And act like a mindless drone he did. All that training clearly wasn’t enough in this case.
Exactly my point. If he doesn’t have enough time/good enough visibility to make a safe call, he shouldn’t be there in the first place.
Right. So then let’s just take all the cops off the street - because surely their efforts at fighting crime are putting poor people at risk. While we are at it, let’s limit fire engines and ambulances to a max 30MPH because that would be safer too. Genius.
You MUST be trolling - you can’t possibly believe what you just wrote.
Pity this wasn’t about a few months ago, it would have been a perfect example to bring home the message in the braking discussion to the worryingly high number of people that were back brake is primary, advocates.
Oh, and just for added geekiness, it’s an SV650 not a TL1000. 
are the police not so post to be public servants? there to protect us and he just endangered the life of a member of the public because he did not read the surroundings correctly.
if he had not acted the guy on the bike would not have crashed end of.
[quote]
SimoninEssex (05/01/2014)
[quote]
NinjaJunkie (05/01/2014)
No - just take inappropriate speed traps like this out of the equation - a lot of the other stuff they do is necessary and useful.
Right Ross, so a kid is crossing the road at a zebra crossing and gets hit by a speeding biker then it is the kids fault. That is exactly what you are saying.
[quote]
SimoninEssex (05/01/2014)
Yeah - but the incident was on a fast b road - not a high street with a pedestrian crossing in it - the example you describe is a hypothetical that has nothing to do with the incident in the film.
Aren’t you supposed to keep a SAFE following distance from other vehicles…
I say 75/25 biker fault
The first bike pulled up the second one might not have seen the policemen in the road so did not except to stop the third bike still locked up the back wheel
But the policeman must have had a good enough reason to stop them even if it was just to bollock them and in the end was only doing his job
.
.
Pin
[quote]
NinjaJunkie (05/01/2014)
Jeesus you are making this hard work. Let’s say that YOU were at that B road at that point in time and decided to cross the road (starting from the opposite side the cop was on). You look both ways, it is clear and you start to cross (with the expectation that vehicles are travelling within the speed limit), and by the time you get to the nearside lane, you get hit by a motorbike doing 100MPH. Is it your fault? How do you think that would be judged in a court of law?
it does not matter wear you are crossing if its at a set of traffic lights or a zebra crossing or the middle of the no wear, you look before you cross and if the car or bike looks like its going to fast or is to close don’t walk out its not rocket science it should be survival instinct.
he looked at fast moving bikes and thought i will make them stop and it caused a accident that is his fault. he should of put his hand out and they would of stopped or if they would of gone flying pass call in the back up.
Again Ross, no one hit the copper. The first bike chose to stop because the cop told him to. He could have ignored the copper and ridden around him - he had plenty of space. So why are you not blaming the first biker for stopping too quickly?
and i didn’t say he had been hit, im saying that he is walking out in front of traffic and hoping they stop witch worked for one of the bike but caused the second to crash. there for his fault.
im thinking your the one trolling now tbh.
because im sure if someone walks out in front of you and causes you to crash you would change your mind in a heartbeat
The second biker’s video shows he is doing 95 traveling 1.5 seconds behind the bike in front in poor visibility. Why is any of that the policeman’s fault?
The lead rider stopped fine, it was **** riding and observation skills that caused the second bike to crash…
Errrr no, If I were doing nearly 100MPH I would take responsibility for my actions (oh and by the way - I would expect to get prosecuted).
(removed that as I found this not nice, just give more thought)
90mph is 40.2336 m/s
In this condition you have max 100 meters visibility.
You crossing road (lets this scenario as it is very useful in my case), between you see the motorbike (or he seeing you) is about 2 sec, there is no f… way to anyone cross the road without causing vehicle to brake or even stop.
But let’s add some fun to the hypothetical scenario and imagine that is stand still traffic. We are in GB and as I found Brits are very good in not using lights (I bet most have this messed up with their monthly bill from British Gas) so we have nice Vauxhall Fiesta or other Toyota Micra parked there, who’s fault would be then for dead of the second biker? Maybe the car in standstill traffic, judging by all your comments, or car driver as he should get out of the vehicle and like John McClane in “Die Hard 2” lit up some old fabric and wave to warn oncoming traffic.
R
Cop is acting on the information he is given from the speed gun, he doesn’t know there is more than one bike coming and so pulls him over for speeding. The second rider is clearly riding too close and is not using suitable visibility for the conditions hence his actions, third rider who has left enough space and has read the road better pulls up in time.
No blame on the copper.