police and bikes

nochekmate

Look just accept that you were in the wrong for Christ's sake instead of saying that there are other cases more deserving of police time.

Your attitude is wrong and tbh no different from the beer swilling personnel out on Friday evenings.

As for riding up pavements, I prefer to look after my bikes and don't worry too much about PBs and kerb jumping - I ride a road bike not a BMX! If you want to race, then sign up for some road racing and you'll soon find out if you have any talent rather than riding round cars, through lights and up pavements to shave a few seconds off your PB.

As others have said, it's 'cyclists' like you that cause problems for the rest of us with drivers who quite rightly cannot understand why cyclists are allowed to get away with it - a car driver mounting the pavement to save him/her time would have expected to get convicted - you were lucky that you were not treated similarly for your misdemeanours (which would have been a tad more excusable had you admitted fault in the first place).

Your attitude stinks and society is suffering greatly from this sort of lack of respect for authority - and yes he was right to pull you over. He should have locked you up for a couple of hours and impounded your bike to teach you a lesson.

Rant over!

markos1963

reacher wrote:

so if i had'nt rode up the pavement i was alright then , seems like i was only half in the wrong ,
i think he desperately wanted to book me for being a tosser as you put it , but once he realised that i was on a mission to get some training done he warmed to the idea that instead of getting pissed an pewkin all over the town centre i was not such a bad lad after all , in fact i think he left wondering why he was making such a fuss over 30 inches of flagsones
anyhow,
you all telling me that you can all put your hands up and honestly say that you have never ever rode on a pavement for a yard or less ?
in all the time you have been on a bike ,
an if you see the old bill in action standing still an watching the town get trashed on a saturday night an doing nothing because they are in gangs an pissed an on drugs you willl understand why i was thinking go an fight some crime not harress me over a ride over a 3 foot empty pavement ,

Actually I haven't ridden on a pavement since the age of 6.
It's all very well going on about others failings but one phrase springs to mind, 'two wrongs don't make a right'
The policeman would have much more time to go and sort out the saturday night nutters if he didn't have to deal with cyclists who can't follow his directions.

MattC59

please, please, please, please, please (whilst grinning and hopping up and down on the spot like a 5yr old boy!)............... this is beginning to head the way of speed_king and steelem

bompington

reacher wrote:

you all telling me that you can all put your hands up and honestly say that you have never ever rode on a pavement for a yard or less ?

I can put my hands up and honestly say that I have never failed to stop when asked to do so by a policeman :roll:

reacher

he said , in between his 10 minute lecture , where incidently he shouted down , or bellowed down on every time i tried to say something , i was not allowed to actually speak at all , just nodding my head was allowed though , that he was a cyclist , much like you lot i'm guessing , fair play he was determined to have his ten minutes on the x factor stage , he must have thought i was simon cowells uncle or something ,
anyway my theory is pretty much that he was just pissed at seeing a blur of speed come up hill with awsome bike manovering abilitys cutting around the stationary panda car while he dreamt about getting to 12 mph one day down hilll ,
i'm thinking this could be the case as he looked a lot like a panda sat in his car ,
i will remind you lot of how usefull the old bill and how you alll love the way they spend their time next time you all gets a speeding ticket an 3 points on your licence on a flat empty stretch of highway

ooermissus

Obvious troll, trolling.

jonny_trousers

He could have put six points on your TV license. Get twelve and your banned from watching Grange Hill for a fortnight.

ooermissus

Your career as a spy might have been over - pavement riding leads to an immediate revocation of the license to kill. No exceptions.

Redhog14

SO you were a pavement jumper and broke the law, the cops pulled you over, you didn't pay heed to them and they still let you off! Then you come on here trying to gather more wood for this wee fire you have stoked up inside you! I am quite happy to join the others here pissing on your fire, you got off lightly don't try and turn your ridiculous childish pouting huff into some kind of moral crusade against the Police and how they let the country burn while eyeing up some fanny at the side of the road.. only fanny is you! You failed the attitude test hence the shouting from aforementioned copper.

SLX01

Whats a 'pavement' ffs? There is no law stating you cannot ride on the 'pavement'.

RoadyForever

I'm not going to lie, there is a pavement near me that I which leads onto a lane (it's a short cut which cuts out a roundabout which is lethal when the road is wet/ MM). If it was a newer housing estate that would be a cycle lane, they just haven't got around to painting it red yet.

And there is a light on my way from the train station, which I will jump (after the oncomming traffic has finished), everyone knows if they don't put their foot down, they will miss the next set of traffic lights, it really is wacky races! They even do this past the traffic island (lorries too), plus it's up hill! - that's an accident waiting to happen.

Also, if I ride into town. I do go up the wrong way of a one way street (not far). There is a two way cycle on the side of it but that leads you onto a blind corner of oncoming traffic. If they put it on the other side, it would have been much, much safer.

So ok, I do break the law, but only when my personal safety is at risk and only if I would be prepared to argue my case in court. I realise if I had an accident, would be pretty screwed (which is why I do it carefully) - but I do this because it is safer than some of the poorly designed traffic carming measures about and not like I'm in a time trail.

Cyclists just jumping red lights and dodging people at pedestrian crossings do give cyclists a bad name.

hulla the hulla

[To the song "Spam" by those wonderful Monty Python people]

Troll, Troll, Troll, Troll !
Troll, Troll, Troll, Troll !
Troll, Wonderful Troll !

I suspect there was no Policeman, no PB to be beaten, no line of traffic to pass

Only a poor, sad individual with no friends, desperate to seek attention.

All the best !

Stewie Griffin

I think he does all of his cycling on the pavement on a girls mtb.

bompington

Stewie Griffin wrote:

I think he does all of his cycling on the pavement on a girls mtb.

with pink glittery handlebar tassles.

Headhuunter

Troll or not, this is an interesting point to raise. I was pulled over after I jumped a red (nothing was coming, I carefully passed through looking both ways but yes, I broke the law, naughty, naughty etc etc).

The question I have is not whether the cop had the right to pull me over or whether I had broken the law, the answer is yes on both counts of course, my question is whether the police have the right to put points on your DRIVING license for cycle offences.

He threatened me with this, I just said yes, sir, no sir, 3 bags full etc etc and went on my way but what if I had had no license? Would I have got away scot free? Is it a question of giving me points or fining me £30? And if he had given me the points would I have had the right to do a driving awareness course as motorists do instead of receiving the points?

That would have been very bizarre - stopped on my bike and sent on a drivers awareness course even though I haven't driven a car since 1996 and have no idea where my license is! All sounds a bit stoopid to me...

Headhuunter

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

RoadyForever

Nope, your license has nothing to do with this, that only applies to a motor vehicle. Same way way you can't get charged with speeding on a bike, only cycling dangerously (if you are putting others at risk) and drunk cycle is a separate offence from drunk driving.

Redhog14

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

On the cycle path on the Forth Road Bridge there is a 15mph limit!

sloppyschleckonds

Another interesting point raised, since when has a licence become a license?

SLX01

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

You cannot get done for speeding on a bike in Richmond park, you will get done for riding in a dangerous manner. The speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.

Headhuunter

Redhog14 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

On the cycle path on the Forth Road Bridge there is a 15mph limit!

I think the Highway Code says that if you're a cyclist who travels at more than 18mph you should not use cycle paths anywhere and should be on the road....

Headhuunter

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

You cannot get done for speeding on a bike in Richmond park, you will get done for riding in a dangerous manner. The speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.

From what I understand from other threads here, the police have been using speed guns and stopping cyclists in Greenwich and Richmond Parks and actually threatening them with prosecution for speeding which sounds ridiculous!

SLX01

Headhuunter wrote:

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

You cannot get done for speeding on a bike in Richmond park, you will get done for riding in a dangerous manner. The speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.

From what I understand from other threads here, the police have been using speed guns and stopping cyclists in Greenwich and Richmond Parks and actually threatening them with prosecution for speeding which sounds ridiculous!

Threatening prosecution or words of advice as they like to call it is used because they know they cannot prosecute for speeding. They have prosecuted a few but only for dangerous riding due to what they consider unsafe speeds.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010 ... 194_en.pdf

Citation, Commencement and Interpretation
1.—(1) These Regulations may be cited as The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces
(Amendment) etc. Regulations 2010 and shall come into force for the purposes of regulations 1 to
4 on 6th April 2010 and for all other purposes on 1st October 2010.
(2) In these Regulations–
“parking permit” means a permit issued by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for the
parking of a vehicle;
“parking place” means a place shown on a notice exhibited by or on behalf of the Secretary of
State as being appointed under these Regulations as a place where a person may park a
vehicle; and
“vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on a road.

Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road
1. On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St
James’s Park or The Regent’s Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph.
2. On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not
exceeding 20 mph.
3. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate
leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15
mph.
4. On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not
exceeding 10 mph.”.

Gizmodo

Headhuunter wrote:

Is it a question of giving me points or fining me £30? And if he had given me the points would I have had the right to do a driving awareness course as motorists do instead of receiving the points?

I don't think this applies here, but a driving awareness course costs between £60 and £100 so would be a lot worse than a £30 fine and points on a licence that you don't use.

Headhuunter

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

You cannot get done for speeding on a bike in Richmond park, you will get done for riding in a dangerous manner. The speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.

From what I understand from other threads here, the police have been using speed guns and stopping cyclists in Greenwich and Richmond Parks and actually threatening them with prosecution for speeding which sounds ridiculous!

Threatening prosecution or words of advice as they like to call it is used because they know they cannot prosecute for speeding. They have prosecuted a few but only for dangerous riding due to what they consider unsafe speeds.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010 ... 194_en.pdf

Citation, Commencement and Interpretation
1.—(1) These Regulations may be cited as The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces
(Amendment) etc. Regulations 2010 and shall come into force for the purposes of regulations 1 to
4 on 6th April 2010 and for all other purposes on 1st October 2010.
(2) In these Regulations–
“parking permit” means a permit issued by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for the
parking of a vehicle;
“parking place” means a place shown on a notice exhibited by or on behalf of the Secretary of
State as being appointed under these Regulations as a place where a person may park a
vehicle; and
“vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on a road.

Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road
1. On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St
James’s Park or The Regent’s Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph.
2. On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not
exceeding 20 mph.
3. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate
leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15
mph.
4. On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not
exceeding 10 mph.”.

It think those rules are largely aimed at motorists although the all encompassing "mechanically propelled vehicle" term would seem to include bikes, however I cannot see how they could do anything about you cycling at faster than 20mph other than have a "stern word". I'm not advocating travelling at high speed in a park when there is potential danger but these rules are just stupid...

SLX01

Headhuunter wrote:

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

You cannot get done for speeding on a bike in Richmond park, you will get done for riding in a dangerous manner. The speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.

From what I understand from other threads here, the police have been using speed guns and stopping cyclists in Greenwich and Richmond Parks and actually threatening them with prosecution for speeding which sounds ridiculous!

Threatening prosecution or words of advice as they like to call it is used because they know they cannot prosecute for speeding. They have prosecuted a few but only for dangerous riding due to what they consider unsafe speeds.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010 ... 194_en.pdf

Citation, Commencement and Interpretation
1.—(1) These Regulations may be cited as The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces
(Amendment) etc. Regulations 2010 and shall come into force for the purposes of regulations 1 to
4 on 6th April 2010 and for all other purposes on 1st October 2010.
(2) In these Regulations–
“parking permit” means a permit issued by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for the
parking of a vehicle;
“parking place” means a place shown on a notice exhibited by or on behalf of the Secretary of
State as being appointed under these Regulations as a place where a person may park a
vehicle; and
“vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on a road.

Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road
1. On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St
James’s Park or The Regent’s Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph.
2. On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not
exceeding 20 mph.
3. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate
leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15
mph.
4. On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not
exceeding 10 mph.”.

It think those rules are largely aimed at motorists although the all encompassing "mechanically propelled vehicle" term would seem to include bikes, however I cannot see how they could do anything about you cycling at faster than 20mph other than have a "stern word". I'm not advocating travelling at high speed in a park when there is potential danger but these rules are just stupid...

I don't know about you but my bike is certainly not mechanically propelled, lol!!

Headhuunter

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

SLX01 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

...It's almost as stoopid as the police stopping cyclists in Richmond Park etc for "speeding" and threatening them with court action. Last I looked it wasn't legally required for cyclists to have any kind of speedo, so when the police ask "are you aware what speed you were travelling at?" I could simply say "no" and that would be that, surely? If it then went to court, how could a judge push for some kind of prosecution when by law there is no requirement for cyclists to have any awareness of their speed?

You cannot get done for speeding on a bike in Richmond park, you will get done for riding in a dangerous manner. The speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.

From what I understand from other threads here, the police have been using speed guns and stopping cyclists in Greenwich and Richmond Parks and actually threatening them with prosecution for speeding which sounds ridiculous!

Threatening prosecution or words of advice as they like to call it is used because they know they cannot prosecute for speeding. They have prosecuted a few but only for dangerous riding due to what they consider unsafe speeds.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010 ... 194_en.pdf

Citation, Commencement and Interpretation
1.—(1) These Regulations may be cited as The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces
(Amendment) etc. Regulations 2010 and shall come into force for the purposes of regulations 1 to
4 on 6th April 2010 and for all other purposes on 1st October 2010.
(2) In these Regulations–
“parking permit” means a permit issued by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for the
parking of a vehicle;
“parking place” means a place shown on a notice exhibited by or on behalf of the Secretary of
State as being appointed under these Regulations as a place where a person may park a
vehicle; and
“vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on a road.

Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road
1. On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St
James’s Park or The Regent’s Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph.
2. On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not
exceeding 20 mph.
3. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate
leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15
mph.
4. On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not
exceeding 10 mph.”.

It think those rules are largely aimed at motorists although the all encompassing "mechanically propelled vehicle" term would seem to include bikes, however I cannot see how they could do anything about you cycling at faster than 20mph other than have a "stern word". I'm not advocating travelling at high speed in a park when there is potential danger but these rules are just stupid...

I don't know about you but my bike is certainly not mechanically propelled, lol!!

Oh... Yeah, I suppose not! I wasn't thinking...

brettjmcc

Headhuunter wrote:

The question I have is not whether the cop had the right to pull me over or whether I had broken the law, the answer is yes on both counts of course, my question is whether the police have the right to put points on your DRIVING license for cycle offences.

Well, bicycles are, in law, carriages (as a consequence of the Taylor v Goodwin judgment in 1879) and should be on the road not footway. (Technically speaking, a ‘road’ is a ‘carriageway’). So I guess in theory, a Traffic Light Offence could mean you could get a maximum fine of up to £1000 and 3 points if you have a licence?

It also says under point 69 in the Highway Code: you MUST obey all Traffic Signs and Traffic Light Signals Laws RTA 1998 sect 36 & TSRGD reg 10(1)

2Phat4Rapha

Warning - LONG


http://bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/ ... d-the-law/

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. ... icefor1688

http://www.lfgss.com/thread5745.html


Mind you, it's not always lycra-@rsed roadies who jump lights and ride on pavements, seen posties, lady shoppers and even a nun 'round here do both!

marcusjb

Though this is drifting off topic - you CAN be fined for speeding on a bike in Richmond Park (and other Royal Parks). They are one of the very few places where a special bye-law exists and the speed limit does apply to cyclists.

Sure you can try argue that you don't have to have a speedo on a bike, but argue too strongly and they'll probably be more likely to fine you.