Some cyclists are above the law - it would appear!!

ooermissus

Pokerface wrote:

Police don't make the laws. Politicians do.


If you don't like the law - talk to your MP not to your local bobby.

As for whether you are 5 or 50 - it doesn't matter. Stay off the pavement. If it's not safe to ride on the road - then DON'T. :roll:

Police decide which laws they enforce. And as for the 'stay off the pavement' nonsense even if the road is dangerous... just try and stop me.

rick_chasey

Pokerface wrote:

Ollieda wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

What if you're a little 5 yr old on a bike to school?

Mmm?

Not sure for reference purposes but there is an exception for bikes with wheels below a certain diameter being allowed to cycle on the pavements - the intention being that a young child could cycle along the pavement with their parents walking alongside on the way to school or other such things.

Unfortuantly some BMX bikes fall within this exception, even worse - some of these BMX riders actually know the law and quote it!

Don't know if there is a 'wheel size' rule anywhere - but this:


"The age of criminal responsibility is 10 so, technically, only children below this age can cycle on pavements without fear of redress."

If it is actually the case that kids can't cycle on the pavement then it's seriously bizzare and stupid.

ooermissus

Rick Chasey wrote:

If it is actually the case that kids can't cycle on the pavement then it's seriously bizzare and stupid.

In London, the Mayor recently had to plead with the police to stop cracking down on kids cycling on the pavements.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... ety-row.do

rick_chasey

ooermissus wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

If it is actually the case that kids can't cycle on the pavement then it's seriously bizzare and stupid.

In London, the Mayor recently had to plead with the police to stop cracking down on kids cycling on the pavements.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... ety-row.do

I cycled every day to primary school from the age of 6 > not a chance in hell I was going to go on the road!

It's very odd - every policeman I've ever been in contact with (granted it's a small pool) have been impressive individuals, who seem to have a lot of common sense. Compared to police abroad in particular, UK police are really something else. I can't square up the stories - and there seem to be enough to suggest there is a grain of truth - to my own experience.

richk

Rick Chasey wrote:

shm_uk wrote:

antfly wrote:

barnesr wrote:

antfly wrote:

I don't think they they should be forcing people to ride on the dual carriageway, it's not a pleasant place to be, which is probably why they are on the pavement.

Its why they're riding on the pavement, but why should they force us off the pavements??

They shouldn't, that's what I meant.

I suspect, if you asked all the pedestrians, they would say they should...

On-duty Police are permitted to cycle on the pavement.
Regular citizens are not, regardless of how big and scary the road is.

What if you're a little 5 yr old on a bike to school?

Mmm?

Isn't that still illegal, only they cannot be prosecuted because of their age?

ooermissus

Rick Chasey wrote:

It's very odd - every policeman I've ever been in contact with (granted it's a small pool) have been impressive individuals, who seem to have a lot of common sense.

I think this is very true.

electric_blue

Pokerface wrote:

Police don't make the laws. Politicians do.


If you don't like the law - talk to your MP not to your local bobby.

As for whether you are 5 or 50 - it doesn't matter. Stay off the pavement. If it's not safe to ride on the road - then DON'T. :roll:

So dangerous driving and parking on the pavement is legal?

Wow - glad you're so clever to tell me that, becasue I thought otherwise. What a stupid bunt eh?

electric_blue

ooermissus wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Police don't make the laws. Politicians do.


If you don't like the law - talk to your MP not to your local bobby.

As for whether you are 5 or 50 - it doesn't matter. Stay off the pavement. If it's not safe to ride on the road - then DON'T. :roll:

Police decide which laws they enforce. And as for the 'stay off the pavement' nonsense even if the road is dangerous... just try and stop me.

I used to cycle home on the A20 - the only road which I could use. this was a virtual motorway with a 50mph limit which no-one obeyed. The speed camera placed on the most dangerous part was set fire to. People regularly died on that road. I cycled on as much of it as I could but I was not prepared to put up with speeding kids and huge HGVs thundering down that road just because the law says I was not allowed to cycle on the pavement that no-one ever used. The law also says that motorists have to drive with due care and attention to other road users, only I didn;t see that bit being enforced.

Years and years of lobbying by the local LCC group for a shared use cycle lane on the dangerous stretch have come to nothing - the local council seems to ahve a blind spot to cycling needs on that road.

So knee jerk away - and foam at the mouth if you'd like. I'm not going to die for the cause though i may be preapared to pay a small fine. If laws are to be strictly observed, why this one and not the myriad of laws governing motorists? Or is that "war on the motorist" - makign them obey the law. Oh no - mustn't do that - we'll have Mail readers after us.

This is an interesting article on the subject of cycling on the pavement - as always it isn't quite as clear cut as the dumb knee jerkers would have you think.

James Daley: The Cycling Column
Laws are made to be broken
Tuesday, 13 November 2007

An interesting debate about the rights and wrongs of riding on the pavement has been raging away on The Independent's new cycling blog, Cyclotherapy, over the past couple of weeks. Although most people seem to agree that it's not the end of the world if it's done with due respect and consideration for pedestrians, others have been quick to point to the letter of the law.

But while cycling on the pavement is indeed illegal, fewer people will be aware that the Government never intended to create rigid legislation with a view to stamping it out entirely.

In fact, when the Home Office introduced fixed, on-the-spot penalties for riding on the pavement towards the end of the last decade, it followed up by issuing an additional piece of guidance. In a letter to an MP, who had questioned the new fines, then Home Office minister Paul Boateng wrote the following: "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users."Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required." (Thanks very much to fellow blogger Dicky for bringing this to my attention.)

This is exactly the right approach to take – not just when it comes to riding on pavements, but when it comes to jumping red lights, too. I only tend to ride on the pavement when I get squeezed off the road by motorists – or when I don't feel safe enough staying on the road. But I'm always considerate to pedestrians and give priority to them (a respect that not all pedestrians return to cyclists when they're trying to cross the road).

Cyclists should be fined for riding on the pavement if they are dangerous or in any way disrespectful to those on foot. Similarly, police should penalise red-light jumpers if they are irresponsible and put other road users at risk.

Nipping through a red light when there's no traffic coming in either direction is hardly the end of the world. It's safer for the cyclist, as it keeps them ahead of, and out of the way of, any motorists behind them, and causes no harm to anyone.

When I've suggested this kind of more tolerant approach in the past, I'm always referred back to the law, and reminded that cyclists have to obey it just like anyone else. But as Mr Boateng illustrated, with his comments about riding on the pavement, the law does not have to be black and white. It's important that the police have powers to fine cyclists for being on the pavement – but they should use their discretion in how they apply such penalties.

It occurred to me that there are bound to be very few policemen who are aware of the Home Office's guidance on these fines, and who choose to apply them as liberally as the Government intended.

Last time I went out on the Critical Mass ride in London (where the police accompany on their pedal bikes), I saw a guy on a recumbent get given a ticket for riding on the pavement. The incident was ridiculous – and, in my opinion, certainly not in the spirit of the guidance. The cyclist involved hopped up on to the pavement for five seconds, peeling off from the front of the pack at some traffic lights, to rejoin further back. There were no pedestrians anywhere nearby – we were in the middle of an empty Gray's Inn Road at about 7.30pm on a Friday night – and the fine seemed to serve no purpose other than to give the police an opportunity to show that they were in control of the crowd.

My guess is that if you were to challenge such a penalty in court, the judge would side with the cyclist. But who's going to bother for the sake of £30?

Visit The Independent's cycling blog at www.independent.co.uk/blogs

Pokerface

electric_blue wrote:

So dangerous driving and parking on the pavement is legal?

It wasn't a debate over what is or isn't legal.

electric_blue wrote:

What a stupid bunt eh?

Yes you are. :roll:

Tail end Charlie

Police aren't allowed to cycle on pavements, they should comply with the same rules as everyone else.
That said, if it's to help get somewhere and catch a criminal, I'm all for it.

ooermissus

The police certainly believe they're allowed to ride on the pavement in association with their duties - so there's either an official exemption or a customary one.

rc856

If the police aren't cycling on the pavements, how are they supposed to catch those that are??!! That area might not be as easy to get to on foot rather than on bike and the community police have bikes to get to calls quicker, rather than on foot, where they may not have access to a car.
If I see a car parked on a pavement/double yellows etc, I can park behind it, in the same position because I'm carrying out my duties etc.

wildmoustache

RC856 wrote:

If the police aren't cycling on the pavements, how are they supposed to catch those that are??!! That area might not be as easy to get to on foot rather than on bike and the community police have bikes to get to calls quicker, rather than on foot, where they may not have access to a car.
If I see a car parked on a pavement/double yellows etc, I can park behind it, in the same position because I'm carrying out my duties etc.

You see those two long bits of flesh dangling from your waist? As well as being useful for cycling they have a more primative purpose. Walking.

The example I gave had nothing to do with catching pavement cyclists, just police using the quickest route from A to B on a pavement where cycling isn't allowed. Much as I do on that stretch.

ooermissus

RC856 wrote:

If the police aren't cycling on the pavements, how are they supposed to catch those that are??!!

Here's how a police cyclist explained the position on a CTC forum:

I am a Police Cycle Patrol Officer and have been for four + years. I am also a keen cyclist out of work, as well as being a Public Safety Cycling Instructor and currently looking to obtain my MIAS and NCS qualifications...

In relation to anyone cycling on the pavement, in my opinion it is the manner in which they are cycling that causes the problem, not the fact they are there.
Take a 16 year old hoodie tearing around a busy footpath in the middle of summer. Clearly this is dangerous not only to them but also pedestrians and yes this needs to be dealt with according to law.
The same 16 year old hoodie, riding sensibly, giving way to pedestrians and riding carefully is not an issue.

As for Police riding on the pavement, again this is an emotive one (certainly on my beat, a pedestrianised town) There are exemptions allowing Police to break regulations if it serves a Policing purpose,so yes patrolling town serves a Policing purpose, but nipping through to the chippy wont.

The Prodigy

Just like many other things in life a common sense approach from everyone involved would mean that cycling on the pavement should never be a problem. Unfortunately in a world sadly lacking in common sense we make rules that seek to remedy the situation but do infact just cause another bunch of problems.

I occaisionally ride on the pavement. Never go anywhere near any peds. I will continue to do this as and when I may need to and the law isn't going to make abit of difference.

As for making my infant daughter ride on the road on her bike, don't make me laugh.

wildmoustache

How many police when asked why they were cycling on the pavement on duty would admit to "nipping to the chippy"?

Back in the real world I agree with the above poster. Common sense.

It's when the police don't apply common sense to a short stretch of deserted pavement cycling and then cycle it themselves - perhaps to the "chippy" - that it's annoying.

mroli

The Prodigy wrote:

As for making my infant daughter ride on the road on her bike, don't make me laugh.

From some source or another:

CAN CHILDREN CYCLE ON PAVEMENTS?

According to the Department for Transport (DfT), the maximum fine for cycling on the pavement from the courts is £500. However it is more usually enforced by way of the Fixed Penalty Notice procedure (FPN) which carries a £30 fine if pleading guilty. However, there is a view that the FPN can only be issued to those over 16.

"The DfT view, from discussions with Home Office, is that the law applies to all but the police can show discretion to younger children cycling on the pavement for whom cycling on the road would not be a safe option."

The age of criminal responsibility is 10 so, technically, only children below this age can cycle on pavements without fear of redress.

While adults are not allowed to cycle on 'footways' (see definition above), children up to the age of 16 cannot be prosecuted for doing so

ooermissus

RC856 wrote:

If the police aren't cycling on the pavements, how are they supposed to catch those that are??!!

In hot pursuit...

bigjim

That guy who was stopped recently and fined £700 for cycling on the pavement was at the side of a dual carriageway in the middle of the night.
Now then about the RLJs.......