The law
Comments
-
iainment wrote:So philosophical questions about the law come down to whether or not reflectors on bikes make the rider lawful or an outlaw.
God bless this site it's priceless.
I raised the matter of the laws regarding reflectors and lights as being the ones which most cylists would find it hardest to comply with, even if they wanted to.This post contains traces of nuts.0 -
dondare wrote:Always Tyred wrote:It must be possible to arrive at a determination of whether it is, in fact, illegal to ride a bike without a bell and/or reflectors.
Regarding changes in the law - that would be trivial, but might require us all to have velcro reflectors around our ankes. Style disaster.
I always found it rather easier to edit someone's publications and presentations than to compose something myself. Perhaps its the same with law.
Bell not required by law.
Pedal reflectors are required by law. Rear reflector also required by law. Reflectors have to conform to British Standard.
Other reflectors not required by law.
If the law was changed so that we could use clipless pedals but must have something similar to pedal reflectors, such as reflective patches on the backs of the shoes or reflective bicycle clips, then these would have to meet a standard as well, but undoubtedly many would not.
I don't believe you. You aren't a lawyer.0 -
dondare wrote:don_don wrote:Actually I only say that the law should be obeyed to distinguish it from the Highway Code, which IMAO should be ignored.
May I ask why? I understand the difference between the two, but the Highway Code contains an awful lot of advice. Are you referring to just the cycling bits that have been changed recently?
Too many people make no distinction between the HC and the law, and therefore condemn cyclists who fail to follow the HC's instructions about helmets and cycle-lanes, for instance.
The HC tells cyclists to wear helmets. Helmets have not been proved to be genuinely useful, let alone necessary.
The HC still maintains that cycle-lanes can make your journey safer. Cycle-lanes are far more likely to make your journey less safe; and if the DSA aren't prepared to admit this then they should simply point out that cycle-lane use is not a legal requirement and leave it at that.
You only dislike helmets becuase that don't make any to fit a frustoconical head.
(avatar)0 -
brookter wrote:Vroomfondel wrote:
If a light is red and there is not a car to be seen around, im not going to sit there like a lemon waiting for it to change when it is perfectly safe to do so when its still on red!!!
I can foresee a little chat with supervision in your future...
To be serious for a second, if you really are a PCSO, then you need to reconsider your attitudes. There are enough people out to criticise PCSOs, without you giving them an open goal. The vast majority of PCSOs do a brilliant job and they deserve respect. Jumping red lights in uniform because you can't be bothered to wait a few seconds isn't professional and it does your colleagues no favours. Don't do it, please.
David
'Ello Dave, when I said i skip red lights when its safe to do so, i was talking about when im off duty, quite obviously ... so dont be telling supervision
im a model of abiding the highway code when cycling on roads in uniform!!! fear not Dave. 0 -
Always Tyred wrote:dondare wrote:don_don wrote:Actually I only say that the law should be obeyed to distinguish it from the Highway Code, which IMAO should be ignored.
May I ask why? I understand the difference between the two, but the Highway Code contains an awful lot of advice. Are you referring to just the cycling bits that have been changed recently?
Too many people make no distinction between the HC and the law, and therefore condemn cyclists who fail to follow the HC's instructions about helmets and cycle-lanes, for instance.
The HC tells cyclists to wear helmets. Helmets have not been proved to be genuinely useful, let alone necessary.
The HC still maintains that cycle-lanes can make your journey safer. Cycle-lanes are far more likely to make your journey less safe; and if the DSA aren't prepared to admit this then they should simply point out that cycle-lane use is not a legal requirement and leave it at that.
You only dislike helmets becuase that don't make any to fit a frustoconical head.
(avatar)
That is Dilbert in my avatar, not me. There is a certain resemblance but....
Do you really want me to list all the reasons why I dislike helmets?This post contains traces of nuts.0 -
Oh dear it's turning into a helmet thread - the bike forum equivalent of "That's what Hitler was trying to do..."
On the lamp battery life thing, when BS6102 was written the lights available at the time were Ever Readies with feeble bulbs powered by hulking great D cells. Not hard to get 10 hours life out of that combination, as long as you didn't care about actually seeing where you were going.
It really looked like the only purpose of the regs was to protect Ever Ready's bike light business by keeping out foreign competition. Didn't work, of , course. Blasted Johnny Foreigner got the EC to pass that cursed 'equivalent' rule.
If you did want to see where you were going you fitted a halogen bulb and used NiCads or alkalines, improving things from a murky brown puddle of light to a vague white one.John Stevenson0 -
Vroomfondel wrote:brookter wrote:Vroomfondel wrote:
If a light is red and there is not a car to be seen around, im not going to sit there like a lemon waiting for it to change when it is perfectly safe to do so when its still on red!!!
I can foresee a little chat with supervision in your future...
To be serious for a second, if you really are a PCSO, then you need to reconsider your attitudes. There are enough people out to criticise PCSOs, without you giving them an open goal. The vast majority of PCSOs do a brilliant job and they deserve respect. Jumping red lights in uniform because you can't be bothered to wait a few seconds isn't professional and it does your colleagues no favours. Don't do it, please.
David
'Ello Dave, when I said i skip red lights when its safe to do so, i was talking about when im off duty, quite obviously ... so dont be telling supervision im a model of abiding the highway code when cycling on roads in uniform!!! fear not Dave.
Vroom.....Surely you can't be a model citizen, obey the highway code etc if you are a PCSO patroling on a bike. I know, my team and I can't do our job if we abide by all the laws.....My views have been made clear in previous posts...
I can afford to talk softly!....................I carry a big stick!0 -
dondare wrote:Always Tyred wrote:dondare wrote:don_don wrote:Actually I only say that the law should be obeyed to distinguish it from the Highway Code, which IMAO should be ignored.
May I ask why? I understand the difference between the two, but the Highway Code contains an awful lot of advice. Are you referring to just the cycling bits that have been changed recently?
Too many people make no distinction between the HC and the law, and therefore condemn cyclists who fail to follow the HC's instructions about helmets and cycle-lanes, for instance.
The HC tells cyclists to wear helmets. Helmets have not been proved to be genuinely useful, let alone necessary.
The HC still maintains that cycle-lanes can make your journey safer. Cycle-lanes are far more likely to make your journey less safe; and if the DSA aren't prepared to admit this then they should simply point out that cycle-lane use is not a legal requirement and leave it at that.
You only dislike helmets becuase that don't make any to fit a frustoconical head.
(avatar)
That is Dilbert in my avatar, not me. There is a certain resemblance but....
Do you really want me to list all the reasons why I dislike helmets?
Sweaty?
Hat hair?
The smell? Boy does mine pong this time of year.
They won't let you into a bank wearing one?
The fact that they aren't suitable for rock climbing?0 -
I've just taken a look at the highway code as I was surprised at the comments about pedal reflectors60
At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.
[Law RVLR regs 13, 18 & 24)]
I have always read this as "At night the following all applies..." Does any one know where the appropriate regulations can be found or can post the actual relevant wording because this is ambiguousFlashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.
implies that you are recommended to use a steady front lamp if there is no street lighting regardless of time of day.
Steve CSteve C0 -
Found the regulations. They stateExemptions—General
4.— ...
(3) Nothing in these Regulations shall require any lamp or reflector to be fitted between sunrise and sunset to-
...
(c) a pedal cycle,
...
So the pedal reflector rule only applies if you ride the bike between sunset and sunrise.
Steve CSteve C0 -
sc999cs wrote:Found the regulations. They stateExemptions—General
4.— ...
(3) Nothing in these Regulations shall require any lamp or reflector to be fitted between sunrise and sunset to-
...
(c) a pedal cycle,
...
So the pedal reflector rule only applies if you ride the bike between sunset and sunrise.
Steve C
I don't believe you - you aren't a lawyer.
0
