Please click below to sign the government petition if you agree that this police practice should be banned (and pass it on!):

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PoliceHdShoulder/



The dangers of stopping a vehicle on the hard shoulder of a motorway are well known. There have been numerous injuries and deaths resulting from collisions involving fast moving vehicles with those that are stationary on the hard shoulder. At least 250 people in the UK are injured every year on the hard shoulder after a breakdown.

Motoring organisations and the police state that the hard shoulder should be used only in emergencies and that, in the event of a breakdown, the vehicle occupants should vacate their vehicle and await assistance in a safe place, away from the traffic, behind the crash barrier.

Quotes from the RAC:
http://www.rac.co.uk/know-how/accidents-in...s-incidents.htm




Despite the known and obvious dangers, it is commonplace for police officers to request that drivers pull over onto the hard shoulder following minor road traffic offences, such as speeding. Once on the hard shoulder, police procedure usually entails inviting the driver of the vehicle to sit in the police vehicle, while passengers, who may include children, remain seated in their vehicle. Trucks and fast moving traffic continue to pass the two vehicles while the police officer(s) discuss the alleged offence(s) with the driver. Discussions may take several minutes, putting the lives of the driver, the police officer(s) and any passengers at risk throughout.

I propose that this dangerous procedure be banned. Police officers should not be allowed to request that vehicles pull over onto the hard shoulder except in emergencies or when there is a real and imminent danger that can only be averted by stopping a vehicle immediately. In all other instances, if it is necessary for a police officer to stop a vehicle, the vehicle should first be escorted off the motorway to a safe location.





Comments welcome

On the face of things a pretty well phrased point BUT there is a difference with a Police stop - the police car has a number of rear facing high intensity flashing lights. Unless a driver is asleep it is going to be pretty hard to not notice the plod stopped.

Thanks for the comment


That's a fair point, and while I agree other drivers should see the flashing lights, the lights will do little to protect the people on the hard shoulder if they don't.

I think in most cases, accidents involving moving vehicles hitting stationary vehicles on the hard shoulder are due to driver error, such as falling asleep, driving without due care, etc. And what about accidents resulting from mechanical failures? Suppose a truck has a blow-out and veers out of control?

If people are killed because of driver error, do we just ignore this danger and say "well, he should've seen the flashing lights"?





Here's a perfect example of how dangerous it can be, despite the flashing lights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qXR16QDS8I

Anyone who ever watches any of those TV programs that show Police activities will know that collisions with Police cars stopped on hard shoulders DOES happen. I suspect that the flashing lights and even the simple presence of a Police car at the side of the road can cause target fixation in some drivers, sometimes leading to accidents. There is also the 'rubber necking' it causes which can lead to accidents because traffic bunches up together so much.

So in a way what the petition proposes is quite sensible, but don't expect it will lead to any changes.

Thank you Mortimer, and you're right of course ..... Getting the government to listen and take notice is notoriously difficult. However, there's a greater chance that something will be done with a petition than without one, especially if we get a lot of signatures!

One point I'd like to add too, from a minor offences point of view and 'ticket-happy' police officers. If this does get passed, it will probably decrease the likelihood of being pulled over, to some extent (may sound far-fetched, but please hear me out here!) ..... Think about it; if a police officer has to escort a vehicle all the way to the next junction just to give the driver a ticket, and the offence was very minor/marginal, there's a good chance he won't bother. And even if he does, the longer it takes to issue a ticket, the less time he has to go searching for more victims.

How would you propose that the BiB deal with the situation if they cannot stop at the road side and offer "words of advice"?

Hi Starfighter.

Do you mean for drivers of vehicles that are already stationary on the hard shoulder?


If so, then of course there's no reason they shouldn't be able to stop and speak to the driver in those cases, but the aim should always be to get them (and themselves) off the hard shoulder as quickly as possible.

If you mean offering "words of advice" to drivers of moving vehicles, then if they find this absolutely necessary, the procedure should be to escort them off the motorway. Is it really worth putting lives at risk just to have a chat with driver about some minor issue?

Of course if the actions of a driver or the condition of their vehicle or load are such that there is a greater risk of an imminent accident by letting them continue as far as the next motorway exit, then I would consider that an emergency, and in those rare exceptions the hard shoulder should be used.

I agree with this, it would be simple to follow a car whatevr and ask or demand that they pull off at the next services/motorway junction.
Most police marked cars and some unmarked have those displays in the rear window that can be set for various messages, "Follow me" would be a good one.

There was a very bad case a few years ago about an ambulance attending some crash on the M4, lights on, police cars with lights on and yet someone still managed to pile into the back of that lot when the ambulance driver was helping the original injured person, cant remember all the details but the ambulance driver died at the scene, not sure how many others did also.

The amount of lights on that night didnt stop the idiot running into them on the hard shoulder, and it was night time where the lights would have been way easier seen that daylight.

You're not thinking of this one by any chance?

Although I agree that pulling over on the hard shoulder is dangerous, in quite a number of cases its vital that the car is stopped as the driver may not have insurance or have been involved in crime etc, also as the majority of people actually do stop most offences could be dealt with within a very short time period ie speeding.

I'm on the motorway all the time, and its still very rare I see someone that has been pulled over. Its more often that there is a HATO vehicle behind a broken down vehicle.

But, you only have to stop if indicated where it is safe and reasonable to do so, so as long as you indicate you are stopping for the police, you could in fact pull off the motorway in theory. I'm not sure how they would take it if you have 20 miles to the next junction!

Or it will mean that officers don't bother stopping you for minor offence where a verbal warning could be issued but instead just note your registration and a description of the driver and just send the NIP in the post. This would remove the chances of verbal warnings and in effect just have mobile gatsos with no discretion!

Yes I passed by it going the other direction, it must have been just after the lorry hit it but I hadn't realised what had happened at the time other than it looked a really nasty accident

Sounds like you just want it to stop so no one gets done for speeding anymore, can't see that one going any further!!

I've got a better idea, ban all vehicles from the motorway, it will be really safe on them then!!!!

(sorry its friday, long week)

wow. You've got 7 others that agree with you on this ludicrous idea!! I think if I was to start another petition to bring police back onto the motorways and get rid of HATO's then I'd get more signatures. Don't think anyone on here has a problem with police enforcing the law. Most of us just have a problem with some police abusing their position and not enforcing the law properly. If all police were fair and just in their approach then I'd say bring more officers onto the motorway and let them stop as many cars on the hardshoulder as they like.

I believe hat the OP does have a very valid point. If you read the emergency vehicles guidelines for the 'fend off' position, the guidance for broken down motorists, etc. - it appears that being sat in the back of a police car, parked on the hard shoulder is dangerous (and arguably unjustifiably so).

My biggest concern is that if the BiB have to put more effort into a stop, there's even less chance of them letting you go without getting a tick.

Following an incident whereby police attempted to stop my vehicle 1/2 mile from a motorway junction for a VERY minor traffic offence, I attended a meeting with roads policing in order to explain, unless it was a dire emergency, you would have to be a braindead mindless moron to intentionally stop someone on the hard shoulder of a motorway creating and causing an avoidable, unnecessary potentially life threatening distraction to all other road users and a probable death sentence should a collision occur. Suprisingly my comments were taken on board and it was agreed that it would be in everyones best interests to take vehicles off the motorway whenever possible at motorway exits/services.

I dunno .... I think it could well have the opposite effect ...


Like I said earlier: If a police officer has to escort a vehicle all the way to the next junction just to give the driver a ticket, and the offence was very minor/marginal, there's a good chance he won't bother. And even if he does make the effort, then he was probably going to issue a ticket anyway. Also, the longer it takes him to issue a ticket, the less time he has to go searching for more victims.


So I think at worst it will have no effect and at best it will decrease the chances of getting tickets for minor/marginal offences. In any case though, what this is really about is avoiding such unnecessary risks and, hopefully, saving a few lives.




Excellent! ... How long ago was this?

Couple of years ago. Quite an awesome response, outcome and result if I do say so myself. Im on a mission to improve road safety and on this issue I consider it was mission accomplished to some extent.

It certainly was. Well done!

Do you know of any constabularies that now have that policy as a result?

Hi,
Was asking myself that very question, will attempt to find out.

Do we know how many vehicles have been struck whilst stopped by BiB on the hard shoulder?

I don't know. It would good to find out if anyone knows of such stats though.



Though as I said previously, the stats are of little relevance really. The obvious fact remains that the hard shoulder is a dangerous place to be - So why allow this to go on when it's simply an unnecessary risk?

Allowing the police to put people's lives at risk by stopping them on the hard shoulder (except in an emergency), when they could've simply escorted them to the next motorway exit instead, is just plain wrong .... not to mention totally inconsistent with all other hard shoulder safety advice.

I would say they are of great relevance, how can you state the practice of bib stopping people is dangerous if this cannot be backed up?

I do agree in some respects, but not in many others, sorry.

So are you saying that you think that the hard shoulder is a safe place to be?

... Or are you saying that you think the flashing lights of a patrol car somehow protect people?


Or should we wait until 'enough' people are injured or killed before we decide?



If pulling people over to give them a ticket or a ticking-off was necessary, I would agree, we would need to weigh up the odds. The point is, it's NOT necessary, and there's a simple alternative - the next junction or motorway services is never far away.


I'm not saying that police should never use the hard shoulder - if there's good reason to do so, then that's fine. If it's an emergency or to pull a vehicle over that would otherwise create a greater hazard if it were to continue, then of course they should use the hard shoulder.


The facts are simple:

1) Standing next to a motorway, without the protection of a crash barrier, is not a safe place to be.

Forget the stats, it's simple probability: Sure, you may be ok for 5 mins, 10 mins, maybe even several hours or even days, but eventually something's gonna hit you. While an individual police car may only pull someone over for a few mins each time, all those times add up. If you include all of the police officers patrolling every motorway, it probably adds up to many hours of people sitting in vehicles on the hard shoulder each and every day.

2) It is not a risk that they (the drivers and passengers who are pulled over) choose to take.

The decision is made for them by the police officer(s).

3) There is a much safer alternative that will, on average, take no more than a few minutes longer.

i.e Escort the vehicle to the next exit! Simple!

If only everything in life was that simple!! I'm taking it your the same bloke as on Pistonheads, so rather than coping posts from there and duplicating it on here as you have done with the above post i suggest you can go on there and read the response to the above post (plus many more), i still think your onto a loser!!!!

Yes I am (I can't post in the thread there yet. It was moved to a section that has a 14 day restriction for new members).


I am copying and pasting what is relevant, and what I have already written to save repeating myself.


I am yet to see a reply there that I couldn't answer, so please do tell me why you think it's not that simple?

(or quote someone, if you prefer)

I take it you've been stopped for speeding recently on the motorway?

Nope.


I fail to see how this would help me if I had.


This in no way stops the police going about their business, it just ensures that they do it in the safest possible way, by following vehicles they wish to pull over to the next exit.

Have you considered telling them you don't feel safe sitting on the hard shoulder, and having the conversation on the other side of the crash barrier?

I have to say the idea sounds like common sense - I was stopped on the M6 Toll for an SP50 fixed penalty (which I duly accepted) just under 3 years ago, and I remember being very uneasy about being sat in a car on the hard shoulder when usually the explicit instruction for drivers and passengers is to get out of the car and stand behind the barrier. In fact I felt like I didn't want to draw out the process by asking anything awkward in order to get on my way asap.

Although I have nothing to back this up, I once heard that at night, it's possible for motorists to be drawn directly toward stationary flashing/bright lights.

Signed.

Of course that's an option. I'm not sure how obliging they would be .... They may even treat such a request with suspicion and refuse it.


But why put someone (and themselves) in danger in the first place by stopping them on the hard shoulder?


What's wrong with simply following the vehicle to the next exit?

I think the question is, should we have to ask? I think if this were an alternative, it should be offered or even carried out as standard procedure.

Thank you.


Like I said. This is not about preventing the police from doing their job, or hindering them in any way.

There's a real danger that you (plus the officer(s) and any passengers that were with you) could've been killed or injured that day. All it would've taken is one single lapse of concentration of the driver of a passing vehicle. And all for the sake of issuing a ticket that could've been issued just as easily at the next exit.

Just wondered why you were picking on speeding? thats all.
Would you prefer camera's on the motorway?

the amount of police stops on the H/S throughout the country must be large, and yet you rarely hear of collisions due to police stops, its normally broken downs, people who have stop for other reasons or previous collisions, and to that end unless there is some evidence that it is a dangerous practice then i'm still not signing. (in fact not many people are......)

If i were to be stopped or breakdown then i would be over the barrier, unless the weather was rubbish then i would remain strapped into my car preferably on the passenger side.

Maybe the goverment should build extra bits to the hard shoulder with concrete barriers as on the M25 under bridges??



I could be hit by a bus later today, or that metorite might just land on my house, or i might just win the lottery!!!!!!

I'm not picking on speeding, and of course, like everyone else, I'd prefer fewer cameras (or none at all!). I gave speeding only as an example of a "minor road traffic offence". The same applies to any other non-emergency, such as no road tax, MOT etc, etc

Speeding is just a more common offence and has less complications than say no MOT, since a vehicle with no MOT may also be very unsafe and could therefore become an emergency stop.

Speeding is also an offence commonly committed by people who are otherwise law abiding citizens .... In other words, people like you and I, who don't deserve to be killed or injured because a traffic cop felt it necessary to have a chat with us.




Thankfully no, I don't think there have been many, but even one would be one too many, especially considering that it's an unnecessary risk that can be avoided.



It's a very new petition. It's got 12 months to run yet. It will take time to get people to understand the reasons.



Well of course that would be good, especially for breakdowns and emergencies, when there is no other choice than to stop on the motorway, but a system like that would take time to build, and of course cost lots of money.



Certainly you could. But if there were an easy way to minimise those everyday risks (apart from winning the lottery of course!), wouldn't you?

There are many risks that we have to take or choose to take. Being stopped by the police on the hard shoulder is neither necessary or a risk of choice.



Thanks for posting to explain the 14 day thing on PH for me BTW

No problem about the PH thing, i think everyone should be able to give their views fairly and i didn't want them to think you wern't answering.

My only answer to your above points would be if you didn't want to be stopped on the H/S of a motorway for speeding, don't speed! i know its not that simple, however that would be the answer i would expect from the powers that be!!!

I am interested where this came from originally? You say you haven't been stopped, so what was it? Did you just wake up one morning and think 'wow thats dangerous, I think I'll lodge a petition' Not being sarcastic - just wondering?

I've no doubt it would be.


But there are a number of reasons you could be pulled over, and don't forget it's entirely possible that the officer was mistaken and that you are completely innocent of any offence.

But regardless of the offence, speeding or otherwise, none that I know of carry the death penalty.

As well as the above, a speeding motorist can be brought to the correct speed almost immediately by a police officer without being stopped (unless they choose not to, in which case I'd suggest it became an emergency) so the 'danger' of their speed is immediately rectified. Other situations such as an unsafe vehicle might require stopping asap.

Nobody is suggesting speeding drivers should go unpunished here.

So let me get this right...You think it's dangerous and someone MIGHT get hurt if they are stopped on the hard shoulder by the police?
Isn't that as bad as being stopped for speeding and fined because you MIGHT have ended up killing someone? Anyone else see the irony here?
Also...
What about those who don't have a choice and have broken down?
Are they not in as much danger (if not more so )than the one's stopped with a Police Battenburg 'advertising' its presence to all and sundry parked right behind you?
If you've broken down you have two rear facing flashing amber lights to 'protect' your ass...a BiB wagon is lit up like a Christmas tree.

I think this petition of yours is borne out of a sense of sour grapes after either you or someone you know was stopped for speeding and took umbrage at being caught. This seems just to be a rather childish way to 'stick it to the man' IMHO. Sorry fella, I for one am not endorsing your little fit of pique.

It was more of a gradual realisation.

I drive on the motorways a lot. I've clocked up literally millions of miles over the years. In that time I've seen a few very bad accidents too unfortunately.

There are also many times I would see vehicles broken down and their passengers standing safely (and rightly so) behind the crash barrier.

In the same journey I would often see a police vehicle parked behind some vehicle he had pulled over. Many times I have seen women and children sat in the vehicle in front while the driver sits chatting with the officer(s).

I couldn't help thinking to myself that this was rather inconsistent to say the least. It seemed that the police, who should of course be setting an example to us all, feel it safe for people to remain in their vehicles on the hard shoulder, even though the people in virtually every broken down vehicle I saw knew to get out and wait in safety behind the barrier.

This issue is something that I have felt strongly about for a long time, but I've never took the time to do anything about it until now.

As I said above, nobody is suggesting speeding goes unpunished - why put the police officer and driver of the stopped car in additional unnecessary danger?



No, they have the option of standing behind the motorway armco.



How is this 'sticking it to the man'? This would provide extra safety for the officer as well as the stopped driver - it's just common sense imho.

I think you've answered your own question there:



If there's no other choice the hard shoulder should be used, just as before.

The difference here is that there IS a choice, and presently that more dangerous choice can be made for you by a police officer.

Well put and I for one completly agree. This is madness and typical of this modern world trying to ban everything that has the slightest amount of risk? Lets ban police pursuits too shall we?!

Police pursuits have a purpose. What does anyone gain by stopping a car on the hard shoulder as opposed to the next exit?

I think you're confusing obvious danger with GM foods or such.

I'm totally with you on that; The amount of things that get needlessly banned simply because of statistics or a lack of public understanding annoys me too .... but this is NOT just about something else that 'might be bad for you'.


In life we all take risks, but usually we weigh up the odds and alternatives.

Simply put, if there's no alternatives we weigh up the odds and choose whether to take the risk.

If there is an alternative that is less risky with no drawbacks we don't need to weigh up the odds.

In this case a no-drawbacks alternative exists (use the very next exit!), so the only madness I see here is that the alternative is not used!!

With respect, No I haven't, but nicely ducked all the same.
You propose banning Police officers from stopping someone on a motorway and pulling them over onto what is regarded as the only 'safe haven' on said motorway...I fail to see any logic in that at all.

You seem quite happy to let (say ) an uninsured/drunk/speeding/drug smuggling/etc driver carry on driving to the nearest exit...How far must someone be taken out of their way to satisfy your sudden attack of concern for Police officers and MOP's safety? The slip road, a road off the roundabout, the next town, Home? What is to stop anyone ploughing into them away from the motorway? (Ever heard of the phrase '$hit happens'?)
I would also expect that a motorway slip road and exits leading off a motorway R/A would have far more traffic on them than there would be ON the motorway.
It's almost like waiting for a shoplifter to get home before you nick 'em for thieving or an axe murderer to finish chopping before arresting him! Your proposals are flawed on so many levels it's unreal.




It's no more dangerous than having an uninsured/drunk/speeding/drug dealing/ etc motorist carry on to the next exit...In many of those cases I would wager a simple stop would turn into a chase...so in banning the stop you are advocating police chases are you?
Banning Police stopping vehicles on the hard shoulder won't solve anything, you just end up moving the problem elsewhere.
Educating drivers not to plough into stationary vehicles on the hard shoulder may prevent what your proposed ban cannot.

Since when has a hard shoulder been regarded as a 'safe haven', and by whom?

It's an emergency lane that offers no protection against the adjacent traffic whatsoever.






I'm not sure what it is that I'm failing to explain properly here. It's really quite a simple proposal, please let me try to clarify ....

If your "uninsured/drunk/speeding/drug smuggling/etc driver" is deemed so dangerous that the chances of him causing an accident while the police escort him to the next exit are very high, then that's an emergency.

If an unsafe load looks like it's about to cause an accident, then that's an emergency too.

As I've said numerous times now, in an emergency is fine and justified.




Absolutely, but "$hit happens" at much higher speeds and creates a much bigger mess on motorways.





Why would you think that the slip road is the logical alternative?

At the end of the slip road you will usually find there is a perfectly good motorway service area, lay-by or just a road that has much slower moving traffic. Most officers will know their 'patch' well enough to find a good spot quickly.



No, it's like waiting for a shoplifter to exit the store before you nick 'em .... which, oddly enough, is the usual procedure, so thanks for the analogy


Please tell me how proposing a safer police working practice that could save lives without any drawbacks is flawed.




As for how to deal with the "uninsured/drunk/speeding/drug dealing/ etc motorist " or any other such 'emergency' (if it is deemed by the police to be an emergency), please see previous answer.

And as for "a simple stop would turn into a chase" - How would where you attempt to stop them make any difference?


Like to a 30mph zone, where any accident would be much less severe you mean?



So we should 'educate drivers' not to fall asleep, have heart attacks, blackouts, or sudden mechanical failures?

Better driver education is certainly needed on the roads, but it certainly wouldn't stop all accidents, and it's far from a quick and easy solution.

I didn't say it WAS a safe haven I said 'regarded as' one. The hard shoulder is infinitely safer than either lanes 1,2 or 3 therefore it can be regarded as THE ONLY safe haven on a motorway.

As for protection, lanes 1,2,and 3 are enclosed by a hard shoulder and at least two lines of ARMCO barriers...These are not electrified and are easily scalable should you be of such a disposition as to be afraid of the traffic.



I see, you just want the Police to be banned stopping folks on the hard shoulder for what exactly?
Come on..I don't think I've missed your definition of what offences YOU think Police shouldn't stop folks for on the H/S...please be specific...after all, any ban enforced on the back of your crusade would need to be specific.


The end product though is still a mess. People falling asleep or not paying attention are not confined to motorways, but you already knew that didn't you?


I didn't think it was a logical alternative, you assumed I did.
You also assume that there is a service station at every motorway exit...Newsflash...There isn't. So what is a BiB to do...travel further and further until he finds one where he can deal with the reason he wants to stop a vehicle?
Are you really advocating taking MOP on a mystery tour, probably inconveniencing them a lot more than it would have done if BiB had stopped them and 'bottomed' the matter there and then?
You speak of 'minor offences' and I'm sure I read...stopping for 'no reason' being one of your 'offences' I'm guessing that the 'no reason' is YOUR idea of a Police officer stopping you on the strength of an ANPR 'ping' and them finding the ping was out of date so no offences committed?
THEY DON'T KNOW its out of date UNTIL they stop you do they?
Can you imagine the outcry if Police were not allowed to stop people on motorways and instead took them on that Mystery Tour I mentioned earlier...I guess if it ever happened to you, you'd be so quick to file a petition against it you'd melt your keyboard.
No chap, you really haven't thought this through at all have you?


You are most welcome.


I don't see your proposals as devoid of drawbacks...in fact they throw more drawbacks into the mix than there are now with Police stopping folks on the motorway.


It wouldn't, but give a perp enough room and he'll go for it. The results could be a darned sight more catastrophic should a 'runner' get into town traffic ...why do you think Police go to such lengths to try and keep these 'runners' ON the motorways? Could it be deemed SAFER?


Now you're being deliberately obtuse...you don't get many pedestrians on a motorway...you get quite a few of those very vulnerable items in 30mph limits (usually that is why there is a 30mph limit in force)


Don't be silly now, you know exactly what I meant...taking it out of context in an attempt to bolster your very weak argument isn't really doing your case any good at all.



It's a darned sight better than banning something, and the only inconvenience experienced when one is being educated, is that one needs to use a brain cell or two to take on board what is being taught.

As I said before, banning something doesn't make the problem go away...it just moves it to somewhere else. Keep on banning and you quickly run out of 'somewhere else's '...what then?
In this instance where would BiB have to take someone in order to execute that stop you first banned from the motorway?
How far would YOU be happy in being taken out of your way just to find out there was actually no offences being committed?
After all if you can get this irate about being stopped on a motorway hard shoulder and let on you way after what, 10 minutes or so.....the balloon really would go up if you were made to follow plod miles and miles before your innocence could be established wouldn't it?

I'm still of the opinion that you (or someone you are very protective of) has been stopped and in your eyes there was no reason for them to be stopped and you feel inconvenienced. So much so that you feel no-one else should be inconvenienced in that manner ever again...hence your 'sour grapes' campaign...If so you really need to take a chill pill, shrug it off and get on with life.

The whole point of this conversation being that you're never given the option to move to the other side of the barrier, only to sit in a police car inches away from HGVs doing 56mph. I'd be happy with being given the option to move past the armco.




I guess people's opinion of how safe the h/s is will differ - but I'd much rather be somewhere safer than directly beside a main stretch of motorway.

I've witnessed accidents where anyone stationary on the hard shoulder would have been obliterated had they been there. Thankfully I've not seen it happen.

Motorways are long drawn out roads which remove the need for much concentration, but allow for far higher speed. IMHO, more people are likely to lose conciousness / concentration, and with worse potential consequences on them.