Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think police should just ram motorcyclists who try and flee?

94 replies

safariboot · 01/08/2017 13:30

We've got people on mopeds throwing acid around in London. People on dirt bikes throwing bricks in Birmingham. The police are always cautious about pursuing motorbikes because they don't want to injure the rider, and the criminals know this full well.

AIBU to want the police to just get tough and ram the feckers? They chose to get on the bike and run from the police, they should take the consequences. Not be free to ride off into the sunset and commit more violent crimes against the public.

OP posts:
ReanimatedSGB · 01/08/2017 15:15

Absolutely not. While it's not as bad as the US, we already have a problem with aggressive, bigoted fuckwits in the police. While there are many, many police officers who are wonderful, decent human beings doing their best to 'serve and protect', it is a career which appeals to self-righteous thugs, as well.
The police have enough powers as it is. Giving them more would make the rest of us less safe.

CockacidalManiac · 01/08/2017 15:20

I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep if the fuckers came off at speed and broke their bloody necks. They think they're untouchable.

plominoagain · 01/08/2017 15:21

As it stands at the moment , every time I switch on the blues and twos , I put myself at risk of prosecution . As quoted from the police federation website below :

The current legislation leaves police drivers vulnerable: it is illegal to engage in pursuit or response drives. This is because there are no exemptions in the current legislation that take into account the high level of specialised training officers are given. All driving standards are measured against that of a non-police trained “competent and careful driver”.
According to the law, ‘dangerous driving’ includes speeding, ignoring traffics signals, or overtaking dangerously. There can also be liability for causing others to drive dangerously.
Officers who have engaged in pursuits or response drivers have, in the past, been charged with dangerous driving, even if no complaints were made, and no one was injured (the outcome is not the matter that should be considered although it almost always is the catalyst).
Police drivers are trained to the College of Policing standard. However this standard is not supported by the current law'

If I have an accident , or get a traffic ticket , even whilst done during the execution of my duty , I am required to inform my personal insurance company , which obviously impacts on my premiums . I have NO protection. None . Now , I'm not saying that if an officer drives recklessly , then he should get away with it , of course he shouldn't . But there have been cases of officers prosecuted for textbook pursuits , where no one has complained , no one has been hurt , and the offender has been safely detained . And it's not like the prosecutions happen immediately , the investigations drag on for years , whilst all the time leaving the officer in limbo , and their family having to deal with the consequences of that .

CockacidalManiac · 01/08/2017 15:22

That's suck a shit situation, plominoagain.
I'm grateful to you for protecting us.

Toysaurus · 01/08/2017 15:24

The police did that in Bristol in the nineties. Caused massive rioting in Hartcliffe because the two men died when they did it and police tried to cover it up.

HipsterHunter · 01/08/2017 15:26

Many people use Mopeds to legitimately get about, my 19 year old DD wants one. It's affordable, cheaper and easier than the bus. The last thing I want is an over zealous Police Force on a stereotyped vehicle/piece of clothing/postcode/or colour of a persons skin, or gender.

As long as your 19 year old stops when requested there wouldn't be an issue!

PerkingFaintly · 01/08/2017 15:27

Yes, Thanks plomino for the work you do. It's appreciated.

TheSparrowhawk · 01/08/2017 15:35

I'm really surprised at the sheer stupidity on this thread. Life isn't like the movies you know, if you chase someone in a vehicle in a built up area the potential for things to go entirely out of control is almost 100%. What if a car backs out of a drive or a child runs across the path? Not to mention the fact that police officers themselves are flesh and blood human beings rather than invincible crime bits and ramming another vehicle is incredibly dangerous - you are almost guaranteed to get hurt. All the idiots advocating for these chases wouldn't be impressed if they had to leap out of the way of a chase in progress I'm sure.

Besides that, there's the tiny fact that police are rightly prevented from causing injury to anybody. If a police officer can potentially kill someone suspected of an offence, would you be ok with being that suspect at some stage? Or your partner/child being the one running in fear from someone with the authority to kill them on the street? Didn't think so.

TheSparrowhawk · 01/08/2017 15:35

crime bots

LurkingHusband · 01/08/2017 15:57

Not really sure what more powers the police need, and what they are worried about anyway. Jean Charles de Menezes had his head blown off for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and no policeman was ever in danger of even a reprimand.

ChelleDawg2020 · 01/08/2017 16:02

As the law stands the police can't do anything, but laws can be changed. To be honest I've no problem with them ramming people who fail to stop, whether they are fleeing by car, motorcycle, bicycle or even on foot. The legal outcome of any consqeuences should rest solely upon the person refusing to stop for the police.

LurkingHusband · 01/08/2017 16:07

The legal outcome of any consequences should rest solely upon the person refusing to stop for the police.

Hmmm, sort of "look what you made me do..." ?

Laulau79 · 01/08/2017 17:52

Thanks plominoagain , the majority of us really are grateful for all do 😀

Kursk · 01/08/2017 18:30

"The legal outcome of any consequences should rest solely upon the person refusing to stop for the police"

Agree 100%

BoneyBackJefferson · 01/08/2017 19:11

LurkingHusband

Hmmm, sort of "look what you made me do..." ?

Surely the job of the police is to arrest criminals, and damage or injury from that is (within reason) a consequence of the crime that they have committed?

Laulau79 · 01/08/2017 22:34

TheSparrowhawk - you do know that the police do chase criminals AND catch them everyday in built up city's

ReanimatedSGB · 01/08/2017 22:39

Given the number of proven, documented cases of people being needlessly arrested (when they had done nothing wrong) violently assaulted and even killed by police officers employing levels of force hugely disproportionate to the suspected offence for which they stopped the person, it's quite likely that some innocent people would rather run than stop if a police officer approaches them.

(Was trying to link to a clip someone posted on my FB today, but I can't get it off FB)

Laulau79 · 01/08/2017 22:45

ChelleDawg2020 - sorry I didn't listen before you said it all 😶

Freddystarshamster · 02/08/2017 06:50

Given the number of proven, documented cases of people being needlessly arrested (when they had done nothing wrong) violently assaulted and even killed by police officers employing levels of force hugely disproportionate to the suspected offence for which they stopped the person, it's quite likely that some innocent people would rather run than stop if a police officer approaches them.

I take it your application to join the special constabulary is already in? Show us how it's done?

police officers employing levels of force hugely disproportionate to the suspected offence for which they stopped the person
But not hugely disproportionate to the reaction of the suspect to being stopped eh? Hmm

Smellyoulateralligater · 02/08/2017 06:57

Confused but the police do have power to apprehend suspects. They do it all the time. And why would anyone want trigger happy police. And why are people advocating death by being run over as an appropriate end point to a police chase.

I feel like I've woken up in the comments section of the Daily Mail...

Ifailed · 02/08/2017 07:11

20 years or so ago, older cars were the vehicle of choice for criminals, they were simple to break into and could easily be 'hot wired' to start. Under consumer and Government pressure, manufactures stepped up and now even the cheapest new car has far better locks and immobilisers.
Mopeds are yet to catch up. They usually have a cheap and easy to break lock and can be started quite easily, hence they are the vehicle of choice - add to that their manoeuvrability in crowed streets it's little wonder they are now more popular with criminals (all started with smash and grab raids on Jewellers a decade or so ago?)
I don't see what good allowing the police to deliberately run down a vulnerable rider and almost certainly cause serious injury will do, other than escalate violence?

corythatwas · 02/08/2017 07:14

HipsterHunter Tue 01-Aug-17 15:26:27
"Many people use Mopeds to legitimately get about, my 19 year old DD wants one. It's affordable, cheaper and easier than the bus. The last thing I want is an over zealous Police Force on a stereotyped vehicle/piece of clothing/postcode/or colour of a persons skin, or gender.

As long as your 19 year old stops when requested there wouldn't be an issue!"

And what if some innocent person suddenly panics and tries to get away anyway? Maybe because of bad experiences with police in the past?

Or what if the police think they are fleeing when they simply didn't realise they were the ones signalled to stop?

How easy will it be for police to claim they were fleeing? Have we forgotten Jean Luis Mendez? The nation was up in arms about this suspicious foreigner jumping the barrier to get away from police, everybody was saying there wouldn't have been a problem if he hadn't behaved in such a suspicious way- and then CCTV was released that showed he'd done nothing of the kind.

Freddystarshamster · 02/08/2017 07:19

And what if some innocent person suddenly panics and tries to get away anyway? Maybe because of bad experiences with police in the past?

Contrary to some sections of the populations belief, you don't get to opt out of being policed, regardless of any "bad experiences" in the past. You want to drive/ride a motor vehicle in a public place, you obey the law. Which includes stopping when directed to by the police. If you don't like that feel free to walk/move to Mogadishu

ThroughThickAndThin01 · 02/08/2017 07:20

Good idea, but sadly not practical. The police would end up being accountable.

Really wish something could be done though.

Argeles · 02/08/2017 07:27

Yes they could ram them, that would be great, but I'd prefer that the police shoot them. The police could block them/surround them first before shooting.

These individuals are committing sickening and violent attacks, and are endangering so many people's lives. There is no deterrent for them at the moment.

Swipe left for the next trending thread