Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Topics relating to Advanced Driving in cars
mainbeam
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby mainbeam » Sun Sep 18, 2016 2:53 pm

Rolyan wrote:Just to clarify, it's not my view of the law. It's the law. As confirmed by all the experts, including the police, that you are steadfastly refusing to believe.


The law is in the legislation and the decided cases, not in the heads of so-called experts. My assertions are substantiated by law. You are just repeating what others have told you and conflating a situation in which a Police officer instructs you to get out of his way with one who has not.

Rolyan wrote:
I don't have the full details of that case but I strongly suspect that it was a uniformed officer on foot. He then overrides road signs etc.

That is different to a police driver behind leaving his blues and twos on.


If you did have access to the full details of that case, first you would understand that it was not concerned with the legislation regarding directing traffic. It concerned the common law. Second, you might have some credibility when asserting that you understand the law with regards to a Police officer instructing you to move out of his way (not simply leaving warning equipment on) that requires you to move across the 'stop' line at red lights.

Rolyan
Posts: 660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Rolyan » Sun Sep 18, 2016 3:11 pm

mainbeam wrote:https://webstroke.co.uk/law/cases/johnson-v-phillips-1975



The first function of a constable has for centuries been the preservation of the peace. His powers and obligations derive from the common law and from statute. It is his general duty to protect life and property: see Glasbrook Brothers Ltd. v. Glamorgan County Council [1925] A. C. 270 , 285 where Viscount Finlay said: “There is no doubt that it is the duty *69 of the police to give adequate protection to all persons and their property.” Stemming from that duty is his duty to control traffic on public roads.

I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answers, which clearly explains the finer points of the law to him.

User avatar
EasyShifter
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 9:25 pm
Location: Leicestershire

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby EasyShifter » Sun Sep 18, 2016 3:25 pm

mainbeam wrote:https://webstroke.co.uk/law/cases/johnson-v-phillips-1975
The first function of a constable has for centuries been the preservation of the peace. His powers and obligations derive from the common law and from statute. It is his general duty to protect life and property: see Glasbrook Brothers Ltd. v. Glamorgan County Council [1925] A. C. 270 , 285 where Viscount Finlay said: “There is no doubt that it is the duty *69 of the police to give adequate protection to all persons and their property.” Stemming from that duty is his duty to control traffic on public roads.

This is my last attempt to reply to someone who is clearly determined not to listen, let alone learn.
To be applied as is being attempted, all the the above quote relies on a highly subjective interpretation. It could - and in my view should - also be argued that a police officer's duty to control traffic also includes the duty NOT to give vague signals that are open to easy misinterpretation; to ensure when controlling traffic that he has an adequate view; to be a position to anticipate and manage the consequences of the signal etc etc. None of those is the case where the police officer is in a car behind another stopped at lights.
It is my belief that this thread has now outlived its usefulness and I propose to take no further part in it, other than to thank all those whose posts have been enlightening.
Michael

mainbeam
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby mainbeam » Mon Sep 19, 2016 8:45 am

You didn't find the instruction vague. You understood it to mean "get out of my way!".

The common law duty is not the same as the statutory powers to direct traffic. They have different purposes. The point made in the above case is that if a Police officer instructs you to move your vehicle so as not obstruct him in the course of his duty it is not an offence - in that case - to reverse the wrong way along a one-way street. This has nothing to do with the statutory powers of Police officers to direct traffic. The fact that since then exemptions have been introduced into the legislation for the offences doesn't change the common law position.

The "highly subjective interpretation" you refer to is simply the common sense approach of the common law. Your obsession with clarity is a consequence of your head being filled with strict offences and Police rules, easily found on the internet.

The fact is you understood the instruction clearly. You cannot sensibly argue that the instruction was vague.

To reiterate, if a Police officer instructs you to move out of his way at traffic lights and in order to do so you need to cross the 'stop' line and can do so safely that is what you should do You can be reassured that you are just as likely to be prosecuted for obstructing a Police officer in the course of his duty for not moving as you are to be prosecuted for a red light offence if you do.

User avatar
dvenman
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:28 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby dvenman » Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:11 am

I wasn't going to bother, but a quick Google shows that the power to direct traffic applies when "a traffic officer is engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road" (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/18/section/6).

Given the officer was responding to an emergency call, I'm not sure that counts as "engaged in the regulation of traffic".

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby akirk » Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:11 am

mainbeam wrote:You didn't find the instruction vague. You understood it to mean "get out of my way!".

The common law duty is not the same as the statutory powers to direct traffic. They have different purposes. The point made in the above case is that if a Police officer instructs you to move your vehicle so as not obstruct him in the course of his duty it is not an offence - in that case - to reverse the wrong way along a one-way street. This has nothing to do with the statutory powers of Police officers to direct traffic. The fact that since then exemptions have been introduced into the legislation for the offences doesn't change the common law position.

The "highly subjective interpretation" you refer to is simply the common sense approach of the common law. Your obsession with clarity is a consequence of your head being filled with strict offences and Police rules, easily found on the internet.

The fact is you understood the instruction clearly. You cannot sensibly argue that the instruction was vague.

To reiterate, if a Police officer instructs you to move out of his way at traffic lights and in order to do so you need to cross the 'stop' line and can do so safely that is what you should do You can be reassured that you are just as likely to be prosecuted for obstructing a Police officer in the course of his duty for not moving as you are to be prosecuted for a red light offence if you do.


The thing is that while you are right in what we should do, this is not strictly an accurate interpretation of the law, so while this might work as a defence in a court of law, a lot would depend on how bloody-minded the magistrate / prosecution / judge might be...

Yes, someone like easyshifter above has a good enough knowledge of driving to understand the likely intention of a police officer in a car behind them, plus the ability / skills / etc. to temper that with checking to see what is safe... but that will not be the case for all drivers...

let us imagine a scenario where there is a nervous driver at the lights, they hear sirens behind them and their knee-jerk reaction is to move forwards and out of the way - they are in a micra the 38-tonner approaching his green light takes them out and they die... who is liable? the lorry driver / the micra driver / the police driver? The point of having laws is that we have to cater for all scenarios if we could anticipate that all drivers had easyshifter's abilities then we could have more relaxed laws, but we can't allow for that - so the law has to be tighter - therefore the law says that you do not jump a red light even if a police car is behind you with horns / sirens / lights going and the officer gesticulating at you out of the window...

A police officer driving a car behind you can not have sufficient control of the setting to give you instruction allowing you to break the law - therefore as a driver you should not take instruction from them - for a police office to give you instructions in this scenario they need to be on foot, have controlled any crossing traffic as well and give clear and obvious instructions telling you which way to move and when - that can not happen from a car behind and that is not the purpose of sirens or lights etc...

So, it is clear as to what the law is.
It is is clear as to why we have that law.
It is clear that this can be by-passed by a police constable in telling you what to do
It is clear that this can not happen when said police constable is still behind the wheel of his car behind you and not in control of the situation

So, there is no time at which you as a driver should jump a red light to move out of the way of an emergency vehicle... absolute - no time, unless a police officer (on foot - or maybe a biker e.g. royal escort etc.) in the junction ahead of you, and fully controlling the junction, gives you clear instruction.

So if there is then a lights camera which leads to a prosecution, the prosecution would be correct in carrying through and fining the driver. Any police driver who tries to bully his / her way through traffic stopped at a red light should also be disciplined...

There is a common understanding in the emergency services that there is never a destination they need to get to so badly that they cause accidents /injuries / death etc. on the way.

Alasdair

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby akirk » Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:12 am

dvenman wrote:I wasn't going to bother, but a quick Google shows that the power to direct traffic applies when "a traffic officer is engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road" (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/18/section/6).

Given the officer was responding to an emergency call, I'm not sure that counts as "engaged in the regulation of traffic".


cross-posted and far more succinct than mine!
in that scenario they are not - regulation of the traffic has to include controlling all affected traffic not just the car in front - at a junction that would potentially mean stopping the cross-traffic to allow the driver to go over the red light

Alasdair

mainbeam
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby mainbeam » Mon Sep 19, 2016 2:49 pm

Until you extract yourselves from the legislation and Police rules you will continue to fail to understand how the common law is applied. The above case law pointedly did not discuss a situation in which a Police officer was directing traffic under the legislation quoted above. All of your comments related to the same are wholly irrelevant. The case concerned, quite simply whether or not when you obstruct a Police officer in the course of his duty, he can require you to move out of his way when to do so would require the safe contravention of a traffic regulation.

You shouldn't be struggling, intellectually, to make this distinction.

Alasdair's point about the law having to be clear is nonsense. The common law uses common sense. The Police rules exist for the reasons given by Alasdair. It doesn't follow that the law is co-extensive with the Police rules.

Your neediness for clarity is interfering with your intellectual capacity to get a grip on this. Furthermore, any assertion of what the law is or isn't must make some reference to the common law and case law yet it appears no one else has considered these. How in that case can you possibly believe you are correct in your understanding? That is arrogant.

Alasdair does agree with one important point and that is the driver must drive safely and a failure to do so would leave you open to prosecution for a red light offence or indeed a Section 3 offence.

So, drive carefully, nothing new there, but do not worry about being prosecuted for following the instructions of a Police officer if it involves safely moving over the 'stop' line of a red light.

Particularly as no one appears to have ever been prosecuted for doing the same.

User avatar
dvenman
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:28 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby dvenman » Mon Sep 19, 2016 3:12 pm

mainbeam wrote:how the common law is applied.


But any prosecution wouldn't happen under common law, would it.

I do grant you there's a distinction in this whole 8 page discussion between common *sense* and the law as it stands. But if a police officer in a car behind me thinks, after I've applied some common sense and made a decision, that I'll break the law to facilitate his progress if I think I'm going to end up with a fine and points, then they're probably up for a refresher course.

mainbeam
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby mainbeam » Mon Sep 19, 2016 3:25 pm

In attempts to keep pace and to deal with the volume and complexity of road traffic the legislature has often made enactments to deal with certain problems. An example may be given by reference to section 22 of the Road Traffic Act 1972 . Subsection (1) (a) of that Act, so far as is relevant, reads as follows:


“Where a constable is for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road … a person driving or propelling a vehicle who —

(a) neglects or refuses to stop the vehicle or to make it proceed in, or keep to, a particular line of traffic when directed so to do by the constable in the execution of his duty … shall be guilty of an offence.”


Such statutes cannot be considered as totally determining a constable's powers or obligations.


It follows that a Police officer may have powers to control traffic that do not derive from the statute.

The precise question that has to be answered in the instant case may be put thus: has a constable in purported exercise of his power to control traffic on a public road the right under common law to disobey a traffic regulation such as going the wrong way along a one-way street? If he himself has that right then it follows that he can oblige others to comply with his instructions to disobey such a regulation.

Again, we are not talking about statutory exemptions for Police officers here. A Police officer may have a right to disobey a red light under common law although the circumstances are narrower than under the statutory exemptions.


Return to “Advanced Driving - Cars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 27 guests