Should I be anoyed?

DevUK

On the way to lunch today I spotted a police cyclist touring the campus (I work at a large university) and to my suprise watched him hop up onto the pavement to avoid a road blockage and cycle accross a pedestrianised area where he stopped for a few mins. He then cycled back through the same area and back onto the road and pedaled off on his merry way.

I can't help but think if the roles were reversed I'd of been receiving a good ticking off...

Anyway, I caught him on camera for fun

jrduquemin

Typical of coppers: one rule for us, one rule for them.....

Gussio

Nice photo, but hardly a "Rodney King" incident

number9

The pedestrians look terrified.

Bikerbaboon

send it to a local rag and to your local police chief.

"dont get mad get even "

biondino

GO WARWICK! MENS AGITAT MOLEM!! THE MIND AGITATES THE MOLE!!!

DevUK

biondino wrote:

GO WARWICK! MENS AGITAT MOLEM!! THE MIND AGITATES THE MOLE!!!

Hey, I just work here... I don't speak the lingo

whome

Police cyclists do seem to do this a lot. A case of do as I say not as I do? Or perhaps in the same situation they would not have a problem with you doing the same. My understanding was the Police generally don't bother.

downfader

DevUK wrote:

On the way to lunch today I spotted a police cyclist touring the campus (I work at a large university) and to my suprise watched him hop up onto the pavement to avoid a road blockage and cycle accross a pedestrianised area where he stopped for a few mins. He then cycled back through the same area and back onto the road and pedaled off on his merry way.

I can't help but think if the roles were reversed I'd of been receiving a good ticking off...

Anyway, I caught him on camera for fun

We have the same problem here. Apparently they have been stopping cyclings on the pavements in the city center high street, and then getting on their own bike and cycling off. I myself have seen them cycling on the pavement many times, sadly its the PCSO's who do it more and let the side down.

I then read a series of letters in the local paper about ths very issue, people were outraged As I personally understand it, a policeman IS allowed to cycle on a pavement, but ONLY in pursuit and with his Blues N Twos on. I also read a folllow up letter that said the local high street was classed as a Bridleway and cycling allowed. :? I have yet to confirm that.

If true I shall be very angry though. When I was 18 I was about 12 foot from the road, and near a drop curb. So it being about 6.30-7am I thought "I'll just scooter it over and rejoin the road". No sooner had I pushed it 6 foot a woman bobby appeared from behind a corner and told me "get off that cycle! NOW!"

I did, but made the mistake of saying. "I was only rejoining the road - theres no one here"

"Do you want to go down the bloody station?!" :shock: Some of them dont help themselves do they. :roll:

DevUK

I have to say, the road is completely blocked as the traffic speed calming type massive hump thing is being re-layed. That being said, this chap didn't go around the blockage, he cycled over to a litter bin and stayed put for a few minutes and returned the way he came.

I have to admit I'm not overly bothered that he did this, I just thought, for the distance he should really have set the example and pushed his bike. At the end of the day we're all human and make "mistakes".

At first I was anoyed, then I was more interested in sneaking a photo

Mike Healey

I assume he was on what is known, I believe, as patrol - round his patch. Seems to me to be reasonable that he should, on occasion, ride on pavements, pedestrian areas and anywhere else which might be relevant to his/her job.

Me, I'd prefer that he was able to pedal straight off should a crime be reported and not faff about having to get on his bike first.

Not to mention covering a greater are than he could on foot, even if the area being patrolled was reserved for pedestrians

Not knowing why he rode where he did, I'm not qualified to criticise his actions, as long as he put no-one in danger while doing it.

Mike Healey

I assume he was on what is known, I believe, as patrol - round his patch. Seems to me to be reasonable that he should, on occasion, ride on pavements, pedestrian areas and anywhere else which might be relevant to his/her job.

Me, I'd prefer that he was able to pedal straight off should a crime be reported and not faff about having to get on his bike first.

Not to mention covering a greater are than he could on foot, even if the area being patrolled was reserved for pedestrians

Not knowing why he rode where he did, I'm not qualified to criticise his actions, as long as he put no-one in danger while doing it.

attica

In my time at that Warwick - including a year living about 100 yards from where the photo was taken, I never once saw a bobby.
Margaret Thatcher's favourite university dontcha know!

I reckon he's only there to impress the Labour party top brass who are there this week.

dazzawazza

If riding on the pavement allows them to do their job more efficiently then I have no problem with it.
I'm sure it's less dangerous than some of the idiotic moves I've seen a patrol car make.
More police on bikes, I say.

DevUK

In hind sight, I can see what you mean. You would hope that they have had some level of training to cope with cycling through pedestrian areas whilst chasing suspects etc. I can see the point about covering a larger area than a foot powered bobby too.

Anyhow, I guess it's nice to actually see a police presence for once, even if there are no students here at the moment...

DavidTQ

Gussio wrote:

Nice photo, but hardly a "Rodney King" incident

Heres the cyclist version of the Rodney King video :-

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4b_1217277214

Found it on another forum.

karl j

dazzawazza wrote:

If riding on the pavement allows them to do their job more efficiently then I have no problem with it....

wot he said

Same as ambulances shooting red lights, imo

DavidTQ

karl j wrote:

dazzawazza wrote:

If riding on the pavement allows them to do their job more efficiently then I have no problem with it....

wot he said

Same as ambulances shooting red lights, imo

I disagree, its not the same - ambulances can go through red lights in an emergency, if the police officer was going to an emergency Id have no problems with him riding on the pavement, for general patrol though the law should be obeyed.

Police officers CAN be prosecuted for driving offences if they break the law without justification, routine patrol DOES NOT give a police officer carte blanche to ignore the law.

tuxpoo

DavidTQ wrote:

Gussio wrote:

Nice photo, but hardly a "Rodney King" incident

Heres the cyclist version of the Rodney King video :-

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4b_1217277214

Found it on another forum.

GASP!

DavidTQ

tuxpoo wrote:

DavidTQ wrote:

Gussio wrote:

Nice photo, but hardly a "Rodney King" incident

Heres the cyclist version of the Rodney King video :-

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4b_1217277214

Found it on another forum.

GASP!

Before the video got out the police officers version was :-

In court papers, Pogan claimed that he wanted to issue Long a summons for failing to keep right, and then ordered Long to stop. The cop accused Long of purposely swerving his bicycle to block traffic and then using it as a weapon to run down the officer, knocking him off his feet and causing a "laceration" on his forearm.

The cyclist was charged with attempted assault in the third degree, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct

Gussio

DavidTQ wrote:

tuxpoo wrote:

DavidTQ wrote:

Gussio wrote:

Nice photo, but hardly a "Rodney King" incident

Heres the cyclist version of the Rodney King video :-

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4b_1217277214

Found it on another forum.

GASP!

Before the video got out the police officers version was :-

In court papers, Pogan claimed that he wanted to issue Long a summons for failing to keep right, and then ordered Long to stop. The cop accused Long of purposely swerving his bicycle to block traffic and then using it as a weapon to run down the officer, knocking him off his feet and causing a "laceration" on his forearm.

The cyclist was charged with attempted assault in the third degree, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct

If I was a rapper, I would rap about this shiznit.

karl j

DavidTQ wrote:

karl j wrote:

dazzawazza wrote:

If riding on the pavement allows them to do their job more efficiently then I have no problem with it....

wot he said

Same as ambulances shooting red lights, imo

I disagree, its not the same - ambulances can go through red lights in an emergency, if the police officer was going to an emergency Id have no problems with him riding on the pavement, for general patrol though the law should be obeyed.

Police officers CAN be prosecuted for driving offences if they break the law without justification, routine patrol DOES NOT give a police officer carte blanche to ignore the law.

Ok, just for you. Same as ambulances shooting red lights in an emergency, imo.

Feel better now ?

DavidTQ

karl j wrote:

DavidTQ wrote:

karl j wrote:

dazzawazza wrote:

If riding on the pavement allows them to do their job more efficiently then I have no problem with it....

wot he said

Same as ambulances shooting red lights, imo

I disagree, its not the same - ambulances can go through red lights in an emergency, if the police officer was going to an emergency Id have no problems with him riding on the pavement, for general patrol though the law should be obeyed.

Police officers CAN be prosecuted for driving offences if they break the law without justification, routine patrol DOES NOT give a police officer carte blanche to ignore the law.

Ok, just for you. Same as ambulances shooting red lights in an emergency, imo.

Feel better now ?

Yeah definetely . I disagree with you still

I dont believe that a copper off for a wonder around on his bike has the same reasonable cause to break laws as they do on an emergency response. IF the police officer was on an emergency response Id be all for him riding on the pavement to get there quicker. But whilst on routine patrol theres no need or justification for what he did. The law still applies to the officer. The public gained nothing from his illegal actions.

karl j

Fair play to you, each to their own opinions and all that.

I hadn't (well not deliberately anyway) meant to suggest non-emergency vehicles should shoot red at will. Re. the original topic, as far as i am concerned the relevant bit for me was the post saying "allows them to do their job more efficiently" . If, and ok yes that is IF, a patrol needs to go up, say, the pedestrianised high street as part of a regular patrol to deter / catch shoplifters / drunk chavs etc and they happen to be cycling police then so be it, as far as i am concerned i have no problem them riding up there.

.... :idea: ..... I think we are possibly saying the same thing but from different ends so let's call it a day on that, eh

DavidTQ

karl j wrote:

Fair play to you, each to their own opinions and all that.

.... :idea: ..... I think we are possibly saying the same thing but from different ends so let's call it a day on that, eh

Quite possibly just drawing the line in a slightly different place, of course where the line is drawn is something police always have to take into account when using their broad ranging powers, they have to decide before taking an action if it would stand up in court.

A by the letter reading of many police powers could see a VERY nasty police state with existing police powers, if it werent for the checks and balances of having to be able to justify actions in court, and where the line gets drawn for appropriate police behaviour and actions can vary from day to day and court to court, and from opinion to opinion.