Police entrapment

[jon0844]

My point wasn't so much about regulations (are there any?) but rather why big name car makers (and Volvo is another, which has pioneered plenty of safety features over the years - ahead of regulations) considering the kick down feature to be worthy of inclusion, as against a physical limit that can't be overridden? I just assume that they do sufficient research, compared to a third party selling a limiter in the back of Auto Express.

There's also the issue of the limiter adjusting for different speed limits, as it's not enough to just set a limit of 70mph. That could still let you speed in loads of places.

The car my dad has reads number plates and shows the speed limit on the dash. It works 95% of the time, but can miss signs (covered by leaves etc). So he drives in a 30mph and reaches the 40 or 60mph signs - but the car doesn't know. Should it keep the limit at the last known limit?

And on my estate, we have a 20mph 'home zone' but for reasons unknown, there are only 20mph signs at one end of the road. Come in from the other way and there's nothing (and before that, it's 30mph).

I think limiters that would stop you being able to override would be a big mistake, and also think there are times when a burst of acceleration can get you out of a situation. Thus my opinion that they're potentially dangerous.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I wonder what would concern people more?

Entrapment ( though the instance that started this thread clearly isn't, as others have said it is poor driving standards ) or inactivity?

This blog ( not mine ) http://nikfox.info/mystory/ raises the spectre of inactivity ( to put it mildly! ) at multiple levels although it is, perhaps, a subject for a separate thread. It certainly makes for very interesting reading and I will leave it to others to draw their conclusions from it.

 

[Oswyntail]

....
Earlier today on a road with one lane for each direction, double lines down the centre, speed limit was generally 50mph with 60mph in places, I was following a brand new BMW 320 who never went above 20mph over the course of about 10 miles, and slammed on his brakes every time he approached a bend or there was an oncoming car. This is more dangerous in my view than doing 80mph in perfectly dry conditions on a 3 lane motorway. The driver was a very elderly gentleman

And do you know why he was driving like that? Perhaps "nursing" his car to a garage, because everything cuts out at 30mph (modern electronics - I have known that). Not, in itself, necessarily dangerous driving, but becomes dangerous if those behind become impatient. The age and sex of the driver are, of course, irrelevant.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

If he was "nursing" like that, should he not have had his hazard lights on and be offering every possible safe passing opportunity to others behind him?

 

[jon0844]

The sex of a driver is different to age, which will likely affect all of us one day. It could be as simple as the driver going slow because of poor vision (and perhaps either not having had an eye test lately, or having forgotten their glasses).

If I had my car running in limp mode, I'd still be fully aware of what was going on around me. In the cases of some motorists, you can clearly see that they've not once moved their eyes to look in any of their mirrors and, when they do and suddenly see something that has been there for ages, will jump and often wobble on the road.

It's hard to convey examples on a forum in text, but I'm pretty sure that anyone who drives will quickly get to see what I mean - and get to predict with a high level of accuracy what is going on.

Now, how someone deals with things is another matter. Do you drop way back, go to overtake and get the hell out of there as quickly as possible, or drive on the bumper and hoot/flash until they swerve over and crash?

 

[Zoidberg]

If he was "nursing" like that, should he not have had his hazard lights on and be offering every possible safe passing opportunity to others behind him?

In bold, no. The circumstances when hazard lights may be operational on a moving vehicle are set out in the Highway Code.

From https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/lighting-requirements-113-to-116

116

Hazard warning lights. These may be used when your vehicle is stationary, to warn that it is temporarily obstructing traffic. Never use them as an excuse for dangerous or illegal parking. You MUST NOT use hazard warning lights while driving or being towed unless you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction ahead. Only use them for long enough to ensure that your warning has been observed.
Law RVLR reg 27

 

[Oswyntail]

If he was "nursing" like that, should he not have had his hazard lights on and be offering every possible safe passing opportunity to others behind him?

Yes - but it doesn't half get embarrassing when there is no such safe place on the road.

.... you can clearly see that they've not once moved their eyes to look in any of their mirrors ...

If you're watching that closely, I would suggest you do not have your eyes on the road.

Now, how someone deals with things is another matter. Do you drop way back, go to overtake and get the hell out of there as quickly as possible, or drive on the bumper and hoot/flash until they swerve over and crash?

Overtake as normal when it is safe to do so.
The point is that, as a driver, you do not actually know what is going on around you, and it is pointless hypothesising (whether it is an unmarked police car or an elderly gentleman in a more expensive car than yours!). One should simply observe what is observable, and drive accordingly within the bounds of safety and the law.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I'm sure even the most experienced drivers would agree that sometimes the Highway Code needs to be intepreted in a slightly different manner to how they are written.

To provide an example, just the other day (I wasn't driving) a car broke down in the middle of a busy junction right in front of us. The driver put the rear reds and hazard lights on whilst myself and someone else donned HiVis and pushed the car off the junction with our vehicle following us and providing protection.

By the letter of the highway code, that was wrong, but it undoubtedly helped prevent an accident, and prevented us pushing the car out the way from being run down as well.

 

[Zoidberg]

I'm sure even the most experienced drivers would agree that sometimes the Highway Code needs to be intepreted in a slightly different manner to how they are written.

To provide an example, just the other day (I wasn't driving) a car broke down in the middle of a busy junction right in front of us. The driver put the rear reds and hazard lights on whilst myself and someone else donned HiVis and pushed the car off the junction with our vehicle following us and providing protection.

By the letter of the highway code, that was wrong, but it undoubtedly helped prevent an accident, and prevented us pushing the car out the way from being run down as well.

I don't consider that example to be covered by the "while driving" aspect of the law. I do think it's covered by the "obstruction" bit.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I don't consider that example to be covered by the "while driving" aspect of the law. I do think it's covered by the "obstruction" bit.

Except the Highway code makes it clear that they can only be used to warn of an obstruction on a stationary vehicle. The only time the HC allows them to be used whilst moving is momentarily to warn people on a dual carriageway/motorway. That's the way it's written.

 

[CC 72100]

If I had my car running in limp mode, I'd still be fully aware of what was going on around me.

Ha! Dad's new car (barely 8 months old) has gone into limp mode 3 times in the last 4 weeks, not helpful when he has to drive on the motorway to work everyday. Never had a problem with his 2 Mazda 6s in 8 years combined, but this vauxhall has been a right pain.

 

[Zoidberg]

Except the Highway code makes it clear that they can only be used to warn of an obstruction on a stationary vehicle. The only time the HC allows them to be used whilst moving is momentarily to warn people on a dual carriageway/motorway. That's the way it's written.

To take this discussion further it'd be necessary to consult the relevant legislation (RVLR reg 27) since the Highway Code is but an interpretation of what's written there. But I cannot imagine that it was intended that a car being shoved should be considered to be being driven.

But anyway, well done to you and the other shover for clearing the obstruction and letting folk get on with their journeys.

 

[jon0844]

Ha! Dad's new car (barely 8 months old) has gone into limp mode 3 times in the last 4 weeks, not helpful when he has to drive on the motorway to work everyday. Never had a problem with his 2 Mazda 6s in 8 years combined, but this vauxhall has been a right pain.

As soon as I read the first sentence I assumed Vauxhall.

Maybe criminals will be hopeful that the Police buy loads of them, so they're off the road a fair bit.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

To take this discussion further it'd be necessary to consult the relevant legislation (RVLR reg 27) since the Highway Code is but an interpretation of what's written there. But I cannot imagine that it was intended that a car being shoved should be considered to be being driven.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. Our vehicle was driving behind us with hazards and rear reds on (protecting us from the traffic), whilst we pushed the car out the way.

 

[starrymarkb]

Down this way around Devon and Somerset on the M5 the majority are BMW estates. A few Volvos and Audis.

90% of Devon and Cornwall's police fleet of cars marked and unmarked are WA registrations. 5% are WJ registrations and the remainder are a mismatch of variety. At the moment D+C have some Astra estates on hire from Northampton on trial with a view to look at replacing their marked Focus' fleet with Astra's. These are all marked cars and are Northampton registered on 62 and 13 registrations.

I wondered why the switch to K* plate Astra's - D&C have been loyal to Ford for years. But then they have just switched from BMW to Volvo for the traffic cars

 

[Zoidberg]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. Our vehicle was driving behind us with hazards and rear reds on (protecting us from the traffic), whilst we pushed the car out the way.

Ah, I see. I agree that "protecting the scene" it that manner was sensible and against how the law is set out in the Highway Code.

 

[richw]

As soon as I read the first sentence I assumed Vauxhall.

So did I

And do you know why he was driving like that? Perhaps "nursing" his car to a garage, because everything cuts out at 30mph (modern electronics - I have known that). Not, in itself, necessarily dangerous driving, but becomes dangerous if those behind become impatient. The age and sex of the driver are, of course, irrelevant.

Whilst I accept he may have been nursing a fault, his driving was dangerous. and if nursing such issues that cause a need to slam on brakes when a car comes towards you or approaching a bend, and unable to go above 20 mph, he needs to stop and call the breakdown service. All brand new BMWs come with BMW assist, depending on how you buy the car between 1 year and 3 years cover. The car was less than 5 months old from the registration.

 

[jon0844]

Some BMW drivers probably need assistance 24/7!

 

[Oswyntail]

... his driving was dangerous....

Irritating, yes. frustrating, certainly. But how was he dangerous?

 

[richw]

Irritating, yes. frustrating, certainly. But how was he dangerous?

It was dangerous I can assure you as I was following, hard to describe. Had you been witness to the incident I can guarantee you would be in agreement. Slamming on brakes at any speed for no reason other than oncoming traffic where the road is more than wide enough is dangerous. If your unable to drive unless you do 20mph and even then need to slam on brakes if oncoming traffic you should not be on the road.
Having spoken to a retired police officer friend last evening and described as above, he said instantly that it was the tell tale signs of someone who had had a drink, but we won't go down that one as no evidence this was the case.

 

[CC 72100]

As soon as I read the first sentence I assumed Vauxhall.

Yep - to have the same fault occur and be 'fixed' twice and then to happen again on a new car really isn't good enough. This time it made the journey to Paris to drop me off ok, survived the autoroute till Calais fine, and had the now infamous 'service due, i'm going into limp mode' not too long after getting off the boat in Dover. And Dover to Gloucestershire isn't the shortest journey in the world....

I understand he's got a Hyundai at the moment, that he isn't in too much of a rush to give back!

Also of note is how the car had a voyageresque rattle in the roof trim between the two front seats. Promptly fixed with a bit of paper wedged in the gap, but not impressive at all.

 

[DarloRich]

Are you absolutely sure that your vehicles will not, under any circumstances, let you override that limit for even a short time?

Yes I am absolutely sure you cant "kick down" and over ride the limiter. That would reduce the point of having a limiter.

 

[jon0844]

I wouldn't feel safe in a car that wouldn't allow me a short burst of power over the speed limit in an emergency.

 

[DarloRich]

I wouldn't feel safe in a car that wouldn't allow me a short burst of power over the speed limit in an emergency.

why? I cant say i have ever thought when driving - sugar i am in danger lets go faster! The limit is set, after all, at the maximum allowed speed on UK roads.

 

[jon0844]

Someone coming up on a slip road really fast. Cars in lane two, so I can't change lane. Car on slip road must give way, doesn't look like it will. So what if a crash isn't my fault? I've been taught to drive defensively and that person is a potential threat to me, so I am going to do what it takes to avoid an accident before it happens. (Accidents are rarely accidental).

I can either slam on my brakes to let the car on, and be potentially rear ended, or I can speed up and let idiot in behind me (well, maybe behind me and the person behind who also wants me to speed up).

I am sure there are many other examples, and not just at 70mph as my comment regarded feeling safe in a car that limited to the speed limit in any given location.

A kick down solves the problem but wouldn't let me drive faster for long as I'd have to be giving it full power - taking me way over the limit.

If a limiter was able to do that, and also be set to the real speed - not an offset speed that's below the limit anyway, I can't see a problem with it perhaps one day being a compulsory feature for all cars on a public road.

 

[Johnuk123]

why? I cant say i have ever thought when driving - sugar i am in danger lets go faster! The limit is set, after all, at the maximum allowed speed on UK roads.

After driving for many years I can say that loads of times I've needed to speed up for a few different reasons.

 

[richw]

I was recently overtaking a bus on a 2 lane dual carriageway, the bus started pulling out into me when I was 3/4 of the way past him, I put my foot down hard to get out the way quick as possible

 

[jon0844]

My dad had an accident last year where a foreign lorry came out and hit him. He was very lucky and not badly hurt at all, yet the car was written off. And the M25 shut for a while.

That's another scenario where you might have the opportunity to accelerate ahead and out of danger.

There may be loads more, there may not - but so far both of these are pretty common examples of things you or someone else will experience.

 

[notadriver]

why? I cant say i have ever thought when driving - sugar i am in danger lets go faster! The limit is set, after all, at the maximum allowed speed on UK roads.

100% agreed. There are many vehicles (not LGVs or PCVs) which have a limiter fitted. I'm thinking of small car sized delivery vehicles. These aren't dangerous to drive and I personally think anyone who feels unsafe driving or being driven in a speed limited vehicle needs driving lessons and/or reeducating. Apart from drivers of emergency vehicles (or those on a private race track) only train drivers are legally allowed to exceed 70 mph on the UK main land.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Apart from drivers of emergency vehicles (or those on a private race track) only train drivers are legally allowed to exceed 70 mph on the UK main land.

And pilots.