122mph biker who rode with son jailed.

[jont]

In practice it appears this is interpreted as meaning an 'average, law abiding' driver. Most of whom I would not personally consider to be particularly careful, never mind competent. Certainly not to the extent that I would consider their views to be a suitable basis for sending someone down.

Well the latest DFT consultation paper suggests that the "average" driver isn't particularly law abiding.
(49% of drivers exceed 30mph limits, 53% exceed the motorway limit).

[jbsportstech]

I agree why should joe public drivers and riders be trusted to pass judgment on whether its dangerous or not. I think the only cases where suitabliy qualfied police advanced drivers/instructors are used is in cases which involve police riders/drivers is this fair probably not.

[jbsportstech]

In practice it appears this is interpreted as meaning an 'average, law abiding' driver. Most of whom I would not personally consider to be particularly careful, never mind competent. Certainly not to the extent that I would consider their views to be a suitable basis for sending someone down.

Well the latest DFT consultation paper suggests that the "average" driver isn't particularly law abiding.
(49% of drivers exceed 30mph limits, 53% exceed the motorway limit).

Without wishing to appear to bashing police drivers again !!! I stress that!!!

but figures the lib dems have obtained suggest the 55% of police officiers in forces that returned the info have a motoring conviction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7936041.stm

[Red Herring]

I don';t think it is about Police driver bashing James, after all we all like a good dig at someone who should in theory know better than to offer themselves up for it....however it is about staying subjective and not condeming an entire occupation on the actions of an individual. Personally if i were the head of an IAM group and one of my members was riding around advertising the group whilst not riding at the expected standard i would want to know about, just like a chief constable would like to know if one of his officers isn't driving appropriately, however there are ways of going about it. If someone tells me that a line is the wrong length the first thing I do is check how they measured it before I rub it out and start again. It may be that their ruler is out of calibration, or it may be that the accuracy they expect differs from mine, or it may even be that they are muesuring the wrong line, either way it is about checking information before taking action and if you are going to take action, especially in public, make sure you know what you are talking about. You certainly shouldn't make assumptions without at least saying so, and you should always be prepared to offer some evidence to support a particular view. Next time you see a police officer doing something you think you would have done differently take time to ask yourself why they did what they did, and what were they really trying to achieve.
For the record I share a lot of your views about police driving standards and like you I know quite a few officers who don't take their driving as seriously as I would like. We also both seem to know officers who do know better and are happy to offer their advice to those wishing to listen. This Forum should be about sharing and discussing those views, not slagging off sections of the population. Everybody on here already knows there are some right awful drivers out there....

[zadocbrown]

but figures the lib dems have obtained suggest the 55% of police officiers in forces that returned the info have a motoring conviction.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7936041.stm

Hang, on. They don't suggest that at all. 55% of total offences are motoring related. That's why you have to be careful with stats!

[Red Herring]

1,000 officers out of nearly 160,000 have a conviction, and 55% of those convictions are motoring related.

So that's about 1 in 320 officers have a driving conviction. Gosh, I only wish that were true....

[jbsportstech]

1,000 officers out of nearly 160,000 have a conviction, and 55% of those convictions are motoring related.

So that's about 1 in 320 officers have a driving conviction. Gosh, I only wish that were true....

Thats why I stated 55% of force who return the info in attempt not to mislead as its not the whole picture.

[zadocbrown]

1,000 officers out of nearly 160,000 have a conviction, and 55% of those convictions are motoring related.

So that's about 1 in 320 officers have a driving conviction. Gosh, I only wish that were true....

Nope. The information is only regarding 41 out of 51 forces (So it's not out of 160,000). We're not told how many officers are in those 41 forces, so we can't calculate a percentage. So it's just more useless information in the press

[MGF]

1,000 officers out of nearly 160,000 have a conviction, and 55% of those convictions are motoring related.

So that's about 1 in 320 officers have a driving conviction. Gosh, I only wish that were true....

Technically, speeding offences dealt with by way of fixed penalties are not convictions so these figures may refer to those officers who have been through court.

It would be interesting to see the conviction rates for others involved in the criminal justice system such as the CPS, Judges, other lawyers and of course lay Magistrates and jury members...

Without knowing the nature of an offence it is difficult to form a judgement as to whether or not it is consistent with an individual's employment. For example, a motoring conviction for a serving Traffic Officer is, in my view more serious than the same for a Detective.

My main concern would be offences involving dishonesty and violence which are probably inconsistent with the very essence of being a Police Officer.

[jbsportstech]

I think it is very much subjective on a cases by cases basis certainly sexual offences should rule u out in my mind.

I once met a police sergant who was very good cooper but in his youth he stole a car and set fire to it 16 I think he said) he then went on to have a very good career in the navy and the police so is it always the case.

[Red Herring]

For example, a motoring conviction for a serving Traffic Officer is, in my view more serious than the same for a Detective.

My main concern would be offences involving dishonesty and violence which are probably inconsistent with the very essence of being a Police Officer.

So does that mean a traffic officer convicted of theft is less serious than a detective being so convicted.....he says very tongue in cheek, especially as I agree with the second paragraph.

[Red Herring]

I think it is very much subjective on a cases by cases basis certainly sexual offences should rule u out in my mind.

I once met a police sergant who was very good cooper but in his youth he stole a car and set fire to it 16 I think he said) he then went on to have a very good career in the navy and the police so is it always the case.

Really, so if say for example a 15 year old gets a conviction for sexual assault because he was amongst a group of teenagers giving a young lady the birthday bumps during which he was alleged to have grabbed the wrong bit....(and that's a true story, and no it wasn't me) should carry that for the rest of their lives?

I think there are plenty of people carrying misdemeanours from their youth, it's patterns of behaviour that tend to tell a story.

[jbsportstech]

I think it is very much subjective on a cases by cases basis certainly sexual offences should rule u out in my mind.

I once met a police sergant who was very good cooper but in his youth he stole a car and set fire to it 16 I think he said) he then went on to have a very good career in the navy and the police so is it always the case.

Really, so if say for example a 15 year old gets a conviction for sexual assault because he was amongst a group of teenagers giving a young lady the birthday bumps during which he was alleged to have grabbed the wrong bit....(and that's a true story, and no it wasn't me) should carry that for the rest of their lives?

I think there are plenty of people carrying misdemeanours from their youth, it's patterns of behaviour that tend to tell a story.

When you say a conviction did he get a caution or did the cps proscute? Sounds like a common assualt how did they prove sexual motive? Either a very innoccent mistake or something more to the case.

What do you call youth would that cover 19-20 and accused of a sexual offence by a current gf and then she drops the hole thing after a week? Would you hold that against someone?

[Red Herring]

I think this would lead to a completely different thread....I would suggest it sufficient to say that you cannot categorize offences as easily as you might think. A bit like driving really, everything on it's merits.