It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Really Gets My Goat

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:07 PM
Not sure this is the right place to post this - so mods please feel free to move.

A quick overview of the reason Im posting - In the UK it is an offence to drive whilst using a mobile phone.

Now my beef - today in Ruislip high Street (NW London) I see a police cars blue lights and move to one side to ease its passage (is is common on the roads over here)

The car is driving towards me at high speed (obviously responding to a call) but as it draws level Im amazed to see the officer with one hand on the wheel and the other with his coms device pressed to his ear.

The car was travelling at between 40-50 mph in a crowded high street (parked cars either side and pedestrians - a normal Saturday shopping scene). How could the officer ensure the safety of his vehicle and that of the civilian population and property with one hand on the wheel?

This is clearly an offence under the road traffic laws here - but not only that the clear recklessness of the the speed etc beggers my belief!

Sorry its a rant - but as a driver who pays out sums of money on bluetooth head sets every couple of years to ensure Im legal its really got me angry seeing an officer of the Met Police flaunting the law.

To ad insult to injury the officer had his partner in the car - who Im sure was more than capable of handling the comms whilst the driver gave his full attention to the high speed interception / pursuit at hand.

Isn't it time we had some way of reporting such incidents to our respective Law enforcement communities - and be sure that such offences are treated with the diligence that the police apply to prosecuting other motorists?

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:20 PM
Well, that is not just a UK occurrence. I live in Canada, and burns my behind to see that as well.
There are those who wear the badge just to be "above" the laws that apply to everyone else.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:28 PM
Thanks for the reply.

I will add that on the whole the met are pretty good over here - we had a stabbing at the top of my street today and the sheer force of numbers around all afternoon was very impressive!

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:28 PM
Are you sure that the laws aren't written with an exclusion clause for said workers? I would expect to see something that "in the course of duty" would allow/ensure/provide for emergency personnel (as an example) and/or other conditional industries that depend on communication while performing job duties. Check and see.

Not to negate that if someone other than the driver is available, one would think that the driver would not be the one using the phone or other devices...

[edit on 24-4-2010 by LadySkadi]

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:32 PM
To my knowledge the law excludes two way radio use - the Met uses Motorola mobile phones that I believe also work in this mode.

But my argument in this case is that the driver had a partner in the car, he should have been doing the comms not the driver.


Nice to see you again Ladyskadi - i believe we have chatted before - good to see you.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by Silk]

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by Silk

So you would prefer for the officer to not be able to relay or take in information while driving? You'd prefer the officer to have to park the cop car and then use the radio com? What if the info he's getting through the com is important, what if it could save lives, isn't that worth the very slight risk of driving while using it?

Besides, a cell phone usually relays unimportant info that distracts or emotionally affects a person (personal life stuff, gossip, etc) but usually that kind of stuff isn't what's coming through a police radio.

Police, taxis, EMTs and fire fighters all have this kind of stuff and I don't see what's wrong with it, they need these communications in the line of duty while other citizens do not need to be yapping away on cell phones.

I agree that if the guy had a partner he should have been the one using it but maybe it was a spur of the moment decision on the part of the officer, a momentary laps of judgement.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by Titen-Sxull]

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:43 PM
reply to post by Silk

I believe law enforcement officers and perhaps other emergency personal are exempt from wearing seatbelts also - i wouldn`t be surprised if it was an international practice.. It may just have to do with the ad hoc nature of the job.

But they also receive additional training - however ...... its still a risky business .

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:45 PM
I would say yes - but again isnt the drivers partner equally able to take that information onboard and relay it to the driver leaving the driver to have both hands on the wheel?

I have driven fast cars and carts most of my driving career (on and off the circuit) and know full well that at high speed in confined spaces you need both hands on the wheel.

My nightmare scenario in this case was the driver clipping a parked car and barrling into a mother and toddler on the pavement.

If you need a good example of this happening please look up what happened to Heather Mills Mcartney - who lost her legs when struck by a Met police car in pursuit.

"In London, in 1993, Mills was hit by a police motorbike and suffered serious injuries, losing her left leg, 6 inches below her knee."

or this case

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:45 PM
reply to post by Titen-Sxull

The point is..should said officer be involved in a collision, especially a serious one resulting in the death of another person, hypothetically speaking..would he be charged?

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:47 PM
reply to post by UmbraSumus

Funny you should mention additional training - whilst researching my post I came across a blog asking where ordinary people can access the "Driving whilst using a mobile phone course"

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:52 PM
reply to post by Silk

Personally, I need the driving while drinking (coffee that is) while shifting course... Add the phone and things can get dicey! Lol. Actually, the state recently passed the law to make it illegal to use hand-held sets but I still see it all the time. So, not sure what the enforcement rate is... Wonder if it's just that additional "gotcha" if/when you draw some attention to yourself for doing something else... a bit like the seat-belt laws.

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 02:56 PM
I see it all the time here - and seldom see anyone pulled over for it - true. But a work colleague was prosecuted for it last year.

However as he was over the limit at the time and ended up banned for 12 months I think the judge went light on him!

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 03:08 PM
reply to post by Silk

You can certainly see some daft things .... people driving and eating cereal , applying make up ...... some other shockers too.

A morning radio station i listen to occasionally- told of an hilarious one ......

Emergency services called to give aid to the occupant of a car that had rear ended a truck .... the driver had knocked herself unconscious in the process .
Whilst attempting to revive the woman, their attention was drawn to a buzzing noise coming from something around the vicinity of the pedals .........

........ yes you guessed it .

That must of been embarrassing when she came round.


[edit on 24-4-2010 by UmbraSumus]

posted on Apr, 24 2010 @ 03:13 PM
Haha I bet!

Off topic but a pals husband works security for the RAF in the 'stan and was saying how many "Japanese Electronic Devices for personal use" he found in WAAFS baggage during searches on his tour!

I have seen some shocking things when driving - but my fav story was the chap in Belfast who would steer with his feet whilst playing the flute!!!!!

top topics


log in