knighton said;
My journeys are more important than theirs. I have to wait. So should they
really?
more important than the emergency services,why so?
Noise
No.
Not more urgent than the emergency services.
More important than the non-emergency journeys undertaken by persons employed ostensibly for performing emergency services misusing the facilities at their disposal.
Curiously, though, many of us have to deal with emergency situations. We have do to so while staying within the limits imposed by the law.
My journeys are more urgent than theirs.
Not more urgent than the emergency services.
More important than the non-emergency journeys undertaken by persons employed ostensibly for performing emergency services misusing the facilities at their disposal.
Curiously, though, many of us have to deal with emergency situations. We have do to so while staying within the limits imposed by the law.
My journeys are more urgent than theirs.
I do not need to.
It is a matter of simple arithmetic.
Sirens are sounding every few minutes. Does this relate to the number of recorded incidents demanding an emergency response?
The sirens are being abused. They are a thorough nuisance. They are physically damaging when used in close proximity to pedestrians. There are simple ways to eliminate the abuse.
The bad attitude is to deny the problem. The bad attitude is to encourage those charged with law enforcement simply to ignore the law.
It is a matter of simple arithmetic.
Sirens are sounding every few minutes. Does this relate to the number of recorded incidents demanding an emergency response?
The sirens are being abused. They are a thorough nuisance. They are physically damaging when used in close proximity to pedestrians. There are simple ways to eliminate the abuse.
The bad attitude is to deny the problem. The bad attitude is to encourage those charged with law enforcement simply to ignore the law.
i just wonder how you claim to know the business of every police officer in a police vehicle in sydenham?
i would say you did suggest you did know as you stated that your journeys were more important than theirs.
and how does the amount of siren use prove your point?
or will you cite there was no report in the press of a crime so that means none happened.........how very naive
i would say you did suggest you did know as you stated that your journeys were more important than theirs.
and how does the amount of siren use prove your point?
or will you cite there was no report in the press of a crime so that means none happened.........how very naive
I moved to Sydenham recently from just down the road in East Dulwich and though I live in a quiet part of Sydenham I can tell you that there are alot more sirens to be heard round here. Sydenham is crawling with police, so its probably them. The ambulance service probably do not abuse their sirens. A few police probably do, because there are some stupid ones (I have met them). Mind you - about 90% of the population become idiots when you put them in charge of car, and I would occasionally include myself in that statistic.
Yeah I agree, its is strange. Maybe because I live near the top of the hill I can just hear the sirens more clearly. Mind you, I'm not complaining if there are more police – hopefully it means all the criminals will be busy elsewhere. Come to think of it my neighbours in East Dulwich were burgled the day after I moved out.
I would say not. It provides a support function. It is not a garage.leaf wrote:ive just remembered something......there is a base[?] on newlands park road that police cars are dispatched from in an emergency....maybe this has something to do with it?
I am pretty sure you will find the cars you see speeding up and down Sydenham Road, around the clock, come from Catford or Lewisham.
-
reasontobecheerful
- Posts: 18
- Joined: 29 Oct 2005 01:03
- Location: Lower sydenham
Sigh...
Knighton, It is not an offence to sound sirens between the hours of 2300 and 0700. Emergency vechiles ARE exempt from the highway code ruling. Please go back and read my original post I am fully aware that the highway code isn't the law.
I think I might know why you hear a lot of sirens at night where you live. I think it might be because you live in a CITY. In a city knighton you have lots of people. These people include nice people (as represented on this forum) and nasty people. Fortunately most of you in your everyday lives don't have to have much to do with these nasty people, maybe stand behind them in the queue in the bank or park next to them at sainsburys. but these nasty people are out there and dare I say it (reasontobecheerful goes into a whisper) there's quite alot in SE26.
These nasty people do all sorts of nasty things. They drink too much cheap cider and get up to all kinds of mischief. This usually ends up with them hurting someone else or hurting themselves, after which someone calls for the police or the Ambulance. Now heres the interesting bit...the people in Nee Naw control would love to tell them where to poke their drink related misdemeanor, but due to those people in government they can't. Therefore the call is processed and given a catagory. This catagory is what defines whether a call gets a blue light response or not. In south London the police and Ambulance service have to deal with lots and lots of these "calls" and this results in lots and lots of sirens.
Simple!
On a side note after x amount of years dealing with these nasty people I am also sick of bloody sirens. Try sitting next to them for 12 hours a day, day in day out! Which is why myself and my colleges try to limit there use. Honest!
Knighton, It is not an offence to sound sirens between the hours of 2300 and 0700. Emergency vechiles ARE exempt from the highway code ruling. Please go back and read my original post I am fully aware that the highway code isn't the law.
I think I might know why you hear a lot of sirens at night where you live. I think it might be because you live in a CITY. In a city knighton you have lots of people. These people include nice people (as represented on this forum) and nasty people. Fortunately most of you in your everyday lives don't have to have much to do with these nasty people, maybe stand behind them in the queue in the bank or park next to them at sainsburys. but these nasty people are out there and dare I say it (reasontobecheerful goes into a whisper) there's quite alot in SE26.
These nasty people do all sorts of nasty things. They drink too much cheap cider and get up to all kinds of mischief. This usually ends up with them hurting someone else or hurting themselves, after which someone calls for the police or the Ambulance. Now heres the interesting bit...the people in Nee Naw control would love to tell them where to poke their drink related misdemeanor, but due to those people in government they can't. Therefore the call is processed and given a catagory. This catagory is what defines whether a call gets a blue light response or not. In south London the police and Ambulance service have to deal with lots and lots of these "calls" and this results in lots and lots of sirens.
Simple!
On a side note after x amount of years dealing with these nasty people I am also sick of bloody sirens. Try sitting next to them for 12 hours a day, day in day out! Which is why myself and my colleges try to limit there use. Honest!
The Highway Code has nothing to do with it.
Noise abatement legislation forbids their use at those times. It is also a matter of manners and consideration.
Society works by consent. Policing is pretty much an irrelevance most of the time. Very occasionally the intervention of a forceful public servant would be useful. This is when they are most likely to appear to be absent.
When judging a service the determining factor is comparative cost-effectiveness. Is it cheaper to rely solely on insurance or would the premiums exceed the cost of employing a watch service? Does the service deliver results. Are there hidden costs attached to the service (such as people unable to attend their useful (wealth creating) occupations because they are sleep deprived as a result of the activities of those engaged within the service).
I am not anti-police. I am anti "bad police". I am pro "good police". The evidence of my own experience suggests there are few of these and the standards are in a state of rapid decline.
Only a half-wit would use a loud siren to proceed along Sydenham Road when it is clear of traffic and people at a time when the majority are trying to sleep. The strobe lights are more than adequate for the job.
At the end of the day the majority of police work is no more, nor less, than the duties of a night watchman or a data entry clerk. Since the police are manifestly inept at detection, after the event, this function cannot possibly be cost-effective and would better be passed on to the insurance industry to fund. Remember that the detection rate, pitifully low as it is, is inflated by the malpractice of taking into account lists of "offences" the collared recidivist likely has no knowledge of. Given that no evidence is presented then who is to know?
I should very much prefer policing and detection to be handled by an authority which is demonstrably free of vested interests and which is seen to perform its own activities within the law and taking care to preserve the peace it is appointed to protect. It is disappointing to see the badly structured, badly managed, badly staffed excuse that currently operates. It is disgraceful that its operatives have contempt for the public at large and regard themselves as above the law.
The abuse of the siren is just one symptom of such contempt.
Then again it has to be admitted that the courts and the Home Office have a deplorable record which can only demoralise those who are in the "front-line". This does not, however, excuse the bad attitude and behaviour described above.
Noise abatement legislation forbids their use at those times. It is also a matter of manners and consideration.
Society works by consent. Policing is pretty much an irrelevance most of the time. Very occasionally the intervention of a forceful public servant would be useful. This is when they are most likely to appear to be absent.
When judging a service the determining factor is comparative cost-effectiveness. Is it cheaper to rely solely on insurance or would the premiums exceed the cost of employing a watch service? Does the service deliver results. Are there hidden costs attached to the service (such as people unable to attend their useful (wealth creating) occupations because they are sleep deprived as a result of the activities of those engaged within the service).
I am not anti-police. I am anti "bad police". I am pro "good police". The evidence of my own experience suggests there are few of these and the standards are in a state of rapid decline.
Only a half-wit would use a loud siren to proceed along Sydenham Road when it is clear of traffic and people at a time when the majority are trying to sleep. The strobe lights are more than adequate for the job.
At the end of the day the majority of police work is no more, nor less, than the duties of a night watchman or a data entry clerk. Since the police are manifestly inept at detection, after the event, this function cannot possibly be cost-effective and would better be passed on to the insurance industry to fund. Remember that the detection rate, pitifully low as it is, is inflated by the malpractice of taking into account lists of "offences" the collared recidivist likely has no knowledge of. Given that no evidence is presented then who is to know?
I should very much prefer policing and detection to be handled by an authority which is demonstrably free of vested interests and which is seen to perform its own activities within the law and taking care to preserve the peace it is appointed to protect. It is disappointing to see the badly structured, badly managed, badly staffed excuse that currently operates. It is disgraceful that its operatives have contempt for the public at large and regard themselves as above the law.
The abuse of the siren is just one symptom of such contempt.
Then again it has to be admitted that the courts and the Home Office have a deplorable record which can only demoralise those who are in the "front-line". This does not, however, excuse the bad attitude and behaviour described above.
