Drink cycling

greg66_tri_v2.0

Ok, not going to read that thread in detail, as it gets pretty excitable pretty fast.

But the difference on the face of it is this: you can't do something on your bike and get points endorsed on your driving licence (AFAIK). That was Spen's point.

OTOH, you can be convicted of any offence and on top of any other punishment, be disqualified (or prevented from getting a licence). So (off the top of my head) if you drive a car to a burglary, or are the getaway man for the armed robbers, you might end up disqualified on top of anything else. There's no power I can see under s 146 to issue points though; it's all or nothing.

Make sense?

greg66_tri_v2.0

Porgy wrote:

are they different - i must admit I thought they'd be the same - I don;t drive - so don;t know.

but wouldn't there be a common principle under these - that somehting you do on your bike cannot be punished by removing or endorsing your driving license.

Just a question.

Ok - points endorsed on a licence. You get points for motoring offences. Usually come in threes, sometimes in sixes, sometimes in twelves (eg driving over a ton). The police can issue these at the roadside for some things; a Court can also impose them on a conviction/guilty plea. Accumulate 12 in a three (?) year period and you lose your licence for a period of time.

Points have a life - three years (I think) for "totting up" purposes, and then they stay on for an extra year but don't count to totting up. Never had any, so not 100% sure.

Disqualification is a straight "hand over your licence now" thing, irrespective of how clean or endorsed it is. Disqualification under s 146 follows a conviction, and is part of the court's sentencing powers. The police can't disqualify you from driving under 146.

You'd think that the punishment might have something to do with the crime, yes. And I'd guess in 99% of cycling offence convictions there'd be no reason to consider a driving disqualification. But the power's there.

Porgy

OK - so that's about as clear as it will ever be - must remember to bookmark this thread for next time it comes round. 8)

Fireblade96

I quite regularly have a few pints and then cycle home. Fortunately most of my route is off main roads and very quiet. On the odd occasion that I've cycled through Reading town centre on my way back from the pub on a Friday evening, the Police have plenty of other things to worry about :shock:

Not that I would ever recommend drinking to excess and then riding. I've only ever done this twice (I have excuses...)
First time, I was fine so long as I kept my speed up. When I slowed down I lost directional control and had to stop, re-align the bike with the road, and re-start.
Second time I knew I'd had far too much. I was going to walk, but by the time I had the bike unlocked instinct took over. I got on one side, lost my balance and fell over on the other side, still holding the bars so fortunately no wrist damage :-) I had a cracking bruise on my @rse the next morning though

Porgy

I do believe it's also true to say that you cannot be breathalised on a bike - not in England anyway.

I had a friend, dead now unfortunately, a French bloke living in London who used to drink and cycle regularly. He told me about the time - I think around 8/9 years ago now when he was stopped, breathalysed and held in a cell overnight. He had no idea that the police were exceeding their powers - though I'm sure they could have found a different way of holding him overnight. They released him without charge in the morning.

So it shows you - know your rights. Or something


Has anyone else apart from me ever fallen asleep on their bike? - I did coming back from a party at 5 am going through Brixton. I wasn't asleep for long though, thankfully.

W1

Porgy wrote:

I do believe it's also true to say that you cannot be breathalised on a bike - not in England anyway.

I had a friend, dead now unfortunately, a French bloke living in London who used to drink and cycle regularly. He told me about the time - I think around 8/9 years ago now when he was stopped, breathalysed and held in a cell overnight. He had no idea that the police were exceeding their powers - though I'm sure they could have found a different way of holding him overnight. They released him without charge in the morning.

So it shows you - know your rights. Or something


Has anyone else apart from me ever fallen asleep on their bike? - I did coming back from a party at 5 am going through Brixton. I wasn't asleep for long though, thankfully.

They can't compel you to take a breath test in the same way they can't compel you to take one for being drunk and disorderly - there's no prescribed limit and it's a subjective test of whether you are drunk or not under the law in the officer's opinion.

As Greg says - endorsable offence = you can have points put on your driving licence (doesn't apply for cycling offences). Enough points = ban. For cycling offences you can be disqualified - this doesn't involve points at all and there isn't an endorsable offence.

MadammeMarie

Spiffington wrote:

Is it acceptable and/or legal to cycle after drinking, up to a point beyond the limit for driving?

Cycling back from t' pub last night, having consumed a mere 2 pints over the course of the evening and feeling no effects*, I realised that it was still enough that I would never risk driving. Should I have been just as cautious about cycling and walked home instead?

* of course, just because I didn't notice any effects doesn't mean there weren't any

I once had one glass of white wine - of the big-ish type! - and then cycled the 7.5 miles home, through London in the evening. Though I didn't crash into anything, it was an experience I do not wish to repeat. By the time I got home I felt extremely tired and thirsty and my head was spinning a bit. Now I don't touch a drop if I'm on the bike. It's just not worth it.

the_hundredth_idiot

W1 wrote:

They can't compel you to take a breath test in the same way they can't compel you to take one for being drunk and disorderly - there's no prescribed limit and it's a subjective test of whether you are drunk or not under the law in the officer's opinion.

Presumably the practical difficulty with this would be proving in court that you were incapable through drink? Though maybe easier these days as the police officer could get out his mobile and take a quick video clip.

Porgy

W1 wrote:

As Greg says - endorsable offence = you can have points put on your driving licence (doesn't apply for cycling offences). Enough points = ban. For cycling offences you can be disqualified - this doesn't involve points at all and there isn't an endorsable offence.

Yes - I understood it when Greg said it.

jonginge

MadammeMarie wrote:

Spiffington wrote:

Is it acceptable and/or legal to cycle after drinking, up to a point beyond the limit for driving?

Cycling back from t' pub last night, having consumed a mere 2 pints over the course of the evening and feeling no effects*, I realised that it was still enough that I would never risk driving. Should I have been just as cautious about cycling and walked home instead?

* of course, just because I didn't notice any effects doesn't mean there weren't any

I once had one glass of white wine - of the big-ish type! - and then cycled the 7.5 miles home, through London in the evening. Though I didn't crash into anything, it was an experience I do not wish to repeat. By the time I got home I felt extremely tired and thirsty and my head was spinning a bit. Now I don't touch a drop if I'm on the bike. It's just not worth it.

That's where you went wrong, you see. It should have been red.


This is a joke, mkay

W1

The Hundredth Idiot wrote:

W1 wrote:

They can't compel you to take a breath test in the same way they can't compel you to take one for being drunk and disorderly - there's no prescribed limit and it's a subjective test of whether you are drunk or not under the law in the officer's opinion.

Presumably the practical difficulty with this would be proving in court that you were incapable through drink? Though maybe easier these days as the police officer could get out his mobile and take a quick video clip.

Indeed - although of course many police cars are video equipped. There is substantial weight in court to a policeman's opinion though - if he says you were drunk, it's likely that the beak will take his word for it. Even if you are not compelled to take a breath test it could be that an adverse inference might be drawn by any refusal to.

andyb78

Greg66 wrote:

andyb78 wrote:

simonwbooth wrote:

I've had a couple of crashes now after having a couple and although both times I maintain that it wasn't my fault 1st a car clipped me whilst coming from behind me and the second a car pulled out in front of me and although I didn't hit him a braked swerved and fell of both time knacking my elbow.

The wife's not best pleased and doesn't want me to do it anymore, it has also lead me to consider that although possible not my fault, would I have been more alert and able to avoid both situations if I hadn't had a drink?

I also understand that if you are arrested for drink cycling and you have a driving license you loose your license even though you weren't in a car.

Re the last bit - utter tosh. Where on Earth did you dig that up from? :roll:

You might, but wouldn't necessarily, lose your licence if you were convicted of any offence, including (eg) something related to cycling whilst drunk: section 146(1) of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000

146 Driving disqualification for any offence

(1) The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, for holding or obtaining a driving licence.

Fair point G66, forgot about that one, technically possible but wildly implausible surely... I was looking at it from acriminal offence POV rather than sanctions following other convictions. I'd be interested to see any case law on it...

Wildboar

Well i don't do it on a regular basis but have cycled the 12 miles home whilst well and truly under the influence and tbh I can't see the problem as my entire route is on back roads which are quiet enough during the day let alone at night, and so the only person I am likely to hurt is me and that's a risk I am willing to take.. Wouldn't normally even have a single pint if I was driving though..

roger_merriman

I hardly drink so never a issue to be honest.

It is wrong. but i'd be more likely to bend the rules going though bushy Park. than down hampton Court drag strip.

tomb353

i spend half the night in a cell a year or so back after falling off (clipped in) outside a police station after a lot of pints....tried to cycle away after they yelled at me, stopped by cop car around the corner and handcuffed in back of car :-( Not proud of it, released with a caution at around 3am and allowed to cycle home. These days I limit myself to 6 pints, I suspect that the police attitude is that unless you are so arseholed that you are visibly all over the shop or falling off they are not interested. If I'd not been dumm enough (and drunk enough) to try and get away I don't think they would have arrested me, maybe just made me lock it up and walk home. Unless you have been involved in an RTA it would be very unlikely to be seen as in the public interest to prosecute. I still would have been substantially over the drink drive limit by the time they let me go, but I could at least hold a conversation by then which is what they wanted to see.

I wouldn't defend drink cycling as such, but within reason it is something you do at your own risk and you make your own choices.

Bugly

If you drink (oops :oops: ) and drive your an idiot according to ads run here, in my opinion if you drink (or do drugs) and cycle you are a moron - you place yourself at risk and its pure simple stupidity. Oh yeah its also illegal and treated as DUI.

lost_in_thought

Bugly wrote:

If you dring and drive your an idiot according to ads run here, in my opinion if you drink (or do drugs) and cycle you are a moron - you place yourself at risk and its pure simple stupidity. Oh yeah its also illegal and treated as DUI.

Really? I've cycled past the police and indeed the police college in Goulburn after a few too many several times, and nobody has ever cared...

Bugly

Really! the traffic laws also preclude you being in control of a horse, a bicylce a car or any other mode of transport deemed a vehicle, whilst under the influence - whether the police pull you up or not - well the way the law is applied is at there disgression to a degree.

"INTOXICATING LIQUOR AND OTHER DRUGS
It is both dangerous and against the law to ride a bicycle ‘under
the influence’ (DUI) of intoxicating liquor or a drug. Upon
conviction for this offence you will be liable to a fine and will
incur a criminal record. You will also incur six demerit points
against your driver's licence or learner’s permit.
You may be convicted of DUI if you are so affected by any amount
of intoxicating liquor or a drug that you are incapable of
exercising effective control of your bicycle.
You can be fined for driving under the influence regardless of
whether you are over or under the 0.05 blood alcohol
concentration level.""

Dont know if this applys in the UK but here in Oz you can (and people) do lose their license for CUI>

Bugly

re horses

"Horse riders
Under the Australian Road Rules, a horse is considered a vehicle
and therefore is permitted to be ridden on the road. " DUI covers being in control of any vehicle (horse, cycle, car, etc).

spen666

Porgy wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

It's funny that a while ago when I argued that it was true some lawyer proved to me it was a myth. now I say it's a myth some lawyer shows me it's true.

this law thing - it's all smoke and mirrors designed to keep us confused. :?

What I know about criminal law can be written, well, in that post, really. So I could be wrong. I'm a bit curious to know what form the other lawyer's proof took though, as it's generally harder to prove a negative than a positive.

I can't find the post I was involved in - but here's another - this subject just goes round and round.

Spen66 disagrees with you on this
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... g&start=20

Spen66 wrote:

You stated that

Quote:
in law it is correct, you can get points on your licence if you have one for an endorsable offence on your pedal cycle



That is wrong. There is no endorseable offence for cycling.

You have access to the PNLD, so do I, plus I also have access to many other legal text books, the relevant statutes and appendicies to the Road Traffic Acts and the relevant regulations. Not one of them has an endorseable offence for cycling as far as I and my colleagues, court clerks and barristers I know are aware.

If as you claim there are endorseable cycling offences, then please name just one such offence.

I will apologise to you if you can show that I am wrong.


You say I am foolish for not reading the fuill story? How do you make out I have not read the full story, which incidentially I have?

I repeat what I said, you are very ignorant of the law for a police officer. You are simply wrong on the subject of endorseable offences for cycling

Porgy, the post of Greg is entirely consistent with what I posted

gbsahne001

If I drink and cycle, then I'll take the back roads or even go cross country

These days I dont drink that much anyway, so it's not really an issue, although the last time was after the works Xmas do and it's not really an experience I'd like to repeat, as I had an off, although not really my fault.

Cycing along a stretch of road with double whites, this idiot tries to overtake me, spots a car coming the other way (dont know why he couldnt see the headlights), pulls back in, forgets that I'm there and pushes me into the side; pedal hits high kerbstones and off I go.

Thankfully with only a grazed knee to show for my fall; driver off course oblivious to this and I'm left to pick myself up.

If I'd been sober maybe I'd have had more chance to react, who knows but it's a decision you take and in all likelihood the only person that's likely to get hurt is you.

lost_in_thought

Bugly wrote:

Really! the traffic laws also preclude you being in control of a horse, a bicylce a car or any other mode of transport deemed a vehicle, whilst under the influence - whether the police pull you up or not - well the way the law is applied is at there disgression to a degree.

Yeah, clearly the NSW police under training haven't learnt that bit yet...

Bugly

tomb353

feel free to keep the "moron" comments coming Bugly, you clearly live in a very black and white world, where risk is wrong. I take it you don't ever do any moronic downhill mountain biking as "you place yourself at risk and its pure simple stupidity".

iain_j

I used to ride home after a few drinks (many many years ago) but stopped doing it when one late evening I found myself glancing off the front of a car with no recollection of how it had happened. No injuries but scared the sh!t out of me.