The Police are doing questionable mods to their flashing blues!

[CREPELLO]

If you're ever pulled over by the Police, now you too can check that they've not been doing their own illegal light modifications to their vehicle...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... fety-fears

Tights! Now that is inventive. But of course, foolish, highly irresponsible and probably illegal.

[hamster]

It was on the blue lights, so not in contravention of RVLR.

In fact emergency vehicles are exempt from RVLR.

[mjr]

In fact emergency vehicles are exempt from RVLR.

They're explicitly named in RVLR and not listed as exempt: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1989/1796/body/made

I suspect you're right that modding the blue lights isn't an offence, hence the "no case to answer" finding in this case.

[CREPELLO]

It was on the blue lights, so not in contravention of RVLR.

In fact emergency vehicles are exempt from RVLR.

Well that's alright then

But seriously, the idea that individual police officers feel compelled to modify something as important as flashing blues, with something as Heath Robinson as black tights...
Shouldn't they be discussing this apparent problem of discreet blue lights, collectively, at a higher level and requesting a solution through the Home Office?

[Barks]

Didnt he know the tights were there or is he just an idiot. It makes me despair of some who we might have in our Police Force.

[AlaninWales]

It was on the blue lights, so not in contravention of RVLR.

In fact emergency vehicles are exempt from RVLR.

Well that's alright then

But seriously, the idea that individual police officers feel compelled to modify something as important as flashing blues, with something as Heath Robinson as black tights...

Obviously there is a need for unmarked vehicles to be discrete at times: That's why they are unmarked. The article makes it clear that this is about hiding the grilllights, not the ones in the picture. In some these 'hidden' lights are easily visible for someone who knows where to look.

Shouldn't they be discussing this apparent problem of discreet blue lights, collectively, at a higher level and requesting a solution through the Home Office?

This is of course what the IOPC are suggesting:

The IOPC director for Wales, Catrin Evans, said: “When police forces attempt to make unmarked police cars less visible, they need to adopt a standardised approach.

“Any modifications made ought to be tested and approved by experts rather than using ad hoc solutions that may not be the safest method.”

[Lance Dopestrong]

Theres no offence. The problem is that when not in use the strobes can sometimes be a bit obvious, hence trying to disguise them. In use they reamin utterly unaffected. Alas, it's seen as a bit under handed - I mean, how dare undercover coppers try not to be spotted, how unsporting.

The IOPC rep for Wales is talkingmout of his behind, as there is no standardised spec for unmarked police vehicles or their pikice accessories ( other than the radio), so hes complaining about vehicles deviating from a standard that doesn't actually exist. As aforementioned, they don't affect the operation of the lights, so I can't see why he's wasting public money spending his professional time talking to the press about something that's not within his remit anyway.

[pete75]

Theres no offence. The problem is that when not in use the strobes can sometimes be a bit obvious, hence trying to disguise them. In use they reamin utterly unaffected. Alas, it's seen as a bit under handed - I mean, how dare undercover coppers try not to be spotted, how unsporting.

The IOPC rep for Wales is talkingmout of his behind, as there is no standardised spec for unmarked police vehicles or their pikice accessories ( other than the radio), so hes complaining about vehicles deviating from a standard that doesn't actually exist. As aforementioned, they don't affect the operation of the lights, so I can't see why he's wasting public money spending his professional time talking to the press about something that's not within his remit anyway.

Illegal or not the point is "An investigation by the force concluded that covering the blue lights with tights had dimmed them and may have contributed to the crash. "
Officers shouldn't be unofficially modifying what are meant to be high visibility lights in a way that reduces their effectiveness. Where visibility is concerned are they classed as safety equipment? If they are then tampering with them may well be illegal.

[mjr]

[...] As aforementioned, they don't affect the operation of the lights, so I can't see why he's wasting public money spending his professional time talking to the press about something that's not within his remit anyway.

Illegal or not the point is "An investigation by the force concluded that covering the blue lights with tights had dimmed them and may have contributed to the crash. "
Officers shouldn't be unofficially modifying what are meant to be high visibility lights in a way that reduces their effectiveness. Where visibility is concerned are they classed as safety equipment? If they are then tampering with them may well be illegal.

Surely the officers were unofficially modifying what are meant to be hidden lights in a way that increases their effectiveness by making them actually hidden?

Modern blues seem to be retina-scorching, to the point where I have to find a place to pull over before they get too close else I have to slow because I'm dazzled and that would probably slow the emergency vehicle down. I'd be fascinated to know how much it had dimmed them by. Did the tights make them merely retina-burning or more like car headlight intensity or even as bad as 1990s blues?

[pete75]

[...] As aforementioned, they don't affect the operation of the lights, so I can't see why he's wasting public money spending his professional time talking to the press about something that's not within his remit anyway.

Illegal or not the point is "An investigation by the force concluded that covering the blue lights with tights had dimmed them and may have contributed to the crash. "
Officers shouldn't be unofficially modifying what are meant to be high visibility lights in a way that reduces their effectiveness. Where visibility is concerned are they classed as safety equipment? If they are then tampering with them may well be illegal.

Surely the officers were unofficially modifying what are meant to be hidden lights in a way that increases their effectiveness by making them actually hidden?

Modern blues seem to be retina-scorching, to the point where I have to find a place to pull over before they get too close else I have to slow because I'm dazzled and that would probably slow the emergency vehicle down. I'd be fascinated to know how much it had dimmed them by. Did the tights make them merely retina-burning or more like car headlight intensity or even as bad as 1990s blues?

If they're not meant to be high visibility devices then why bother fitting them in the first place?

"The collision investigation found there was a significant reduction in the brightness of the lights because of the tights. It was judged that the nylon covers could not be ruled out as a contributory factor as they had made it extremely difficult for the driver of the light goods vehicle to identify the vehicle behind as a police car responding to an incident."