Drunk' cyclists investigated by Mersey tunnels police
- Thread starter Andy Roadie
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Colin_P
Guru
Booze is so over rated, as one gets older it almost becomes habitual. I went from being one of those habitual drinkers who even made their own and would routinely drink about four pints every evening to giving it up completely. So I may evangalise a little on the merits of being booze free.
Only once you have effectively given up do you realise how silly and pointless it is.
But for those that do wish have a 'few' and ride a bike I think it should be the as for car drivers. Drunk cycling may not be punishable anything nearly as badly as drink driving as there is no licence to suspend but the consequences can be the same. As a drunk cyclist you may be ok yourself if there were no other traffic on the road and may be ok even if you fell off but it is the consequential damage that may be caused that cannot be overlooked.
Stating the obvious,a drunk cyclist not only puts themselves in danger, but everyone else as well. I wouldn't want to be the motorist through no fault of their own who runs over a drunk cyclist no more than being hit by a drunk driver in another car.
I say fine them and fine them big!
Only once you have effectively given up do you realise how silly and pointless it is.
But for those that do wish have a 'few' and ride a bike I think it should be the as for car drivers. Drunk cycling may not be punishable anything nearly as badly as drink driving as there is no licence to suspend but the consequences can be the same. As a drunk cyclist you may be ok yourself if there were no other traffic on the road and may be ok even if you fell off but it is the consequential damage that may be caused that cannot be overlooked.
Stating the obvious,a drunk cyclist not only puts themselves in danger, but everyone else as well. I wouldn't want to be the motorist through no fault of their own who runs over a drunk cyclist no more than being hit by a drunk driver in another car.
I say fine them and fine them big!
Last edited:
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
Again you read what you want to and reply what you want to don't you ... And so rare I know 3 people in our company who have the doctors letter on file ready for when they blow over the lower limit we have. Which if you could be bothered to read my post properly you would see I am an advocate of for being the drink drive limit .
Last edited by a moderator:
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
Since http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/6/section/146 the law allows for a driving licence be suspended for drink cycling, in addition to the hefty fine. I don't think they imprison drink cyclists yet, but drunk drivers usually have to be more than three times over the limit to suffer that.
And once again, the consequences can be the same but a drunk cyclist will probably be less damaging than a drunk driver. Laws must not be designed to treat the averages as if they are the same as the worst possibility. Plus, a cycle is easier to control than a motor vehicle so can be operated safely with a greater impairment and the current law correctly recognises that.
- Location
- The TerrorVortex
A quick Google finds no reports of it in the UK.
Sussex police apparently arrested someone for drunk cycling in 2010. Doesn't seem to be as pressing an issue as all that...
Plus, I have (allegedly) cycled 8 miles home in a state of severe refreshment. Perhaps. I defy anyone to show I was not in comp!ete control of my bike, given that I didn't fall off, crash or even stop for a nap.
Sussex police apparently arrested someone for drunk cycling in 2010. Doesn't seem to be as pressing an issue as all that...
Plus, I have (allegedly) cycled 8 miles home in a state of severe refreshment. Perhaps. I defy anyone to show I was not in comp!ete control of my bike, given that I didn't fall off, crash or even stop for a nap.
- Location
- The TerrorVortex
Well, they'd probably not have even bothered with me.
If you want to lobby lawmakers then go ahead. Us cyclists don't make policy. Sadly.
It's amazing how these non-existant police stop drink drivers though.
If you want to lobby lawmakers then go ahead. Us cyclists don't make policy. Sadly.
It's amazing how these non-existant police stop drink drivers though.
Last edited:
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
[QUOTE 4084820, member: 9609"]I did come across this a little while ago and not sure what to make of it - has it ever happened, and could it - @Pale Rider
146 Driving disqualification for any offence.
(1)The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, for holding or obtaining a driving licence.
(2)Where the person is convicted of an offence the sentence for which is fixed by law or falls to be imposed under section 109(2), 110(2) or 111(2) above, subsection (1) above shall have effect as if the words “instead of or” were omitted.
(3)A court shall not make an order under subsection (1) above unless the court has been notified by the Secretary of State that the power to make such orders is exercisable by the court and the notice has not been withdrawn.
(4)A court which makes an order under this section disqualifying a person for holding or obtaining a driving licence shall require him to produce—
(a)any such licence held by him together with its counterpart; or
(b)in the case where he holds a Community licence (within the meaning of Part III of the M1Road Traffic Act 1988), his Community licence and its counterpart (if any).
(5)In this section—
“driving licence” means a licence to drive a motor vehicle granted under Part III of the M2Road Traffic Act 1988;
“counterpart”—
(a)
in relation to a driving licence, has the meaning given in relation to such a licence by section 108(1) of that Act; and
(b)
in relation to a Community licence, has the meaning given by section 99B of that Act. [/QUOTE]
The act quoted is a general powers of sentencing one.
It certainly doesn't apply directly to cyclists, if it applies at all.
What the courts like to call 'ancilliary orders' are usually relevant to the offence, thus someone who is cruel to animals may get a general sentence - community work, prison, whatever - and banned from keeping animals.
Or a child abuser will be banned from unsupervised contact with children in addition to whatever sentence he gets.
You don't need a driving licence to ride to bicycle, so I can't seen your licence being removed as part of a cycling prosecution.
However, the prosecution is under one of the Road Traffic Acts, so it may be there is the power to ban anyone who is prosecuted under those acts.
146 Driving disqualification for any offence.
(1)The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, for holding or obtaining a driving licence.
(2)Where the person is convicted of an offence the sentence for which is fixed by law or falls to be imposed under section 109(2), 110(2) or 111(2) above, subsection (1) above shall have effect as if the words “instead of or” were omitted.
(3)A court shall not make an order under subsection (1) above unless the court has been notified by the Secretary of State that the power to make such orders is exercisable by the court and the notice has not been withdrawn.
(4)A court which makes an order under this section disqualifying a person for holding or obtaining a driving licence shall require him to produce—
(a)any such licence held by him together with its counterpart; or
(b)in the case where he holds a Community licence (within the meaning of Part III of the M1Road Traffic Act 1988), his Community licence and its counterpart (if any).
(5)In this section—
“driving licence” means a licence to drive a motor vehicle granted under Part III of the M2Road Traffic Act 1988;
“counterpart”—
(a)
in relation to a driving licence, has the meaning given in relation to such a licence by section 108(1) of that Act; and
(b)
in relation to a Community licence, has the meaning given by section 99B of that Act. [/QUOTE]
The act quoted is a general powers of sentencing one.
It certainly doesn't apply directly to cyclists, if it applies at all.
What the courts like to call 'ancilliary orders' are usually relevant to the offence, thus someone who is cruel to animals may get a general sentence - community work, prison, whatever - and banned from keeping animals.
Or a child abuser will be banned from unsupervised contact with children in addition to whatever sentence he gets.
You don't need a driving licence to ride to bicycle, so I can't seen your licence being removed as part of a cycling prosecution.
However, the prosecution is under one of the Road Traffic Acts, so it may be there is the power to ban anyone who is prosecuted under those acts.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
I once knew a bloke who told me that his uncle was prosecuted for "furious pedalling". Mind you he may have made it up, or he may have told the truth but his uncle may have lied about it. Or indeed I may have made it up.
PhilDawson8270
Veteran
Why does it require different legislation?
If their body converts carbohydrates to alcohol, and it is above the legal alcohol level in the blood. Then they cannot drive, it's no different to drinking alcohol and driving. I don't understand why there would be any difference.
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
because if a zero limit was in place ........
PhilDawson8270
Veteran
Then they won't be allowed to drive. Unfortunately, medical conditions exclude others from driving too, as they're deemed dangerous.
Why is it ok to be physically drunk, and way over the legal limit, just because you didn't drink it? It doesn't matter what the medical condition, they're not fit to drive a motor vehicle.
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
whoosh
PhilDawson8270
Veteran
Explaining your point is generally a more effective method of debate.
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
righty ho then.
1 ) a zero limit is not workable due to several factors. I highlighted the extreme cases where a medical condition puts well over the current limit. there are lots of ( despite Regs assertion it is sooo rare) people who produce alcohol in the gut but well below network rail limit. several people on our rail projects have discovered this as D and D mandatory testing happens at induction. a few people were very shocked to see a measurable level despite not having had any alcohol for several days.
2) "aunt mildreds" sherry trifle , Rum n raisin Ice cream/Fudge ( yes it does actually contain rum)
3) alcohol had gel does get absorbed into the blood stream.
4) ever had a mild tummy upset where the bacteria imbalance gets skewed. perfect conditions for a natural alcohol to occur.
I personally would be very happy to see the limit in the UK as low as the Network rail levels (13mg) or lower. BUT NOT ZERO .
1 ) a zero limit is not workable due to several factors. I highlighted the extreme cases where a medical condition puts well over the current limit. there are lots of ( despite Regs assertion it is sooo rare) people who produce alcohol in the gut but well below network rail limit. several people on our rail projects have discovered this as D and D mandatory testing happens at induction. a few people were very shocked to see a measurable level despite not having had any alcohol for several days.
2) "aunt mildreds" sherry trifle , Rum n raisin Ice cream/Fudge ( yes it does actually contain rum)
3) alcohol had gel does get absorbed into the blood stream.
4) ever had a mild tummy upset where the bacteria imbalance gets skewed. perfect conditions for a natural alcohol to occur.
I personally would be very happy to see the limit in the UK as low as the Network rail levels (13mg) or lower. BUT NOT ZERO .
