The law

iainment

It is constantly being said on here that the law must be obeyed at all times.

Should it? All laws, all of the time? No grey areas?

cee

my opinion is that we pick and choose the laws which we want to adhere to and accept the consequences of disobeying that law.

So.......I have on occasion slightly broken the speed limit whilst driving my car, but I realise that if I get caught doing so, I can expect 3 points on my license and a fine (at least).

I don't think that law is perfect and there are obviously examples where it just plain doesn't make sense. Someone on another topic was talking about bikes not being allowed on certain tracks/bridleways/paths (i can't remember the exact law or whetever) but the land owner regularly drives their tractor up it legally. Being Scottish and living in Scotland, this makes no sense to me whatsoever, as I can pretty much go wherever I like.

I do realise, however, that the law is set up (at least in principle) to be beneficial to the majority.

spen666

Obey the law - yes

Campaign to change the law - yes

I don't think that law is perfect and there are obviously examples where it just plain doesn't make sense. Someone on another topic was talking about bikes not being allowed on certain tracks/bridleways/paths (i can't remember the exact law or whetever) but the land owner regularly drives their tractor up it legally.

There are many examples of the law not making sense.

Re the paths you refer to- surely the difference is that the landowner can do as he wishes re paths on HIs/ HER land- "you" are a visitor only

dondare

iainment wrote:

It is constantly being said on here that the law must be obeyed at all times.

Should it? All laws, all of the time? No grey areas?

If you ride a fairly new bike after dark then keeping the law is almost an impossibility. The precise requirements (including beam pattern and battery life, and having been passed by two different standards authorities) are not met by any lamps currently available. And hardly any clipless pedals have the reflectors that they must have to be legal at night.

Ha Ha: at night all bikes are grey....

(Bikes over 25 years old are not required to be lit up to the same degree, so my old iron allows me to ride legally at all times.)

spen666

dondare wrote:

iainment wrote:

It is constantly being said on here that the law must be obeyed at all times.

Should it? All laws, all of the time? No grey areas?

If you ride a fairly new bike after dark then keeping the law is almost an impossibility. The precise requirements (including beam pattern and battery life, and having been passed by two different standards authorities) are not met by any lamps currently available. And hardly any clipless pedals have the reflectors that they must have to be legal at night.

(Bikes over 25 years old are not required to be lit up to the same degree, so my old iron allows me to ride legelly at all times.)

Are you not required to have pedal reflectors at all times?

It is easy to comply with that part of the law- just use non- clipless pedals! [Law has not kept up to date with developments in cycling - either that or cyclists using clipless pedals are genrally a law ignoring bunch]


Is their legislation re battery life for bike lights?

dondare

iainment wrote:

It is constantly being said on here that the law must be obeyed at all times.

Should it? All laws, all of the time? No grey areas?

Actually I only say that the law should be obeyed to distinguish it from the Highway Code, which IMAO should be ignored. My arguments about pavement cycling and RLJing are based on other factors.

dondare

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

iainment wrote:

It is constantly being said on here that the law must be obeyed at all times.

Should it? All laws, all of the time? No grey areas?

If you ride a fairly new bike after dark then keeping the law is almost an impossibility. The precise requirements (including beam pattern and battery life, and having been passed by two different standards authorities) are not met by any lamps currently available. And hardly any clipless pedals have the reflectors that they must have to be legal at night.

(Bikes over 25 years old are not required to be lit up to the same degree, so my old iron allows me to ride legelly at all times.)

Are you not required to have pedal reflectors at all times?

It is easy to comply with that part of the law- just use non- clipless pedals! [Law has not kept up to date with developments in cycling - either that or cyclists using clipless pedals are genrally a law ignoring bunch]


Is their legislation re battery life for bike lights?

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.
Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

spen666

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

dondare

spen666 wrote:

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Old bikes are exempt, my bike is old so I'm not breaking the law. My shoes have reflective patches on and my bike is lit up like the proverbial Chrismas tree, so I'm keeping the spirit of the law and at least as visible as I would be if I had pedal reflectors. But if anyone ever makes decent pedals with reflectors then I'll buy 'em.

I'm not being hypocritical because I condem anti-social and dangerous cycling and those who reinforce anti-cycling prejudice but my own riding is exemplary in every respect. If all cyclists had my attitude then you'd never hear anyone complaining about cyclists riding on the pavement, jumping red lights, endangering pedestrians, riding without lights, going up one-way streets the wrong way &c. &c. because I don't do any of those things.

spen666

dondare wrote:

spen666 wrote:

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Old bikes are exempt, my bike is old so I'm not breaking the law. My shoes have reflective patches on and my bike is lit up like the proverbial Chrismas tree, so I'm keeping the spirit of the law and at least as visible as I would be if I had pedal reflectors. But if anyone ever makes decent pedals with reflectors then I'll buy 'em.

I'm not being hypocritical because I condem anti-social and dangerous cycling and those who reinforce anti-cycling prejudice but my own riding is exemplary in every respect. If all cyclists had my attitude then you'd never hear anyone complaining about cyclists riding on the pavement, jumping red lights, endangering pedestrians, riding without lights, going up one-way streets the wrong way &c. &c. because I don't do any of those things.

I wasn't accusing you personally- I was referring to you as in the readership of the forum.

If you criticise because they are breaking the law-then I would say its hypocritical. If you criticize because its dangerous- then that is different- although it may be that the RLJ's/ Pavement crew(s) would say its dangerous to ride without reflectors


Have you found the law re lighting? I've loked but can't find anything. I'm curious because until very recently it wasn't possible to get batteries with a 10 hour run time- and mot rechargeable lighting sets last about 2-4 hours only

Parkey

"Other people are technically breaking the law because they have no reflectors on their pedals, therefore I can break whatever law I like, including the law about this red light here. Pip pi..." *crunch*

Indeed there are laws and there are consequences, but there are also cultural factors.

By cultural factors I mean that people will often think it's okay to do something, even if it's against the law, if "everybody else does it". A lot of cyclists see other cyclists flouting the law - pavement cycling, RLJ, etc - and decide that therefore doing so is acceptable behaviour. Rationalisation, "it's safer, I'm not doing any harm... etc" comes later.

Very very few cars jump red lights in the way quite a large proportion of cyclists do. This isn't because there are policemen or cameras watching at every set of lights, it's because it's culturally unacceptable to do so. I believe that cyclists should take the same attitude.

(As an aside, I hear that apparently the police have said they will be onto all of the people who've used clipless pedals after dark as soon as they've finished getting everyone who's ever recorded music off the radio.)

iainment

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Ah but you did post to incite people to violence recently, so aren't you in fact being hypocritical as well.

dang65

dondare wrote:

It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

I guess it could easily be argued that the components are designed for track racing bicycles and not for road use?

spen666

iainment wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Ah but you did post to incite people to violence recently, so aren't you in fact being hypocritical as well.

Is that still going over your head?

spen666

dondare wrote:

...It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

There are many objects - eg knives with blades greater than 3" long that are illegal to have or use in public ( without good cause etc). It is perfectly proper and lawful to manufacture and sell such items

Its the use, not possession that is illegal- similar situation here re bike components

dondare

iainment wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Ah but you did post to incite people to violence recently, so aren't you in fact being hypocritical as well.

When did I incite people to violence?

iainment

spen666 wrote:

iainment wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Ah but you did post to incite people to violence recently, so aren't you in fact being hypocritical as well.

Is that still going over your head?

Yopu mean, gasp, you weren't being serious? But who'd know in your twisted world of law and accountancy.

The trouble with the written word is that it doesn't always convey the intended nuance does it.

iainment

dondare wrote:

iainment wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

Clipless pedals are too good to be rejected because of an old law. The problem is that it's a good law, pedal reflectors are a real life saver. I'd much rather see clipless pedals with reflectors being made available, and the law enforced, than the law being forgotten or changed.
It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

If you ride a bike with clipless pedals that do not have reflectors on - are you not being hypocritical in criticising those who break other laws - eg the RLJ/ pavement cycling crew(s)

Ah but you did post to incite people to violence recently, so aren't you in fact being hypocritical as well.

When did I incite people to violence?

You didn't, Spen did.

dondare

Parkey wrote:

"Other people are technically breaking the law because they have no reflectors on their pedals, therefore I can break whatever law I like, including the law about this red light here. Pip pi..." *crunch*

Indeed there are laws and there are consequences, but there are also cultural factors.

By cultural factors I mean that people will often think it's okay to do something, even if it's against the law, if "everybody else does it". A lot of cyclists see other cyclists flouting the law - pavement cycling, RLJ, etc - and decide that therefore doing so is acceptable behaviour. Rationalisation, "it's safer, I'm not doing any harm... etc" comes later.

Very very few cars jump red lights in the way quite a large proportion of cyclists do. This isn't because there are policemen or cameras watching at every set of lights, it's because it's culturally unacceptable to do so. I believe that cyclists should take the same attitude.

(As an aside, I hear that apparently the police have said they will be onto all of the people who've used clipless pedals after dark as soon as they've finished getting everyone who's ever recorded music off the radio.)

Actually, in terms of absolute numbers far more motorists jump the lights than cyclists. It's one of those things that you describe, acceptable because everyone does it.

For instance:
Red means stop and wait and continue waiting entirely behind the white line.
Amber means STOP.
Red means STOP even if it's only been red a few seconds and the car ahead just went through.
Green means that you can go but ONLY when it's safe to proceed.

dondare

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

...It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

There are many objects - eg knives with blades greater than 3" long that are illegal to have or use in public ( without good cause etc). It is perfectly proper and lawful to manufacture and sell such items

Its the use, not possession that is illegal- similar situation here re bike components

If the law is not enforced at manufacturer and supplier level, then it will either have to be ignored or enforced at cyclist level.

Underscore

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

According to the DfT:

Obligatory Lighting and Reflectors
3. Any cycle which is used during the hours of darkness or during periods of poor visibility MUST be fitted with the following:
* white front light
* red rear light
* red rear reflector
* amber/yellow pedal reflectors - front and rear on each pedal.
[...]
5. If either of the lights is capable of emitting a steady light, then it must conform to BS 6102-3 and be marked accordingly, even if used in flashing mode.

According to http://www.leedscyclists.org.uk/Legal/Legal.htm:

The British Standard for front lamps includes a requirement that they be capable of running for 10 hours on a set of batteries

Unfortunately, it cost £80 to purchase a copy of BS6102-3 so I've been unable to confirm this point.

_

spen666

dondare wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

...It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

There are many objects - eg knives with blades greater than 3" long that are illegal to have or use in public ( without good cause etc). It is perfectly proper and lawful to manufacture and sell such items

Its the use, not possession that is illegal- similar situation here re bike components

If the law is not enforced at manufacturer and supplier level, then it will either have to be ignored or enforced at cyclist level.

Absolute nonsense


so you want to ban every firm from making knives then? people can use them to cut meat etc


Its not possession that is unlawful per se- it is the use of the item

Clipless pedals are lawful to use without reflectors on the track- so why can they not be made?

What about guns - farmers etc can use them lawfully

spen666

Underscore wrote:

....According to http://www.leedscyclists.org.uk/Legal/Legal.htm:

The British Standard for front lamps includes a requirement that they be capable of running for 10 hours on a set of batteries

Unfortunately, it cost £80 to purchase a copy of BS6102-3 so I've been unable to confirm this point.

_

I also can't find that BS anywhere

Parkey

dondare wrote:

Actually, in terms of absolute numbers far more motorists jump the lights than cyclists. It's one of those things that you describe, acceptable because everyone does it.

Yeah but when there are about ten times more cars using the roads than bicycles at any moment in time I don't think absolute numbers can tell us that much.

I agree that some might run them after they've just changed and some might roll forward across the line in that pathetic way that makes no difference to when they'll change. I can't remember the last time that I saw even the worst of motorists just ignore a light in the way some cyclists do.

spen666

Underscore wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

[....

Battery life; must be 10 hours I believe, perhaps I'm wrong. I'm not going to check up that now.

I'd be interested to know more about that point

According to the DfT:

Obligatory Lighting and Reflectors
3. Any cycle which is used during the hours of darkness or during periods of poor visibility MUST be fitted with the following:
* white front light
* red rear light
* red rear reflector
* amber/yellow pedal reflectors - front and rear on each pedal.
[...]
5. If either of the lights is capable of emitting a steady light, then it must conform to BS 6102-3 and be marked accordingly, even if used in flashing mode.

According to http://www.leedscyclists.org.uk/Legal/Legal.htm:

The British Standard for front lamps includes a requirement that they be capable of running for 10 hours on a set of batteries

Unfortunately, it cost £80 to purchase a copy of BS6102-3 so I've been unable to confirm this point.

_

That quote from Leeds Cyclists is actually wrong as the lights must comply with BS6102-3 OR an equivalent EC standard


I suspect the EC standard doesn't require the 10 hour time limit. The BS came out in 1985- I bet there were no lights that matched this then for cycles


That Leeds website also state

...However, British Standards also apply to bicycle lights, although the most recent edition of the relevant standard (BS 6102-3) has not yet been incorporated into the law. When it is, the British Standards will also apply...

So from that it appears that BS6102-3 may not apply at present

dondare

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

spen666 wrote:

dondare wrote:

...It would be unthinkable for a car to be marketed that didn't meet the legal requirements for lights and reflectors, why are the manufacturers of cycling components allowed to get away with it?

There are many objects - eg knives with blades greater than 3" long that are illegal to have or use in public ( without good cause etc). It is perfectly proper and lawful to manufacture and sell such items

Its the use, not possession that is illegal- similar situation here re bike components

If the law is not enforced at manufacturer and supplier level, then it will either have to be ignored or enforced at cyclist level.

Absolute nonsense


so you want to ban every firm from making knives then? people can use them to cut meat etc


Its not possession that is unlawful per se- it is the use of the item

Clipless pedals are lawful to use without reflectors on the track- so why can they not be made?

What about guns - farmers etc can use them lawfully

I'm happy about guns, knives and clipless pedals being freely available. My point is that unless pressure is put on suppliers to market a pedal that meets all the legal requirements then the law must be ignored or changed or cyclists must be prosecuted. But pedal reflectors are good so the law makes perfect sense as it is and it is not in the interests of cyclists to be prosecuted.

cupofteacp

I think an interesting point about the law is that there are so many it’s difficult to obey all of them.

I don’t agree with full RLJing and on most bike thread’s it demonised, I found it interesting that one of the earlier posts here regarded speeding and that the consequences would be 3 point and fine, when in reality the consequences could result in you killing people. Why do people accept any form of speeding, it not safe under any circumstance. Why don’t the motoring public demonise speeding in the same way we do RLJing?

The police try to enforce the law and due to their limited number and the minimal deterrents this is impossible. All that can be achieved is to “steer” society in a direction. What you’ll notice is that one particular law is highlighted and the public focused on it. One weeks its gun crime, the next it’s mobile phone use in cars, the next its knife crime, and the next it’s drink drive.

I know it’s easy to blame the press but where do they get most of their stories? It always appears that it’s some government figures.

Parkey

cupofteacp wrote:

Why do people accept any form of speeding, it not safe under any circumstance. Why don’t the motoring public demonise speeding in the same way we do RLJing?

A lot of motorists do demonise it, but to a large proportion of motorists they go ahead and do it for exactly the same reasons some cyclists think RLJ is acceptable. "Everyone else is doing it, it's safer*, it's not hurting anyone, etc etc"

*(I've actually heard someone use this argument. Something about being less likely to be distracted from the road)

downfader

Hi there, I hope you dont mind me joining in (I just found this place from another website)

My understanding of the law is that it is generally common sense that has been made compulsary to either protect one party or another. In an ideal world we wouldnt need them but laws are helpful

Red light jumping is an issue in m,y home town of southampton. There are a few of us that dont do it and I cant beleive the many near misses I have seen when one party jumps the lights and the other legally driving through is going too fast. I would not want to be in the situation.

With lights I understand the BS standards and why we have them but often wonder why we've just left it as it is now that battery times and LED brighness has improved tenfold (well it seems that way, lol). Most of the BS lights I see are useless in the dark whe there is a lot of traffic, often with many motorists using fog lights unnecessarily.

Anyway, thats my opinion. Nice forum you have here!

dondare

Unnecessary use of fog lamps is illegal.

downfader

dondare wrote:

Unnecessary use of fog lamps is illegal.

It is also blinding. :oops: