Pounder
writes

"bod" 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.


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.

While there may have been a good reason for it, it does seem to be
increasingly common practice to close roads (often completely) for
several hours in order to carry out an investigation into the cause of
an accident. Sometimes the reason given is that they are waiting for
the crash barriers to be repaired, or for the road to be resurfaced.

Yesterday, I believe that the whole of the M26 was closed for quite a
lot of the day because of a fatal lorry accident. Similarly, last
week, the M1 was closed around the junction for Luton Airport (not
sure if fatal). And the previous week, the M4 was closed between
Slough and Langley. As I said, the police may have legitimate reasons
for doing this, but you can't help but feel that there is an element
of 'just because we can' in some instances.

I'm sorry but it's nonsense. It is always the aim of traffic officers to get
normal traffic moving again just as soon as possible. Closing off a motorway
invariably causes chaos on surrounding roads and that simply causes more
problems for the police.

Fatal accident sites are treated as crime scenes (because the accident may
have been caused by another driver's dangerous driving) and taking
measurements, photographs, and carrying out a thorough accident
investigation, can take time. Allowing normal traffic flow past a fatal
accident scene can obliterate valuable evidence.

--
Kev

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Graham Harrison
writes

"Ian Jackson" wrote in
message ...
In message , Mr Pounder
writes

"bod" 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.


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.

While there may have been a good reason for it, it does seem to be
increasingly common practice to close roads (often completely) for
several hours in order to carry out an investigation into the cause
of an accident. Sometimes the reason given is that they are waiting
for the crash barriers to be repaired, or for the road to be
resurfaced. Yesterday, I believe that the whole of the M26 was closed
for quite
a lot of the day because of a fatal lorry accident. Similarly, last
week, the M1 was closed around the junction for Luton Airport (not
sure if fatal). And the previous week, the M4 was closed between
Slough and Langley. As I said, the police may have legitimate
reasons for doing this, but you can't help but feel that there is
an element of 'just because we can' in some instances.
-- Ian

The investigation of "accidents" sometimes seems to be very
unpredictable. One will cause the closure and resulting chaos
described here and yet others, also resulting in deaths, will be
swept away very quickly and subsequent investigation marginalised. I
wonder what criteria they use to decide?

Might it be influenced by the availability of the local Accident
Investigation Team? If they are sitting around, kicking their heels,
you might as well give them some work to do. If they are already out
on another job, it might be decided that, unless something really
serious has occurred, a thorough investigation may not really be
necessary.

There is that - also, the number of vehicles involved is a major issue. A
single vehicle RTC where there is no suspicion that another driver may have
caused the crash can be dealt with more rapidly than a multiple pile up
where a lot of detail has to be obtained to reconstruct what happened. Even
a two vehicle fatal will require a lot of investigation if there are
allegations that another driver caused the crash.

It is simplistic to argue that 'idiot traffic officers' are blocking off
roads for no good reason. They never do any such thing. It is their prime
duty to get normal traffic flowing again asap.

--
Kev

In message , Ret.
writes




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.

I'm sure that, in most cases, it is nonsense.

However, I understand that one of the reasons that the police close
roads which have no obvious 'physical' reason to be closed, is that they
are now initially treating many more accidents as potential crime
scenes. Until they have investigated and looked for evidence, the road
will remain closed as long as deemed necessary. I believe that this was
the reason given for the prolonged closure of a long stretch of the M5,
a couple of years ago.

And, certainly on some occasions, I am not totally convinced that the
police are in the slightest way concerned in the effect of their road
closure has on surrounding traffic. I was recently caught needlessly for
over an hour in a situation where there had been an incident, and the
police had closed the road. This resulted in a queue of traffic well
over a mile long trying to get into town - but nobody was moving. But
was there any police presence at the tail-end of the queue, preventing
motorists from joining it, and diverting them? Of course there wasn't!
--
Ian

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:00:33 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
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.

Sorry if I'm not 100% convinced about that. They seem to close off major
routes and motorways at the drop of a hat these days.

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

No spill, looked like a bog standard 7.5 tonner.

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

Unlikely. It had ridden up a few metres onto a divider seperating the
turn off from the main A406. IT wasn't even badly damaged. The worst the
driver would have suffered I suspect would be a bit of whiplash.

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.

Oh for gods why?? Why this anally retentive forensic measuring of everything?
As long as no one is drunk or dead just clear up the mess and let the insurance
sort it out. Why do the police feel they always need to charge someone with
something? Haven't they got any real criminals to chase?

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.

Its actually usually by people who've driven extensively in europe and know
how quickly they manage to clear even serious accidents over there and
generally don't even close the road while they're doing it.

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.

No it isn't.

B2003

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Ret.
writes




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.
I'm sure that, in most cases, it is nonsense.

However, I understand that one of the reasons that the police close
roads which have no obvious 'physical' reason to be closed, is that
they are now initially treating many more accidents as potential crime
scenes. Until they have investigated and looked for evidence, the road
will remain closed as long as deemed necessary. I believe that this
was the reason given for the prolonged closure of a long stretch of
the M5, a couple of years ago.

And, certainly on some occasions, I am not totally convinced that the
police are in the slightest way concerned in the effect of their road
closure has on surrounding traffic. I was recently caught needlessly
for over an hour in a situation where there had been an incident, and
the police had closed the road. This resulted in a queue of traffic
well over a mile long trying to get into town - but nobody was
moving. But was there any police presence at the tail-end of the
queue, preventing motorists from joining it, and diverting them? Of
course there wasn't!

Perhaps because there weren't any available? Most people have a grossly
inflated view of just how many police officers are on duty at any one time.

--
Kev

d wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:00:33 -0000
"Ret." wrote:
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.

Sorry if I'm not 100% convinced about that. They seem to close off
major routes and motorways at the drop of a hat these days.

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

No spill, looked like a bog standard 7.5 tonner.

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

Unlikely. It had ridden up a few metres onto a divider seperating the
turn off from the main A406. IT wasn't even badly damaged. The worst
the driver would have suffered I suspect would be a bit of whiplash.

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.

Oh for gods why?? Why this anally retentive forensic measuring of
everything? As long as no one is drunk or dead just clear up the mess
and let the insurance sort it out. Why do the police feel they always
need to charge someone with something? Haven't they got any real
criminals to chase?

This will only be done where there is a fatality or the possibility of a
fatality. If a driver caused an accident in which one of your loved ones was
killed, I presume you would want him bringing to justice?


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.

Its actually usually by people who've driven extensively in europe
and know how quickly they manage to clear even serious accidents over
there and generally don't even close the road while they're doing it.

Probably because in much of continental Europe the standard of driving is so
bad that there are considerably more accidents and dealing carefully with
each one would take up too much time?


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.

No it isn't.

And you qualifications for claiming this are?

--
Kev

David F wrote:
On Nov 10, 9:04 am, "Ret." wrote:

I'm sorry but it's nonsense. It is always the aim of traffic
officers to get normal traffic moving again just as soon as possible.

You're right in that *should* be the case, but in many instances it is
not.

Well, speaking as an ex traffic officer and trained accident investigator I
think I have more knowledge of these issues than you...

--
Kev