Killer cop

[Tomahawk R1]

No i didnt change my stance, it seems you dont like listening to anyone elses point of view, unless you think they agree with you. I`ve put my point of view across and i stand by it.....

[Stately]

No i didnt change my stance, it seems you dont like listening to anyone elses point of view, unless you think they agree with you. I`ve put my point of view across and i stand by it.....

So just to clarify then.

If the Police or ambulance are responding to a potentially life threatening situation, then they should brake speed limits and get to the scene as fast as possible.

[Tomahawk R1]

No i didnt change my stance, it seems you dont like listening to anyone elses point of view, unless you think they agree with you. I`ve put my point of view across and i stand by it.....

So just to clarify then.

If the Police or ambulance are responding to a potentially life threatening situation, then they should brake speed limits and get to the scene as fast as possible.

Do you mean BREAK speed limits? When safe to do so. 90 in a 30 isn`t safe in my opinion. 30mph means built up area yes? Could mean lots of pedestrians about yes? then you would put sirens on Yes?

could you Clarify that?

[Blue]

Yeah why should they?

You cant put other peoples lives at risk, which ever way you want to look at it!

So your child has sustained serious injuries after falling from a tree (God Forbid).

They're losing a lot of blood, and have sustained a severe head injury, causing fluid to leak from the brain.

Minutes count and can make the difference between them making a full recovery, or ending up dead.

You dial 999.

Do you insist they do not exceed any speed limits and stop at all the red lights ?

But it wasen't was it?? It was just a car that triggered his ANPR unit. It could have been an out of date tax disc. What it definantly wasen't was a child with a life threatening injust. That was until he started to drive at 90 and than a child did have a life threating injury.

You can sit there all night going on about what if we had a serious incident and dialed 999 but no one did dial 999 in this case did they?

[Stately]

Do you mean BREAK speed limits? When safe to do so. 90 in a 30 isn`t safe in my opinion. 30mph means built up area yes? Could mean lots of pedestrians about yes? then you would put sirens on Yes? could you Clarify that?

It largely depends on the time of day / night.

Late at night means very few pedestrians about.

What time did the incident in question happen ?

But it wasen't was it?? It was just a car that triggered his ANPR unit. It could have been an out of date tax disc. What it definantly wasen't was a child with a life threatening injust. That was until he started to drive at 90 and than a child did have a life threating injury.

You can sit there all night going on about what if we had a serious incident and dialed 999 but no one did dial 999 in this case did they?

[/quote]

I don't know.

Do you know - FOR A FACT

Often ANPR cameras flag up vehicles that have been called in via 999.

I see you've got your five year old writing your posts for you again

[Blue]

They don't flag up urgent 999 calls just by the cars number plate and again in THIS CASE as in the BBC report he WAS NOT answering a 999 call. He was trying to catch up a car that flagged up on the ANPR system. No other reason than that. No dying or seriously injered people, no bank robbery, no aliens. Just a car the was on the ANPR system.

But you will never accept that as you keep going on about a 999 call that did not exsist




And by the way, He's my son's 4 and in bed I assume you don't have kids cos that would involve real females and sex

[Stately]

They don't flag up urgent 999 calls just by the cars number plate and again in THIS CASE as in the BBC report he WAS NOT answering a 999 call. He was trying to catch up a car that flagged up on the ANPR system.

You se, you're trying to enter into intelligent debate but you're clearly out of your depth.

Try reading the posts.

An ANPR camera can flag up a vehicle that has been reported via a 999 call.

That is to say.

If the vehicle had been involved in a robbery, and a witness had called 999 to give the details, then this information would be entered into the Police national computer, which would generate to the ANPR system, flagging the vehicle up.

The same applies if the vehicle had been involved in any other sort of incident such as a hit and run, or even a murder.

The ANPR camera's don't exist solely for the purposes of catching uninsured or stolen vehicles.

They play a much more wide and varied role in the fight against all sorts of crime.

It's not rocket science, even for you

[Blue]

The fact that you keep avoiding cos you cant admit to is the true fact that he WAS NOT answering to ANYTHING todo with a 999 call. If he was don't you think that would have been said in his defence??

[Stately]

The fact that you keep avoiding cos you cant admit to is the true fact that he WAS NOT answering to ANYTHING todo with a 999 call. If he was don't you think that would have been said in his defence??

I can't believe this.

Can you not read.

I never said he was answering a 999 call.

I said that the ANPR might have flagged up a vehicle that was reported via 999.

It really is a waste of time writing in response to you.

You are thick.

I dread to think what your four year old is going to grow up like with a moron like you as a role model.



I

[Blue]

That is another personal remark towards me

Why?

What you keep on writing is "What if we called the police on 999 would we expect him / her to break the speed limit." The guy was not on a 999 call so the question still remains as irrelivent as the rest of the rubbish you have written. The answer still remains no, I would not expect them to drive at 90 in a 30 with no blue lights on putting other peoples lives at risk.

Oh and, Why do you keep on answering me if you don't want to. Sound familier??

[Stately]

What you keep on writing is "What if we called the police on 999 would we expect him / her to break the speed limit." The guy was not on a 999 call so the question still remains as irrelivent as the rest of the rubbish you have written.

I'll have another go at explaining as you clearly have not grasped the point.

The reference to 999 calls to the emergency services in the context of saving a life, was used by me as an anolgy to show that under some circumstances, it is acceptable for the emergency services to brake the speed limits.

Admittedly that was off at a bit of a tangent to the original point, but sadly, your tiny little brain was uanble to compute this.

Back to ANPR, and again you fail to grasp the point so I'll put it as simply as I can, as you are obviously havig a lot of problems in comprehending a very basic principle.

If you witnessed a crime, and reported a vehicle reg to the Police, that number would be submitted to the PNC (Police national computer) which in turn would fed through to the ANPR camera network.

Consequently, if the offending vehicle was flagged up by the ANPR and the details fed through to the Police patrol, that would be as a direct result of the call you put through to the Police operator, via 999.

In other words, in the above scenario, the Police would be responding to a 999 call, placed by you, that had been fed through to the PNC, and onto the ANPR network.

Of course we don't know all the facts yet, and it may indeed have been a stolen vehicle, or vehicle without tax, but equally, it may have been involved in a serious crime, reported via 999, so in that context, the officer would have been responding (indirectly), to a 999 call.

How do I know I've just completely wasted my time and you haven't understood a single word.

[Cheese Monkey]

How the [censored] can you try to justify driving at 90mph in a 30 for a ANPR thing, with no sirens, and a kid killed. Yes, yes I know I cant show where you've written exactly that. But to me that is exactly how it is coming across. You need your head looking at

[Stately]

How the [censored] can you try to justify driving at 90mph in a 30 for a ANPR thing, with no sirens, and a kid killed. Yes, yes I know I cant show where you've written exactly that. But to me that is exactly how it is coming across. You need your head looking at

Have a look at the thread, and being as objective as you can, state clearly weather or not I am the only one who is defending the Police.

Sorry to say, I'm not on my own on this one.

Several on here would have rode their bikes at similar speeds through built up zones just because they wanted to...

At least this cop had a motive... so he was wrong not having Blues and 2's on... I repeat... ACCIDENT

Extremely sad but true... she should have taken care crossing a road, I mean, did she not hear a car travelling at 90mph? ... in my view she's as guilty as the cop.

actually agree with you on those points,what ever happened to look right left right before crossing the road. if it was at night then the car would have head lights on

god am i sticking up for a copper

Care to address any of these comments ????????

Nah - didn't think so.

[Cheese Monkey]

The difference is, you're the troll, they aint

[greg]

The difference is, you're the troll, they aint

Could be time to stop feeding it. They don't care whether they are slagged off or not, they just like to see really long threads kept going by trollery. It's their food. Trolls are out their on their own.