Met police firearms

[Fedster + 1,307]

The issue of moped riders who take off their helmets to avoid arrest has become a contentious subject

Baroness Williams

Police can chase scooter-riding suspects who throw off their helmets to try to avoid pursuit, peers have been told.

Home Office minister Baroness Williams of Trafford said there was no national ban on police pursuing suspects who were not wearing helmets.

After a wave of assaults and robberies in London, Lady Williams said the Government was working with a wide range of partners on an action plan to combat such crime.

She confirmed that a review was also under way into the law, guidance and practice surrounding police pursuits and response driving.

Independent crossbencher Lord St John of Bletso said over the last two years about 30,000 mopeds, motorcycles and scooters had been stolen in and around London, with many used for crime.

He asked what could be done to increase the number of arrests and prosecutions of offenders often aged between 12 and 20.

Lady Williams said the Metropolitan Police had recorded a sharp increase in motorcycle-related offences in the year to June 2017.

Recently there had been a fall in such crimes but it was too early to say whether this was part of a "sustained trend" or a "seasonal fall", she told peers.

Former chief superintendent Lord Mackenzie of Framwellgate urged the courts to hand down "exemplary sentences as an example to others" when prosecuted for such crimes.

Tory Lord Cormack called for an assurance that burglaries and other crimes couldn't be carried out with impunity because the police were not going to pursue the criminals.

Lady Williams said it was a "myth" to suggest police were not pursuing scooter and moped-riding criminals not wearing helmets, adding: "That's not the case at all. There has been no ban on police pursuing people without helmets."

But Labour spokesman Lord Kennedy of Southwark said he had spoken to police officers reluctant to chase suspects on scooters without helmets for fear of the suspect falling off, incurring injury or death.

Lady Williams said in every pursuit case, police assessed risk and may be unwilling to chase a suspect not wearing a helmet for the safety of other people.

View On Police Oracle

 

 

 

[Mac7 808]

There may not be a national ban but there certainly is a local ban. Pursuits with mopeds, motorbikes etc with or without helmets has been banned outright in my force since I joined.

Will the good Lords and Baronesses come out in support of the offficers when a pursuit with a moped goes belly up??

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

It would help to know which Force. I think the Baroness has got her information wrong on many points. Is it about time that authority sorted this problem out and gave a definitive directive. 

I do wish they would stop calling them mopeds, they are high powered motor scooters.

[BlueBob + 692]

4 hours ago, Zulu 22 said:

It would help to know which Force. I think the Baroness has got her information wrong on many points. Is it about time that authority sorted this problem out and gave a definitive directive. 

I do wish they would stop calling them mopeds, they are high powered motor scooters.

I don't see where she refers to a force in particular, but surely she is right that forces are risk assessing and making a decision...it just that the decision would often be to stop / not pursue!   
Like many policing things there are no easy answers either  in the Lords or on the streets

[SimonT + 1,185]

It's not banned in my force. It's just something that can't ever happen. 

It's like asking your boss for a year of fully paid leave. You can do it. You just won't get it. 

[James255 + 26]

A Derbyshire police RPU officer told me motorbike/moped pursuits are banned there, as they don't have stinger suitable for them or something.

[Prae 764]

We cannot pursue motorcycles under any circumstances in my force. We can sting them though but nobody has ever done it.

Another lying politician.

[obsidian_eclipse + 1,202]

Doesn't happen and it won't happen in our force. The minute a motorbike fails to stop you will be instructed to turn off your warning equipment and pull up at the side of the road when safe to do so, that would be before any circumstances are relayed.

[Pavillion 43]

11 hours ago, Prae said:

We cannot pursue motorcycles under any circumstances in my force. We can sting them though but nobody has ever done it.

 I believe its a delicate situation and not easy for anybody to make a decision, I would think The route taken was better safe than sorry.

 

11 hours ago, Prae said:

Another lying politician

Thats a bit harsh. Politicians go through great pains to serve their country and people to the best of their ability. I think at best the truth of the matter was not being told.

[Radman + 2,163]

1 hour ago, Pavillion said:

 I believe its a delicate situation and not easy for anybody to make a decision, I would think The route taken was better safe than sorry.

The issue however is that the "better safe than sorry" approach in this instance has directly led to a massive increase in moped enabled crime - including theft, robberies and even serious assaults including acid attacks.

I think as a society we are going to have to come to terms with the people who put themselves within these situations, commit serious crime and then decide to flee the police have to shoulder those decisions should the worse happen and they end up seriously injured or worse whilst police try to apprehend them.

[HazRat 762]

On 24/01/2018 at 11:10, Fedster said:

Independent crossbencher Lord St John of Bletso said over the last two years about 30,000 mopeds, motorcycles and scooters had been stolen in and around London, with many used for crime.

He asked what could be done to increase the number of arrests and prosecutions of offenders often aged between 12 and 20.

Without wishing to put too finer point on it, pass a decent sentence and lock people up. They won’t then be able to indulge in their favourite past time of robbing and dangerous riding.

On 24/01/2018 at 11:10, Fedster said:

Former chief superintendent Lord Mackenzie of Framwellgate urged the courts to hand down "exemplary sentences as an example to others" when prosecuted for such crimes.

This^

Edited January 25, 2018 by HazRat

[Hyphen + 693]

To be fair to what has been said in the article and playing devils advocate a little, is the issue not with the police then? Possibly being risk averse? Although it would take far more robust backing from government to offset the risk.

I agree though, far tougher sentencing would be needed. It always comes back to this but the justice system is a joke along with the lefty pandering with things like stop search.

I do agree though, there needs to be a shift in attitude, if people make off (which is an offence) then they run the risk of hurting themselves. People try to block this out and put their fingers in their ears but it is a reality. 

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

6 hours ago, Hyphen said:

To be fair to what has been said in the article and playing devils advocate a little, is the issue not with the police then? Possibly being risk averse? Although it would take far more robust backing from government to offset the risk.

I agree though, far tougher sentencing would be needed. It always comes back to this but the justice system is a joke along with the lefty pandering with things like stop search.

I do agree though, there needs to be a shift in attitude, if people make off (which is an offence) then they run the risk of hurting themselves. People try to block this out and put their fingers in their ears but it is a reality. 

It's absolutely not banned.

It's also absolutely not supported.

A non-TPAC trained officer can use s3 criminal law act in exigent circumstances to use tactical contact with a subject motor vehicle. That doesnt mean 9/10 the officer doesn't get their legs done.

Police officers can use statutory exemptions when driving if trained...that doesn't mean they dont get stuck on when it doesn't go as per the textbook.

Armed Police officers can carry firearms and discharge then in the line of duty...but look what happens a large proportion of the time when they do.

That's what the Home Secretary is failing to understand.

 

[Hyphen + 693]

2 minutes ago, MerseyLLB said:

It's absolutely not banned.

It's also absolutely not supported.

A non-TPAC trained officer can use s3 criminal law act in exigent circumstances to use tactical contact with a subject motor vehicle. That doesnt mean 9/10 the officer doesn't get their legs done.

Police officers can use statutory exemptions when driving if trained...that doesn't mean they dont get stuck on when it doesn't go as per the textbook.

Armed Police officers can carry firearms and discharge then in the line of duty...but look what happens a large proportion of the time when they do.

That's what the Home Secretary is failing to understand.

 

Totally agree, I think this is why there needs to be a change in attitude and culture from the top down, originating in government. Unfortunately thinking realistically it won’t happen.

Edited January 25, 2018 by Hyphen

[SimonT + 1,185]

I don't think it's the police being risk averse. The current standing of the law is clearly against officers carrying out pursuit duties and officers can easily end up in court, especially if the person being pursued comes to harm. Which bike riders can very easily come to. 

If someone dies from police action and that's the way it's seen, then it rightly comes under huge scrutiny. But there is no protection for the officer. No acknowledgement that they were doing their job and a job that the public have asked them to do. 

I'm not pursuing bikes unless there is a significant threat to life at that time. Anything else and I'm not doing it. I can't be accused of shirking my duty because I can just say it's a risk assessment.