Slashdot Mirror
British Spies To Be Allowed To Break Speed Limit
An anonymous reader writes "The Telegraph reports, 'Britain's spies are to be given a "licence to speed" for the first time, under changes to motoring laws. While James Bond would no doubt have scorned such niceties, officers in MI5 and MI6 are currently required to obey the rules of the road, even when national security is under threat. Now Robert Goodwill, the transport minister, intends to add the Security Service and the Secret Intelligence Service to the group of agencies with permission to break the speed limit.'"
... because we can be certain that intelligence agencies previously never broke the law.
If the Secret Intelligence Service tries to get away with speeding, they have to reveal who they are, then they aren't secret anymore. In fact anyone speeding might be revealing they're in the Secret Intelligence Service.
It compares the current list of public services that are allowed to speed (fire, police and ambulance) to the new list (Vehicles used to carry organs for transplant, bomb disposal units, mountain rescue teams and those engaged in “surveillance and covert operations”). But nowhere does it mention that they'll have a siren. If someone is driving really really fast where normally people aren't driving really really fast, and hits someone, killing one or more, I wonder how it'll play out on court.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
so now they can keep up with other traffic
What about construction zones? What about school zones?
This kind of thing is so utterly likely to get completely innocent people killed that I expect to see it being discontinued within a week of implementation.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I had a house-mate once who was a (non-UK) law enforcement officer, and he talked about "moving surveillance" (i.e. trailing suspects in a car.) They'd typically have three cars in such an operation, so that they could take turns being close to the suspect without arousing suspicion.
He said that according to the law, officers fully obeyed road laws during such an operation, but unofficially, it was impossible to do so. Once he got pulled over by a traffic cop, who, seeing his radio, maps etc. and badge, profusely apologized and sent him back on his way.
I imagine that moving surveillance is what they are envisioning 'spies' using this power for, rather than using an Aston Martin to chase an assassin motorcyclist through a built-in-middle-ages town on market day.
I do think it is better to recognize the reality of the situation, then you can put regulations and guidelines around what is and is not acceptable. You can't issue guidelines on how to handle a situation you pretend doesn't exist.
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
Unlikely... they'd get stopped and pulled over just like anyone else. Under this law, however, I do not think they would be ticketed... after showing their credentials, presumably they would just be sent on their way. Failing to pull over and stop for a police car that is on your tail is also a crime... one that is entirely independent of speeding. If the officer did give them a speeding ticket, it would not have to be paid.(although the person would probably still have to make a report that they were given a ticket).
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
When I last visited the UK drivers drove like maniacs on the motorway. Speed limits seemed to be universally ignored. 100 miles per hour seemed to be typical.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
Unlikely... they'd get stopped and pulled over just like anyone else.
Pulled over for speeding? In the UK? Since when?
There were hardly any traffic cops remaining on the roads when I left the UK some years ago. Instead, they'll get a photo in the mail, and will presumably write back to say that actually they were a spy on important National Security business, and the police will just forget about it.
How many people die in traffic accidents compared to terrorist attacks?
If I remember correctly, far more people have been killed by police cars driving at high speed than by terrorists. I was almost hit by one myself some years ago while walking along a country road.
Wouldn't it take longer to be pulled over, explain that you are in the secret service. Wait for the officer to stop laughing, then PROVE that you are in the secret service, then get back on the road?
I mean if something is "National Security" type stuff - where apparently seconds matter, it's so important that you can put your countrymen in the line of danger by whizzing past them at dizzying speeds, surely an interuption of at least five minutes (at the utter least) is going to be much much worse than simply doing the speed limit in the first place....
Oh, snap, I forgot I shouldn't have brought my logic and common sense into this conversation....
*sips coffee*
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
This is the crowd I grew up with, so I may be the unkowning carrier of disinformation, but here is my read:
All drove very fast. They did get ticketed frequently stateside, but the personnel office had resources. Justifications were welded onto all damage.
A small number drove mad fast because they couldn't pull out of some high-danger mentality even after the helicopter lift. They flouted the law like city kids who are "in the system", since they felt doomed anyway. You can see that kind of driving around the exits for military bases, where soldiers drive ninety to work because that is their permanent risk profile.
But most were just trying to feel the thrill, to act like the real thing. They had race-car training and cop evasion training and could surprize you when they decided to treat some ordinary sight as a threat. But they suffered that ordinary human pathetic weakness for emergency powers and a starring role.
Of course, the British are pioneering. Wait for the feedback effect, when someone challenges the phony backstory for a traffic death, and a file is opened on this new strain of domestic saboteur.