Police ticketing cyclists

d.mart

Just seen a couple of cyclists being given a talking to and a ticket by the police at junction of Gracechurch St and Fenchurch St. don't think they're looking at ASL infringements though... :roll: [/img]

ooermissus

This is important - and highly effective - work.

A similar crackdown in March had the following stellar results.

Hours spent patrolling 131
Stops 5 (3x cyclists stopped Ludgate Circus, 2x motor vehicles stopped Ludgate Circus)
Crimes 0
Arrests 0
Warnings 5
Fixed penalty notices 3

:roll:

Clever Pun

boring

they're doing it to be seen to be doing it in response to the communities requests, or local rag running something about it.

W1

ooermissus wrote:

This is important - and highly effective - work.

A similar crackdown in March had the following stellar results.

Hours spent patrolling 131
Stops 5 (3x cyclists stopped Ludgate Circus, 2x motor vehicles stopped Ludgate Circus)
Crimes 0
Arrests 0
Warnings 5
Fixed penalty notices 3

:roll:

And how many offences didn't happen in the first place because el ploddo was hanging around?

Or are they only supposed to go after murderers and rapists, and leave all the anti-social tossers alone?

notsoblue

Its not the police's fault, its the people who turn up to community liaison meetings that cause this.

mroli

To be fair, its not the people turning up at community liaison meetings that do this, its the people jumping red lights and not obeying the highway code that do this...

rick_chasey

mroli wrote:

To be fair, its not the people turning up at community liaison meetings that do this, its the people jumping red lights and not obeying the highway code that do this...

Cyclists complaining about jumping red lights are like motorists complaining about speeders.

Plenty of people do it and it's very convenient.

Gussio

They could have ticketed the tw*t on a mountian bike who came close to knocking me over on a zebra crossing on Victoria St 5mins ago.

notsoblue

mroli wrote:

To be fair, its not the people turning up at community liaison meetings that do this, its the people jumping red lights and not obeying the highway code that do this...

Cyclists break the law, drivers break the law, but the police are forced to commit a disproportionate amount of resource to dealing with cyclists because of feedback from these meetings.

ooermissus

notsoblue wrote:

police are forced to commit a disproportionate amount of resource to dealing with cyclists because of feedback from these meetings.

true.

City police are known for being particularly active in targeting cyclists. In fact, many London riders see the force as decidedly anti-bike, a curious paradox given that it has the country's only dedicated cycling police unit.

Earlier this week, as the force's cycle team took me through its training course, I got the chance to meet Superintendent Lorraine Cussen, in overall charge of the Snow Hill police station and thus the bike squad based there. "I don't think we're anti-cyclist. A couple of years ago we could perhaps have been accused of that, but things have changed," she told me.

Why, then, do I see so many City officers pulling over cyclists? The main answer, it seems, is public demand.

Police forces are now obliged by central government to tackle issues flagged up by local communities. In the City, this tends to bring complaints about rough sleepers and law-flouting cyclists.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... red-lights

FoldingJoe

Saw that as I walked down Gracechurch to Monument at about 4.45.

They were giving a woman a ticking off at the time.

Applespider

I was stopped at a junction tonight and a pair of police cyclists coming from the other directions pulled over towards me. But it was just to ask what brand of front light I had since it was a darned sight brighter than what they'd been issued with.

Initialised

A bloke I followed tonight deserved a ticket. Approaching a junction he veers off into the cycle lane on the opposite side of the road rather than turning right properly. Further along he does the same onto the pavement again instead of a proper right turn.

The first instance was at the bottom of Bensham Bank, I often see a couple of the staff from Ride heading the opposite way to the d1ckh34d at speed, doesn't he realise what would happen if another vehicle took the corner into him?

If there are any police cyclists in Gateshead look out for a guy on an MTB with a red top and black shorts.

shouldbeinbed

Rick Chasey wrote:

mroli wrote:

To be fair, its not the people turning up at community liaison meetings that do this, its the people jumping red lights and not obeying the highway code that do this...

Cyclists complaining about jumping red lights are like motorists complaining about speeders.

Plenty of people do it and it's very convenient.

that depends on who's doing the complaining doesn't it. not all of us jump red lights and can make any comment we like without fear of hypocrisy.

good on the cops

shouldbeinbed

notsoblue wrote:

mroli wrote:

To be fair, its not the people turning up at community liaison meetings that do this, its the people jumping red lights and not obeying the highway code that do this...

Cyclists break the law, drivers break the law, but the police are forced to commit a disproportionate amount of resource to dealing with cyclists because of feedback from these meetings.

so mobilise cyclists to attend the meetings en masse and force the speeding, dooring, left hooking issues to be addressed then.

bloody public eh.

jamesco

shouldbeinbed wrote:

not all of us jump red lights and can make any comment we like without fear of hypocrisy.

good on the cops

+1

If the police decided overnight to be zero-tolerant and ticket every infraction, it would be bloody wonderful. Red-light runners are prats, whether they're in a car or on two wheels. Every cyclist that moans about cars in ASLs will have the (undeniable) fact of cyclists running red lights thrown back in their faces; fine the lot!

spen666

If those committing crimes are getting punished then what is the problem?

I'm quite happy to learn that law breakers are being punished irrespective of thir mode of transport.

Rather than slating the police for enforcing the law, we should be encouraging them in this task and encouraging them to apply it to other modes of transport AS WELL, not instead of

t4tomo

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

Gussio

Both today and yesterday I have been more concerned by other cyclists than cars. Don't know what it is about this week, but the level of tw@tishness seems to have increased multifold. Roll on the rain and wind of winter, when hopefully the roads get a little saner.

notsoblue

t4tomo wrote:

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

Replace "quite badly shook up" with "suffered a ruptured spleen, broken ribs and fractured vertebrae" if he had collided with a motorised vehicle.

I'm in awe of how people seem to have the binary view that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it. Its crazy.

bails87

notsoblue
I was hit by a car and didn't have any of that stuff. I must be hard as nails!

t4tomo didn't say

that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it

He said law breaking cyclists can be a danger to other cyclists. That is true.

If you don't break the law you won't get caught. If no cyclists were RLJing and pavement riding then the police wouldn't have to use/waste (depending on your point of view) resources on policing 'us' and they could go after the dangerous drivers more. As has been said above, they're responding to what the community are concerned by. Go to the next local police meeting and complain about cars if you want.

shouldbeinbed

notsoblue wrote:

t4tomo wrote:

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

Replace "quite badly shook up" with "suffered a ruptured spleen, broken ribs and fractured vertebrae" if he had collided with a motorised vehicle.

I'm in awe of how people seem to have the binary view that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it. Its crazy.

but that didn't happen there did it, only in your mind.

I'm in awe of the blinkered vision that wants a two tier enforcement system and special prvileges depending on your personal choices.

where do you stop on that scale?

Is mugging and robbery ok as long as you didn't actually stab someone?

Is it ok as long as you burgle only in affluent areas rather than target people without much in the first place?

If I chloroformed someone and killed them painlessly whilst they slept am I less of a murderer than if I stuck a gun in someones face?

define your parameters of acceptable criminality

Clever Pun

spen666 wrote:

If those committing crimes are getting punished then what is the problem?

I'm quite happy to learn that law breakers are being punished irrespective of thir mode of transport.

Rather than slating the police for enforcing the law, we should be encouraging them in this task and encouraging them to apply it to other modes of transport AS WELL, not instead of

while this is true, a friend was at hammersmith where the police were targeting rlj'ing and right in front of them a lot of ASL infringements were taking place. When he brought this up (he wasn't getting ticketed) the cops said they were there for cyclists

this needs to be addressed the law should be upheld not specific ones. Not saying it happens across the boards but it's a example of poor policing

Clever Pun

shouldbeinbed wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

t4tomo wrote:

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

Replace "quite badly shook up" with "suffered a ruptured spleen, broken ribs and fractured vertebrae" if he had collided with a motorised vehicle.

I'm in awe of how people seem to have the binary view that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it. Its crazy.

but that didn't happen there did it, only in your mind.

I'm in awe of the blinkered vision that wants a two tier enforcement system and special prvileges depending on your personal choices.

where do you stop on that scale?

Is mugging and robbery ok as long as you didn't actually stab someone?

Is it ok as long as you burgle only in affluent areas rather than target people without much in the first place?

If I chloroformed someone and killed them painlessly whilst they slept am I less of a murderer than if I stuck a gun in someones face?

define your parameters of acceptable criminality

there's already a scale though isn't there? cyclist gets fined £30 car drivers get points and a larger fine. Points don't mean prizes

Headhuunter

ooermissus wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

police are forced to commit a disproportionate amount of resource to dealing with cyclists because of feedback from these meetings.

true.

City police are known for being particularly active in targeting cyclists. In fact, many London riders see the force as decidedly anti-bike, a curious paradox given that it has the country's only dedicated cycling police unit.

Earlier this week, as the force's cycle team took me through its training course, I got the chance to meet Superintendent Lorraine Cussen, in overall charge of the Snow Hill police station and thus the bike squad based there. "I don't think we're anti-cyclist. A couple of years ago we could perhaps have been accused of that, but things have changed," she told me.

Why, then, do I see so many City officers pulling over cyclists? The main answer, it seems, is public demand.

Police forces are now obliged by central government to tackle issues flagged up by local communities. In the City, this tends to bring complaints about rough sleepers and law-flouting cyclists.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... red-lights

This is absolutely the crux of the problem and it's pretty much impossible for most cyclists who are generally commuters through The City, on their way to work, to attend these "community meetings" as they take place at 10am or whenever in the middle of the day.... How do you mobilise a load of cyclists to attend these mtgs when they're working? The only people who have the time to attend are the unemployed and OAPs. There was an article about this exact think on one of the London cycling blogs, a young unemployed cyclist went to one of these meetings and it was literally full of a certain sector of society and the opinions expressed were far, far from representative of the general population working and living in the City, yet the police use these unrepresentative opinions to formulate responses and policies.

Headhuunter

t4tomo wrote:

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

I do not believe that the roads are automatically safer if "everyone obeys the rules". Road rules are largely designed with motorists and pedestrians in mind. Cyclists fall between the cracks and most accidents occur at junctions. IMO we need some way to get cyclists ahead of traffic at junctions and perhaps filter lights (as peds have) at the busiest juncs. ASLs do not work as the police do not enforce them....

notsoblue

bails87 wrote:

notsoblue
I was hit by a car and didn't have any of that stuff. I must be hard as nails!

Well I was clearly exaggerating for effect, but its a fact that motorised vehicles kill more cyclists and pedestrians each year than bikes do. Its hard to argue that a cyclist going through a red light is as dangerous as a car doing the same.

bails87 wrote:

t4tomo didn't say

that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it

He said law breaking cyclists can be a danger to other cyclists. That is true.

Can be, but in my experience they aren't. I honestly can't remember the last time I was put in serious danger by another cyclist. And the city of london police aren't out in force to ticket cyclists because other cyclists have been lobbying for them to do so...

bails87 wrote:

If you don't break the law you won't get caught. If no cyclists were RLJing and pavement riding then the police wouldn't have to use/waste (depending on your point of view) resources on policing 'us' and they could go after the dangerous drivers more. As has been said above, they're responding to what the community are concerned by. Go to the next local police meeting and complain about cars if you want.

I'm not defending RLJ, and I'm not having a go at the police. I just think people are crazy for thinking that cyclists are a menace and warrant disproportionate policing.

notsoblue

shouldbeinbed wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

t4tomo wrote:

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

Replace "quite badly shook up" with "suffered a ruptured spleen, broken ribs and fractured vertebrae" if he had collided with a motorised vehicle.

I'm in awe of how people seem to have the binary view that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it. Its crazy.

but that didn't happen there did it, only in your mind.

I'm in awe of the blinkered vision that wants a two tier enforcement system and special prvileges depending on your personal choices.

where do you stop on that scale?

Is mugging and robbery ok as long as you didn't actually stab someone?

Is it ok as long as you burgle only in affluent areas rather than target people without much in the first place?

If I chloroformed someone and killed them painlessly whilst they slept am I less of a murderer than if I stuck a gun in someones face?

define your parameters of acceptable criminality

You have a black and white world view, I don't. Theres nothing I can say to you to justify my point of view on this.

rick_chasey

notsoblue wrote:

shouldbeinbed wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

t4tomo wrote:

Indeed, if everyone obeys the rules the roads are far safer.

A colleague of mine got knocked of his bike & quite badly shook up by a cyclist pegging it the wrong way down a one way street straight into him.

Its not just motor vehicles that cause a danger to cyclists.

Replace "quite badly shook up" with "suffered a ruptured spleen, broken ribs and fractured vertebrae" if he had collided with a motorised vehicle.

I'm in awe of how people seem to have the binary view that cyclists breaking the law is just as dangerous as motorists breaking it. Its crazy.

but that didn't happen there did it, only in your mind.

I'm in awe of the blinkered vision that wants a two tier enforcement system and special prvileges depending on your personal choices.

where do you stop on that scale?

Is mugging and robbery ok as long as you didn't actually stab someone?

Is it ok as long as you burgle only in affluent areas rather than target people without much in the first place?

If I chloroformed someone and killed them painlessly whilst they slept am I less of a murderer than if I stuck a gun in someones face?

define your parameters of acceptable criminality

You have a black and white world view, I don't. Theres nothing I can say to you to justify my point of view on this.

Usually disagreements always come down to a difference in values...


In other news, the Pope is catholic.

Headhuunter

The problem is that there are limited numbers of police and so limited resources. Personally I don not think it is an effective use of an expensive and limited resource to heavily target a relatively innocuous category of road user simply because an unrepresentative selection of individuals at a "community meeting" demand it. The police should be looking at the bigger picture and targeting road users in proportion to what government gathered statistics show as most dangerous. Let's get more bang for our buck and try not to respond to hysteria which cycling seems to produce in this country...

notsoblue

Rick Chasey wrote:

Usually disagreements always come down to a difference in values...

True, but some differences are worth the effort to try and understand. In this particular situation it would be a waste of time to try and forge some kind of mutual understanding.