Illegal Cycling

cooldad wrote:

MountainMonster wrote:

Fully-sprung wrote:

I always ride on the footpath because I am considerate to motorists (My school is on a steep hill, I go slow up hills that steep(compared to cars any way)) I never where a helmet (it makes my head heavy(so if I fall(which hasn't happened without the aid of ice)if I where a helmet my head would hit the ground harder(this is actually my excuse))) never use lights(because it's never dark enough to benefit me) and I cut the corner at the traffic lights to within a foot of the first cars bumper, and I race against cars. Does that mean I should be in debt and in prison by now? I've seen lots of cops but not one has ever pulled me up or anything.

You sir, are a idiot. On all levels. Considering you can't even use the word wear properly, i'm guessing you must be a very young kid, thinking your cool.

While I agree with your sentiment, you should always be careful with your own spelling when calling someone else an idiot. You're or you are.

Yeha man wish I would have caught that before I posted, or even noticed it haha. Phones and typing don't go well together with me.

yoohoo999 wrote:

I

Shame there was a police car about 30 yards behind me, since it was actually quite a sweet move. Police weren't too angry, you've got full vision around all junctions and it was obviously clear, but they did mention that I had failed to notice them behind me and I still cycled straight over the top of a roundabout.

I was bricking it about the 4 pints I'd just necked, followed by "chasing a police car at 35mph" as the officer put it. To be honest, they weren't bothered at all, just called us a pair of idiots and to act our age. * I don't condone drinking and cycling *

For the roundabout - you might have asked if they have ever heard of K-K-K or Kerb, kerb kerb. If they have any plod training they will know it means straight line a roundabout when safe.

The law for drunk in charge of a bicycle has more in common with the law regarding drugged driving. Proving there is substantial quantities of drugs/drink in your system is not required (nor a measure of guilt). They have to show you are not in control (or with drugs, impaired). So the quantity you drank is not really that important. You could be over the drink drive limit and still not be guilty. You can also be under it and guilty, but I reckon that would be hard to prove.