City of London Police targeting cyclists again....

noodles71

We can debate the merits of stopping at red lights all day long here...... I'm one who does in 99% of all cases. The plod are manning their usual spot on Bishopsgate this morning at the intersection of Wormwood St catching all the nodders running the light. I turn right on the green light into Bishopsgate heading north from Aldgate way and a black cab goes roaring through the red light heading north up Bishopsgate about 2 seconds late. I nearly get wiped out by about 1 metre and proceed to give the wanker an earful. As for plod, they watched the whole thing and laughed. I'm sure if the roles were reversed I would be £30 lighter now. I'm all for their mini blitz if it applies to everyone. To ignore a dangerous red light incident to concentrate on others that are mostly irrelevant to safety and more to politiking and revenue raising is f**king poor standards.

Its quite obvious to me tickets for cyclists in the City on London are all about statistics and not safety. Pretty shit behaviour from them especially seeing as though it was on the exact spot the cycle courier got killed by a Terravision bus the other week.

And the stupid prats wonder why people have no respect for them.....

bigmat

There was a fatal RTA at that spot not too long ago - I had hoped this might explain their presence, but your anecdote suggests otherwise. Unfortunate.

rick_chasey

noodles71 wrote:

And the stupid prats wonder why people have no respect for them.....

I think there are other pressing issues around at the moment for that...

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

noodles71 wrote:

And the stupid prats wonder why people have no respect for them.....

I think there are other pressing issues around at the moment for that...

I think you're referring to the Met rather than the CoL Police, although I'm splitting hairs.

rick_chasey

rjsterry wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

noodles71 wrote:

And the stupid prats wonder why people have no respect for them.....

I think there are other pressing issues around at the moment for that...

I think you're referring to the Met rather than the CoL Police, although I'm splitting hairs.

One's part of the other, non?

davmaggs

Nope, City of London police are not part of the Met

In terms of the tickets, I don't think we can moan. Sure, there's always going to be another bike or car we could point at and say why didn't you stop him, but ultimately its just sour grapes that you got caught.

Kieran_Burns

davmaggs wrote:

Nope, City of London police are not part of the Met

In terms of the tickets, I don't think we can moan. Sure, there's always going to be another bike or car we could point at and say why didn't you stop him, but ultimately its just sour grapes that you got caught.

I remember a (possibly made up) quote where a man was caught speeding by the Police and while complaining asked why so many others "got away with it"

The Policeman replied "when you go fishing, you don't catch all the fish in the river do you sir?"

sketchley

noodles71 wrote:

We can debate the merits of stopping at red lights all day long here...... I'm one who does in 99% of all cases. The plod are manning their usual spot on Bishopsgate this morning at the intersection of Wormwood St catching all the nodders running the light. I turn right on the green light into Bishopsgate heading north from Aldgate way and a black cab goes roaring through the red light heading north up Bishopsgate about 2 seconds late. I nearly get wiped out by about 1 metre and proceed to give the wanker an earful. As for plod, they watched the whole thing and laughed. I'm sure if the roles were reversed I would be £30 lighter now. I'm all for their mini blitz if it applies to everyone. To ignore a dangerous red light incident to concentrate on others that are mostly irrelevant to safety and more to politiking and revenue raising is f**king poor standards.

Its quite obvious to me tickets for cyclists in the City on London are all about statistics and not safety. Pretty shoot behaviour from them especially seeing as though it was on the exact spot the cycle courier got killed by a Terravision bus the other week.

And the stupid prats wonder why people have no respect for them.....

There would be cctv on that junction. You could complain about the police officers actions.

noodles71

davmaggs wrote:

Nope, City of London police are not part of the Met

In terms of the tickets, I don't think we can moan. Sure, there's always going to be another bike or car we could point at and say why didn't you stop him, but ultimately its just sour grapes that you got caught.

I didn't get caught, I was waiting at the red light. It was the bastard cabbie that ran the light and didn't get pulled that I am pissed off about. It was dangerous and the police didn't seem to care as they were only interested in cyclists this morning.

Sketchley wrote:

There would be cctv on that junction. You could complain about the police officers actions.

I think the death there a few weeks back was missed on the CCTV as they were asking for witnesses..... And I also seriously doubt they would do anything anyway.

mybreakfastconsisted

noodles71 wrote:

Its quite obvious to me tickets for cyclists in the City on London are all about statistics and not safety.

A spokesperson told me that in the past three years City Police issued 12 fixed penalties to motorists for entering ASZs unlawfully.


Yet in the same period it handed out just over 6,000 fixed penalties to cyclists for jumping red lights.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... s-cyclists

Unofficially, the feeling among Johnny Law is that a TS10 offence and 3 points is too harsh a penalty for drivers who flout the rules on ASLs. So they are simply not enforcing the law.

The Met does not separately record the numbers of motorists infringing ASZs, but does record the number of fixed penalties it hands out each year for red light offences as a whole. Since 2008 it has issued about 3,000 fixed penalties annually at the roadside to motorists for these offences. In the same period the number of fixed penalties for cyclists for red light offences has gone up from around 1,000 in 2008, to 1,700 in 2009, to over 3,000 in 2010. So the figures for cyclists and motorists are now roughly equal. The Met says that this is "a result of police attempting to make cycling safer in London"

It makes no sense when the road users least likely to hurt or kill other road users are targeted above and beyond the road users who cause the most harm, it makes no sense at all.

notsoblue

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

It makes no sense when the road users least likely to hurt or kill other road users are targeted above and beyond the road users who cause the most harm, it makes no sense at all.

Yeah, but to be fair, we are pretty smug.

iPete

In one thread you have people moaning about the high number of tickets against cyclists vs other road users then in the next you have people moaning about nodders, who lets face it need a ticket to sort them out. What one do we want more cos I'm down with sorting out the nodders.

Headhuunter

mybreakfastconsisted wrote:

noodles71 wrote:

Its quite obvious to me tickets for cyclists in the City on London are all about statistics and not safety.

A spokesperson told me that in the past three years City Police issued 12 fixed penalties to motorists for entering ASZs unlawfully.


Yet in the same period it handed out just over 6,000 fixed penalties to cyclists for jumping red lights.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... s-cyclists

Unofficially, the feeling among Johnny Law is that a TS10 offence and 3 points is too harsh a penalty for drivers who flout the rules on ASLs. So they are simply not enforcing the law.

The Met does not separately record the numbers of motorists infringing ASZs, but does record the number of fixed penalties it hands out each year for red light offences as a whole. Since 2008 it has issued about 3,000 fixed penalties annually at the roadside to motorists for these offences. In the same period the number of fixed penalties for cyclists for red light offences has gone up from around 1,000 in 2008, to 1,700 in 2009, to over 3,000 in 2010. So the figures for cyclists and motorists are now roughly equal. The Met says that this is "a result of police attempting to make cycling safer in London"

It makes no sense when the road users least likely to hurt or kill other road users are targeted above and beyond the road users who cause the most harm, it makes no sense at all.

This is the problem. "Justice" is not even handed. I emailed the City Police about this once and pretty much got the same response that they considered the penalty of points on the license vs a £30 fine for a cyclist to be unfair. Las I looked it wasn't up to the police to interpret the law and pick and choose which laws they enforce...

Re ASLs, a year or 2 ago I approached an ASL which as usual was blocked by a taxi a van and a police motorcyclist. I simpky passed the lot of them and stopped ahead of them. The plod proceeded to have a go at me for going past the ASL. When I pointed out that it was full of traffic, including him, he said "don't give me that!" and roared off on his motorbike... Bloody idiot...

Ian.B

I just saw two City mounted police issuing a penalty charge to a bike courier - I have a vision of them galloping down the street in hot pursuit. Not sure of the offence, but I'd hazard a guess it was cycling the wrong way down a one way street

Ian.B

iPete wrote:

cos I'm down with sorting out the nodders.

When it comes to RLJing or other road traffic offences, I don't think nodders are any more guilty than regular/experienced cyclists

spen666

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

The police (by their own admission) can't catch all criminals. People here are complaining about their choice of priority.

Ian.B

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

The police (by their own admission) can't catch all criminals. People here are complaining about their choice of priority.

Isn't that exactly Spen's point? Every group thinks the police should prioritise other groups of criminals

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

The police (by their own admission) can't catch all criminals. People here are complaining about their choice of priority.

and every group complains the actions of the other groups are higher priority

There is a very simple way to avoid this problem - don't be a criminal and commit crimes. It is not acceptable to commit crimes because you think other crimes are of a higher priority.

Can I go out and commit burglaries with no risk of being caught, because the police should be capturing murderers and violent sex offenders?

Crime is crime

notsoblue

Ian.B wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

The police (by their own admission) can't catch all criminals. People here are complaining about their choice of priority.

Isn't that exactly Spen's point? Every group thinks the police should prioritise other groups of criminals

Well, I'm not a criminal, and I'd rather they prioritised a different group of criminals than they appear to be now. I don't think theres anything wrong with having that opinion. I dislike people who irresponsibly RLJ as much as the next guy, but its naive to assume that all crimes have equal impact, or that police are making the best decision for society when choosing what to prioritise.

I understand the reason why the police crack down on cyclists more than they do on motorists, quite simply its just easier to stop a bike than it is a car. With finite resources, the police have decided to take the easy option. Can't blame them really. Doesn't mean I won't rant impotently about it on the internet though.

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

Can I go out and commit burglaries with no risk of being caught, because the police should be capturing murderers and violent sex offenders?

Nope. But if I see someone being booked for shoplifting a snickers bar while a bank is being robbed, I might question police priorities.

rjsterry

spen666 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

The police (by their own admission) can't catch all criminals. People here are complaining about their choice of priority.

and every group complains the actions of the other groups are higher priority

There is a very simple way to avoid this problem - don't be a criminal and commit crimes. It is not acceptable to commit crimes because you think other crimes are of a higher priority.

Can I go out and commit burglaries with no risk of being caught, because the police should be capturing murderers and violent sex offenders?

Crime is crime

Hang on. I've no wish to jump lights, nor has the OP. He was commenting on the apparently partial way that the junction was being policed - i.e. rightly pulling over cyclist, but letting taxi go (and laughing at a near miss). There's no wish that the law should be applied differently, but an observation that it is.

noodles71

As the OP I'd just like to say..... If you get done going through a red light then you deserve a ticket. It doesn't matter if you are on a bike, car, bus or a JCB. Regardless on your take on RLJ as a cyclist, if you don't spot the copper before you run the light then chances are you might miss that fast moving object one day so learn the lesson.

What peeves me off is that it isn't uniformly applied across everyone who the law applies to. Yes, cyclists run red lights, noobs or otherwise. Do a mental count though on your ride each day and you will see roughly the same number of cyclists running lights as the other vehicles just crossing the line on a red. Why the f**k do drivers feel this last second dash is acceptable when their default "Daily Mail" moan against cyclists nearly always seems to be about red lights.

notsoblue

noodles71 wrote:

As the OP I'd just like to say..... If you get done going through a red light then you deserve a ticket. It doesn't matter if you are on a bike, car, bus or a JCB. Regardless on your take on RLJ as a cyclist, if you don't spot the copper before you run the light then chances are you might miss that fast moving object one day so learn the lesson.

What peeves me off is that it isn't uniformly applied across everyone who the law applies to. Yes, cyclists run red lights, noobs or otherwise. Do a mental count though on your ride each day and you will see roughly the same number of cyclists running lights as the other vehicles just crossing the line on a red. Why the f**k do drivers feel this last second dash is acceptable when their default "Daily Mail" moan against cyclists nearly always seems to be about red lights.

+1

Koncordski

Some, but importantly not all, cyclists are dicks.

Some, but importantly not all, motorists are dicks.

Some, but importantly not all, police are dicks.

McNulty

notsoblue wrote:

noodles71 wrote:

As the OP I'd just like to say..... If you get done going through a red light then you deserve a ticket. It doesn't matter if you are on a bike, car, bus or a JCB. Regardless on your take on RLJ as a cyclist, if you don't spot the copper before you run the light then chances are you might miss that fast moving object one day so learn the lesson.

+1

+2 to an extent
I have no sympathy for RLJ, by association they make my life more difficult - there should be no "take" on it btw, a red light is a red light. Once our own house is in order we can whine about how unfair the application of the law is.

SimonAH

I would say that the salient point here is that the police stood and watched a crime being committed in front of them and made no attempt to enforce the law - and that the crime being commited was of a greater severity than the law they were trying to enforce. This is poor if not negligent policing.

notsoblue

SimonAH wrote:

I would say that the salient point here is that the police stood and watched a crime being committed in front of them and made no attempt to enforce the law - and that the crime being commited was of a greater severity than the law they were trying to enforce. This is poor if not negligent policing.

Yep

EKE_38BPM

notsoblue wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

I would say that the salient point here is that the police stood and watched a crime being committed in front of them and made no attempt to enforce the law - and that the crime being commited was of a greater severity than the law they were trying to enforce. This is poor if not negligent policing.

Yep

+1
Fiddling while Rome burns.

shouldbeinbed

Tell Boris, the local MP & councillors, the area police liaison /neighbourhood group & write to the relevant force chief constable. They all have a bigger say in crime priorities more than we do.

To play a bit of devils advocate and being pragmatic. They'd been tasked with a specific job, they were doing that specific job, unfortunately that is the nature of a lot of policing these days. They'd get more grief for ignoring their instructions on what would be considered a minor crime than staying put and doing what they were there for. No doubt if OP had been hit, they'd would have acted cos any hit beats a near miss by miles.

If any of us had been given a specific job by the boss no doubt following instructions from high up themselves but on little more than a whim ignored it & followed up some marginal and minor task (relatively speaking) how well would it go down for us with the entire line of management we're answerable to?

If it was as close as the OP says & they recognised it as such then laughing isn't appropriate, but did they realise? Different angle, different people perceive danger differently, are they cyclists who instinctively understand the danger from a bikers POV? Maybe they're from a long line of cabbies & never sit on a bike, OP did you go & speak to them and report it as dangerous as well as marginally illegal? - if not why would they be expected to consider it as such?

6000 RlJs, vs how many speeding tickets & gatso's? Or shopliftings or burglaries etc. We're hardly seen as John Dillinger really are we?

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

Ian.B wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so once again we have people complaining about the police catching criminals. Apparently every group thinks the police should catch other groups of criminals and ignore the crimes committed by their own group. The crimes our groups commit are excusable.

The police (by their own admission) can't catch all criminals. People here are complaining about their choice of priority.

Isn't that exactly Spen's point? Every group thinks the police should prioritise other groups of criminals

Well, I'm not a criminal, ....

Then this thread is of no relevance to you. The police action will not affect you