Reasonable Man

Resident Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Reasonable Man

  1. Unfortunately not. Not within the law. Sounds like she's a tenant so her landlord is liable and you must continue to report all of her anti social behaviour to them.
    Also report all criminality to the police. All noise problems to the council.
    It gets wearing but bad people don't get chucked out of their houses because of one or two (or) 20 incidents. From the councils view they will always have this problem, they can just move it around but these people are a problem wherever they go.
    Get your neighbours on board and those who shout loudest and longest get action.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. I said should have been scrapped, it was not but should have been brought in with the new pension scheme.
    What is the point in officers being transferred to the 2015 scheme and protected officers are working 30yrs, stopping their payments and carrying on working and receiving maximum benefit when everyone else is losing money……wrong……. totally wrong in my view……..I spoke out regarding this on the old site and was shouted down and still speak out about this today, the the middle third officers are suffering the most. 
    Lets correct the wrong and stop this happening……………...all officers pay pension to retirement or death………..simple.

    I guess they didn't listen to you. Perhaps they thought that it was better that not everyone lost out.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. She's right you know,
    'A Downing Street source said that a typical police officer joining the force on a £23,259 salary in 2010 would have taken home £17,972 after deductions for tax and national insurance. After seven years' service, the same officer would have a salary of at least £35,478. This would give a take-home pay of £27,405 after tax and NI contributions - an increase of £9,433, equivalent to 32% more than required to keep up with inflation.'
    So the 4% of officers who joined in 2010 would have had such a rise, if they all remained employed as officers.
    By the similar calculations an MP's salary has increased by 127% over the same period if you compare the salary of an MP in April 2010 to their salary now if they had become PM.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    • Haha 1

  4. Speed detection is based on actual speed, not what an individual speedo indicates.
    Road cameras are set to measure the actual speed but an element of 'grace' is used, so no one is going to get a ticket for passing a camera at just over the limit.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. And, some thought Cressida Dick was the Bees knees. Demoralising the troops is not a very clever strategy.

    Never miss a chance to have a dig but seriously?
    Commissioner Dick took charge on 17 April 2017 and the mergers were implemented two weeks later. The article says that the DAC in charge was talking about the scheme back in November and something on the scale would have been months, if not years in planning.
    Do you think Ms Dick should have just said, 'OK, the staff don't like change so I will just put it all back as it was.'?

  6. 22 hours ago, Mark101 said:

    It should really be one weekend off a month, just like duty groups. Weekends are the busiest times when duty groups need CID to attend and deal with the jobs, so the right officer attends the job, first time…………..Remember it is not what is good for the DC's, it is what is good for the Bosses:P

    ... what is good for the victims. 

    Or do we say, 'sorry, you should have been robbed/burgled/assaulted during the week. Our detectives prefer to work then.' 

  7. Wise men are not hypocrits. If you do not want to drive responsibly and lawfully then you would not deserve to hold a licence to drive. If you have that attitude then you would not retain your driving authority for very long.

    By your evangelistic approach I've never met a Traffic Officer who was not a hypocrite and we would have struggled to get the cars on the road as most officers would have lost their ticket.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. It cannot be done safely though. Have a read of the Highway Code, or perhaps this does not apply to you. Two wrongs do not make a right. 
    If it was me and still working the car hogging the outside lane would be reported and the car undertaking would also be reported.  Too many drivers seem to feel that the law does not apply to them and that they can do whatever they want. That type of driver does not deserve to hold a driving licence. 
    The highway code states that you overtake on the right only, unless you are in a slow moving traffic queue. I am surprised that you have no penalty points as you soon may have.

    The Highway Code is not the law, just guidance.
    I undertake like this nearly every day on my way to work. There's a 3-5 mile section of motorway that is very busy approaching two busy junctions half a mile apart. The middle lane usually goes along at about 50 mph with lanes 1 and 3 doing about 40. When you pass the first junction lane 1 speeds up and goes faster than lanes 2 or three.
    I often undertake in close proximity to a marked police car as there is a traffic centre just off the motorway. Those officers could stop hundreds of us drivers if they thought it was a serious crime, but then they'd have to stick themselves on as well.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. What you describe would not be dangerous driving -
    A person drives dangerously when:
    ~ the way they drive falls far below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver; and
    ~ it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.
    Thousands of people do what you describe every day without being prosecuted.
    You may become unstuck if one of the slow movers on your right decides to move into lane 1 as you are passing and there is a collision. You will argue that they should have looked first and they will say you shouldn't have been undertaking. You are likely to get done.

  10. There is no clear answer. It depends on the exact circumstances at the time and the opinion/attitude of the police officer who sees you doing this.
    The Highway Code allows for traffic moving faster than that in a lane to the right to pass the slower traffic but the HC is not the law and some eager beaver could say you are driving carelessly or recklessly.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk