In some cases yes probably. But were likely put in for a reason at the time. It would be nice if we could be left to choose an appropriate speed for the conditions, however a lot of folks would see that as a licence to use warp speed all the time. Which is possibly why we have silly limits in some areas now.

160mph on a straight motorway with no other traffic in daylight is safe, but 70mph when foggy, busy and dark is unsafe. 30 or 40 might be more appropriate, but how many people actually slow down in those conditions????

Until ALL road users can be mature enough to be reasonable, then our behaviour will have to be policed. Unfortunately.

C0,

Don't get me started on the nanny state stuff. We are living in a society where everyone wants to know where the boundaries are for every aspect of life, presumably so that the common sense bypass operation they had can be deemed as success and they don't have to take responsibilty for anything they do as long they we following the rules/law.

The latest classic full circle is the "teachers now allowed to use reasonable force" to keep pupils under control. Not that long ago the policy was "you can't touch 'em"

The police arrest somone for wheeling a motorbike along with the owners permission cos he is pi5hed ( not the owner) and stop him making the thing secure and it gets nicked. Basically the cops says its "policy" to stop the guy doing anything after he has been arrested!! In this particular situation coomojn sense has gone out of the window.


SPEED DOES NOT KILL, accidents do, the only "safe" speed is zero. Speed has a link to the consequences of the accident.

100 down a foggy road is "safe" until you have an accident. Driving at 10 MPH on a foggy road DOES NOT remove the possibility of an accident, merely reduces the consequences.

Nurse, Nurse, time for me medication!

Ray.

So they are supposed to hitch up a bike trailer and take it in with him are they?
Get real.
The lack of common sense was when the individual decided to be in charge of a bike when over the limit.
Mind you, I suppose you would know exactly what to do in every circumstance and would never get anything wrong.
Could I ask you to publish your mobile number, then every time a Cop has a decision to make, they can give you a call thereby getting it right every time.
In the words of Billy Connoly, " Don't tell me how tae do my job.... do I come to your works and tell you how tae sweep up? "
;)

There is a big difference between "hitching up a bike trailer and take it with him" and allowing the guy to secure it and hopefully prevent a theft.

You wouldn't expect an arresting officer to stop you closing and locking the door of your house would you? Same principle in my opinion.

Personally, I think that it is not unreasonable that if the police wish to "take you into custody" then then assume responsibility not only for you and your safety but also the safety of any property you were carrying or were in charge of at the time.

Anyway, that's my opinion - which I am entitled to (I think I still am entitled to it, for the moment)

If it is within the guidelines of personal property - bags, goods & possessions in your pockets - yes.
As for vehicles or contents that can't easily or safely be carried - no.
They will be left parked & safe, locked if possible depending on the condition of the vehicle but we take no responsibility for loss etc.
Remember, the driver has been arrested.
Simple - don't wan't to be placed in that situation??
Don't get yourself arrested!
As for opinions... we're all allowed them and that works both ways!


Edited cos I put the wrong quote in.....

[Edited on 21-10-2005 by Rushjob]

I have 5 mates who i have grown up with !

they are police officers

3 guys are bikers

1 guy is a DCI

and the other nicked his old man for beating the crap out of his mom!

which one would i trust?

answer all of them !:smug:

why?

because they are my mates!
simple we all have a job to do!:D

is it that easy...so one ever gets falsley arrested?