Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
boris
Posts: 422
Joined: 5 Nov 2010, 1:58pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby boris » 1 Dec 2011, 6:25pm

A couple of years ago a rider went home alone from the club run and was left for dead unconscious with fractures by a silver hatchback just north of mansfield.No witnesses to the moment of collision. As I understand it no attempt at all was made to find the driver or car.
I was only a bit surprised by that until reading this thread and finding that it can be done if you want to.

irc
Posts: 4537
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby irc » 1 Dec 2011, 6:55pm

De Sisti wrote:
swansonj wrote:..... Someday, any one of us may be in a position where we desperately
need a police officer to put their own safety in jeopardy to protect us.


That's not going to happen. Health and Safety doctrine will prevent it.


Despite what you read in the papers the police still take appropriate risks. I've seen cops rescuing people from canals, entering houses on fire before the fire service had got there tackling violent armed criminals etc. There was a recent story where the fire service management stopped the fire service from carrying out a rescue on H&S grounds and the police did it instead.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... winch.html
No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?

Ivor Tingting
Posts: 844
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 9:57pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby Ivor Tingting » 2 Dec 2011, 9:56pm

Si wrote:Ah, some, more poetic than I, might comment upon the seemingly heady aroma of axes (personal for the use of) grinding away prevalent on this thread :lol:

I see that in answer to my question there have been no cases presented that show the force in question has treated a similar incident, where the victim was not a cyclist, in any other way.

I take on board the tales of personal disappointment with the police's response to incidents that have happened to some posters on this board, and I do not doubt for one moment that such incidents did occur or that more could have been done. However, I do not see how this justifies accusations of the police only looking after their own in this case. No direct link - just as, I'm sure, we'd refute accusations that any of us are criminals and law breakers because the accuser has seen some cyclist somewhere jumping a red light, riding on the pavement, running over a granny, etc. Likewise, I'm sure that on some forums out there there are many reports of the police wasting so much of their time by prosecuting 'law-abiding' drivers for offences caused by some other road user's demands for respect on the roads (paid for by motorist's Road Tax).

But what it all comes down to in the end is some poor chap being the victim of a hit and run. Hopefully, his being a copper will not preclude us from having sympathy with him will it? I would hate this thread to approach the position where catalogues of ill-treatment by the police lead some to view this thread as saying that he deserved because he was a copper - that would be most regrettable.



An absolutety absurd and ridiculous thing to write. No one has suggested this. Why don't you get off your high horse and stop telling us what to write or think. The police clearly have a very mixed record of investigating cases where cyclists have been injured or killed. In the instant case we see the type of enthusiasm and resolve trying to bring a perpetrator or perpetrators to justice that all cases SHOULD receive but sadly don't. I have quite a few instances myself where the police response has quite literally been CBA just like pete75. This does not mean he or I believe for one second the instant injured officer deserved to be knocked down. We are just pointing out that the police will be pulling out all their stops to catch the perpetrator(s).
"Zat is ze reel prowoking qwestion Mr Paxman." - Peer Steinbruck, German Finance Minister 31/03/2009.

gilesjuk
Posts: 3270
Joined: 17 Mar 2008, 10:10pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby gilesjuk » 3 Dec 2011, 12:10am

irc wrote:
Despite what you read in the papers the police still take appropriate risks. I've seen cops rescuing people from canals, entering houses on fire before the fire service had got there tackling violent armed criminals etc. There was a recent story where the fire service management stopped the fire service from carrying out a rescue on H&S grounds and the police did it instead.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... winch.html


There was a case of Police watching someone drown as they didnt want to risk a rescue.

irc
Posts: 4537
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby irc » 3 Dec 2011, 7:00am

gilesjuk wrote:
irc wrote:
Despite what you read in the papers the police still take appropriate risks. I've seen cops rescuing people from canals, entering houses on fire before the fire service had got there tackling violent armed criminals etc. There was a recent story where the fire service management stopped the fire service from carrying out a rescue on H&S grounds and the police did it instead.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... winch.html


There was a case of Police watching someone drown as they didnt want to risk a rescue.


It depends on the circumstances though. Risking life is one thing. Jumping into a river to meet certain death is another. One instance I'm personally aware of where the police didn't enter a river was when the river was in spate flowing faster than anyone could swim and the person in the river was 50 yards from the bank downstream from a bridge. Only his head was visible for a couple of minutes. After the body was recovered it was found that the reason he hadn't been rapidly washed downstream to the river mouth where a rescue attempt might have been possible was that he had an iron drain cover attached to his feet for what was a successful suicide attempt. IMO not entering the river was the correct decision.
No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15020
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby Si » 3 Dec 2011, 10:24am

Ivor Tingting wrote:
Si wrote:Ah, some, more poetic than I, might comment upon the seemingly heady aroma of axes (personal for the use of) grinding away prevalent on this thread :lol:

I see that in answer to my question there have been no cases presented that show the force in question has treated a similar incident, where the victim was not a cyclist, in any other way.

I take on board the tales of personal disappointment with the police's response to incidents that have happened to some posters on this board, and I do not doubt for one moment that such incidents did occur or that more could have been done. However, I do not see how this justifies accusations of the police only looking after their own in this case. No direct link - just as, I'm sure, we'd refute accusations that any of us are criminals and law breakers because the accuser has seen some cyclist somewhere jumping a red light, riding on the pavement, running over a granny, etc. Likewise, I'm sure that on some forums out there there are many reports of the police wasting so much of their time by prosecuting 'law-abiding' drivers for offences caused by some other road user's demands for respect on the roads (paid for by motorist's Road Tax).

But what it all comes down to in the end is some poor chap being the victim of a hit and run. Hopefully, his being a copper will not preclude us from having sympathy with him will it? I would hate this thread to approach the position where catalogues of ill-treatment by the police lead some to view this thread as saying that he deserved because he was a copper - that would be most regrettable.



An absolutety absurd and ridiculous thing to write. No one has suggested this. Why don't you get off your high horse and stop telling us what to write or think. The police clearly have a very mixed record of investigating cases where cyclists have been injured or killed. In the instant case we see the type of enthusiasm and resolve trying to bring a perpetrator or perpetrators to justice that all cases SHOULD receive but sadly don't. I have quite a few instances myself where the police response has quite literally been CBA just like pete75. This does not mean he or I believe for one second the instant injured officer deserved to be knocked down. We are just pointing out that the police will be pulling out all their stops to catch the perpetrator(s).


Before criticising what someone has said why don't you take some time to actually read, and most importantly, understand it first?
Then you might like to try and learn some manners, and to communicate in a civil way. I have to say that if you had made such remarks to anyone else then I would have considered removing them as, yet again, you have stepped outside the behaviour expected on this forum. If you can't communicate without respect and politeness I would suggest that there are other forums out there better suited to your needs.

Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby Tonyf33 » 3 Dec 2011, 7:41pm

So because someone vehemently disagrees with another's opinion (rightly or wrongly) that is going to be moderated? Hardly an open forum then is it? I don't see what Ivor wrote as breaking the forum rules that you would think to remove it?

Si, as a point of order you were the one taking it upon yourself to interpret all members posts on this subject & from that suggest that they were making the discussion sound as if the copper deserved what he got. Is that not that in itself a criticism of the posters by your interpretation of their posts to imply such?(You could hardly call what you suggested as a non negative comment!)

I myself don't see that for one instance. I believe that it was wrong of you to suggest such when there was little if anything in the posts to back up what you described. An annoyance at the perceived amount of time & effort going into the investigation due to the victim being a police officer comparative to Joe public is how I read it.

That Ivor disagreed with your reading of the discussion and his annoyance that you had labelled posters into that bracket of intimating that they thought a copper got what he deserved as you had suggested (part edited due to my error) gave rise to his post, for what it's worth, I agree with him.
Last edited by Tonyf33 on 6 Dec 2011, 12:34am, edited 1 time in total.

pete75
Posts: 11711
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby pete75 » 4 Dec 2011, 6:17pm

Tonyf33 wrote:So because someone vehemently disagrees with another's opinion (rightly or wrongly) that is going to be moderated? Hardly an open forum then is it? I don't see what Ivor wrote as breaking the forum rules that you would think to remove it?



Tony I suspect Ivor's "crime" is not disagreeing with another's opinion but disagreeing with Si's opinion. One and the same you or I might say but SI thinks differently.
Si tries to be both gamekeeper and poacher which none of the other mods seem to attempt. A board moderator shouldn't really get involved in heated discussions and certainly not get close to personally commenting on other posters in the way Si sometimes does.

pete75
Posts: 11711
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby pete75 » 4 Dec 2011, 6:27pm

boris wrote:A couple of years ago a rider went home alone from the club run and was left for dead unconscious with fractures by a silver hatchback just north of mansfield.No witnesses to the moment of collision. As I understand it no attempt at all was made to find the driver or car.
I was only a bit surprised by that until reading this thread and finding that it can be done if you want to.



And here SI is the evidence you wanted that Notts police have taken no action when a similar thing has happened to a non police cyclist. Most of us don't live in Notts so have given examples from our own areas though It'd be somewhat astonishing if forces across the country reacted to hit and run accidents in very different ways - they are enforcing the same laws.

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15020
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby Si » 5 Dec 2011, 10:39am

It seems that everyone one is entitled to their opinions except a moderator eh...because if a moderator puts forward an opinion then they ordering others as to what they should think.

So, for your benefit, I shall explain the problem. ITT said that I had accused others of saying that the copper deserved it for being a copper. This is blatantly untrue as anyone who takes trouble to read my post properly can see. I've no problem with him questioning what I said, it's the way that he goes about it: phrases like "get off your high horse"and "stop telling us what to write or think": hardly conducive to a happy and friendly forum is it? If he had made such comments to someone who was not a moderator then I would have considered removing them, especially considering the abuse that he handed out to certain forum members on a previous thread about the police.

Indeed, the remark "stop telling us what to write or think" is interesting, as if you examine the posts in question you might notice that I put forward my opinion of how this thread might be ill-used by some if it should go in a certain direction (thus I am not telling anyone what to what to think or write), yet it is ITT who is telling me what I should do, and hardly being civil about it at that.

But let's examine what your complaints are:
So because someone vehemently disagrees with another's opinion (rightly or wrongly) that is going to be moderated? Hardly an open forum then is it? I don't see what Ivor wrote as breaking the forum rules that you would think to remove it?

No, as I pointed out - it has nothing to do with him disagreeing with me. It is the manner in which he chose to do so - I'm perfectly happy to discuss how my comment might have been interpreted f people are willing to do so in a calm and civil way.

Si, as a point of order you were the one taking it upon yourself to interpret all members posts on this subject & from that suggest that they were making the discussion sound as if the copper deserved what he got. Is that not that in itself a criticism of the posters by your interpretation of their posts to imply such?(You could hardly call what you suggested as a non negative comment!)

Again, no. what I was actually saying was that I should hate for the criticisms on this thread to mount up to such an extent that it over shadowed the poor chap that was injured and could give lee-way for some to accuse forum members of saying that he got what he deserved because he was a copper. You will notice that at no point did I accuse anyone of saying that he he deserved because he was a copper. I think that you have to agree that the difference is pretty clear.

I myself don't see that for one instance. I believe that it was wrong of you to suggest such when there was little if anything in the posts to back up what you described. An annoyance at the perceived amount of time & effort going into the investigation due to the victim being a police officer comparative to Joe public is how I read it.

Mostly I don't disagree with that: hence my request for anyone who could show that this particular force had treated a similar event concerning a member of the public differently - surely such evidence is the only real way of telling if their were bias is it not? Although past evidence suggested that there is at least one poster on here who has a serious chip on their shoulder concerning the police - and insults directed towards police officers who use this forum have had to be removed in the past. Funnily enough, the same person likes to complain about moderation too, and insult moderators....I wonder if there some strange psychological thing concerning perceived authority figures here. Anyway, despite the insults and the breaking of forum rules we think that we have been more than generous in the amount of slack that we have cut this person...on many forums they would have been long gone by now.

That Ivor disagreed with your reading of the discussion and his annoyance that you had labelled posters into that bracket of intimating that they thought a copper got what he deserved(as you had suggested in BOLD ITALICS SO THAT NO_ONE MISSED IT) gave rise to his post, for what it's worth, I agree with him.

But I didn't accuse anyone of saying the copper deserved it so it's a moot point. However, you, Tonyf, are able to respond to a post that you disagreed with in a reasonable manner so I am more than happy to enter into a friendly discussion with you and explain my point of view. Indeed, if you thought that I was accusing someone of saying the copper got his just deserts then I'm even happy to apologise for accidentally giving the impression that I had to some people. You see, that's what it is all about - being able to communicate in a civil and respectful manner, rather than immediately going on the war path and getting all aggressive.

pete75 wrote:Tony I suspect Ivor's "crime" is not disagreeing with another's opinion but disagreeing with Si's opinion. One and the same you or I might say but SI thinks differently.

I think that I have explained already what the issue was with ITT's post was, indeed, I have made such explanations to you a number of times already concerning your actions in threads that I have had no input to, so you can hardly say that it was down to someone disagreeing with me. So again, here it is: disagreement - fine, aggressive posts and insults - not fine. By all means, take an opposing point of view to some one, but discuss things in a friendly and polite manner.

Si tries to be both gamekeeper and poacher which none of the other mods seem to attempt. A board moderator shouldn't really get involved in heated discussions and certainly not get close to personally commenting on other posters in the way Si sometimes does.

Which means that we will be closing down the forum. Moderators are voluntary. We do it because we enjoy using the forum. If we are barred from contributing to threads then enjoyment will disappear as will we. No moderators no forum - because when the forum was not moderated certain disruptive posters caused most threads t disintegrate into shouting matches and most other users to leave. Simple as.

snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby snibgo » 5 Dec 2011, 12:33pm

I value this forum above many others because of its moderation policy. We discuss, disagree and perhaps change our minds by reasoned argument rather than by name-calling. Long may it be so.


User avatar
Big John
Posts: 29
Joined: 21 Dec 2007, 8:47am
Location: Gateshead

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby Big John » 5 Dec 2011, 12:53pm

I agree with Snibgo - I don't post much (generally only if I think I have something useful to add) but I value the fact that for the most part posters are respectful of the opinions of others - even if they are different from the poster's own. The moderators sustain this ethos - which for me is to be encouraged, not criticised.

reohn2
Posts: 35880
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby reohn2 » 5 Dec 2011, 1:24pm

Snibgo is spot on as is Si IMHO,tolerence is a virtue,name calling isn't,nor are untruths about what someone has posted and quoting others out of context.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

thelawnet
Posts: 2204
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Off duty copper gets knocked off his bike. Hit n run.

Postby thelawnet » 5 Dec 2011, 1:57pm

pete75 wrote:
boris wrote:A couple of years ago a rider went home alone from the club run and was left for dead unconscious with fractures by a silver hatchback just north of mansfield.No witnesses to the moment of collision. As I understand it no attempt at all was made to find the driver or car.
I was only a bit surprised by that until reading this thread and finding that it can be done if you want to.



And here SI is the evidence you wanted that Notts police have taken no action when a similar thing has happened to a non police cyclist. Most of us don't live in Notts so have given examples from our own areas though It'd be somewhat astonishing if forces across the country reacted to hit and run accidents in very different ways - they are enforcing the same laws.


The difference perhaps is that there are good grounds for supposing this case is closer to attempted murder than a simple hit and run.