Safe Speed Forums

I think you have a point.

I would sum it up like this: To me, it is not sensible to prosecute the driver of a HA vehicle for using a police parking place to do their job. Discretion and common sense should be applied.

The problem is, we have an organised regime telling us that common sense cannot be applied to the law, with a massive spin machine to drive the point home 24 hours a day. The law is the law is the law we are told. Road tax a day late: you get fined. 79mph on a motorway: you get fined and even get your licence taken away.

They can't have it both ways. Tolerance has to be earned. Serious criminals have never tolerated the police because the police have obviously rightly never tolerated them. But the majority of the public traditionally have tolerated the police and worked with them, because the police tolerated the public. Now that has changed. The police (and related branches of authority), now show zero tolerance for petty, insignificant, matters and even seem to be perversely proud of it. So the public have a right to show zero tolerance for them too, sad as it is.

I don't see how. The original poster questioned the HA use of Police Only observation ramps, and it has since been shown that the HA are legally entitled to do this. That should be the end of the matter.




Unless you have special dispensation to exceed the limit. The same kind of special dispensation which allows the HATO vehicles to use these ramps.




And maybe over time they will be changed - I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was now a requirement for all new/replacement signs to use the "Authorised vehicles only" wording. But do you really want the HA to spend however much it would cost to go around the entire road network replacing every last Police Only sign, when that money could be better spent on other things?

It's like when the new-style road signs were introduced back in the 60's (?), there wasn't a wholescale ripping-out of the old signs just because they no longer met the new rules, they simply got replaced over time as and when necessary (and some of them are still present to this day...).




Is it though? Or is it just a photo taken by someone who appears to fall into the category of motorists with, for whatever reason, a real bee in their bonnet over the introduction of HATOs. I'd be happier if we could replace every HATO with a trafpol, but that isn't going to happen. But give the HATOs some credit - within the scope of their defined role, they do seem to be doing a pretty good job, certainly no worse than the way I remember seeing trafpols doing the same jobs a few years ago. I also think they deserve a bit more respect - you might disagree wholeheartedly with the general concept of a HATO, but that shouldn't detract from the fact that the actual flesh and blood HATOs we see out there on the roads are doing a job which carries a fair risk of injury or death if they, or someone else around them, makes even a small error. Not a job I'd fancy doing...

_________________
Chris

But there's no need to apply discretion or common sense when they've been given dispensation to use the police only observation points...

_________________
Chris

At risk of being controversial I think we should feel sorry for the police. Correct me if I'm wrong but they have to work to Home Office targets for certain crimes and the volume of paperwork has to be seen to be believed.

So instead of being allowed to use their discretion they get diverted into things like "Hate Crime" in areas where IMO little racism exists and witch hunts looking for paedophiles and child abusers. The police then get the flak for what the politicians and Home Office civil servants should be getting the flak.

cal response

_________________
now retired

^^^ I was merely referring to the humble road user social domestic and pleasure not so called "proffessional drivers"

what makes me and i assume the other fella who originally posted here a little upset was the blatant 'one rule for them and a different for us" attitude that exists , a immoral double standard which is sometimes played out in front of our faces where we as law abiding , tax paying run of the mill joe bloggs can just sit back and let it happen, for example that copper in a new car doin 159 & 83 in a 30 and still can be classed as 'safe' but thats another completrely different rant all together ! or even to keep this on subject , non police vehicles sitting on spaces reserved for police vehicles cleverly guised as police vehicles ( blue and black from a distance is indistinguishable!)

You dont see AA/RAC/Green Flag vans parked on these areas & they do roughly the same job i.e pick up the pieces !

I beleive that wombles are paid 16-17k a year