Allo allo allo! You cant ride a bike at this time of night!
- Thread starter downfader
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Mad at urage
New Member
- Location
- Just N of Cardiff
Hmmm, Brom' going dirt cheap in the Free Ads? I wonder why that is then ...
For more clarity if it is required:
Sus' laws? I am a white male and have been stopped under them plenty of times (including "We have been told to stop and question anyone out at this time of night", me: <smiles> "What? Is there a curfew then?"), walking back from a party (20 miles - I was young once!), coming home from shift-work ... or just in the wrong clothes in the wrong place (boots and combat jacket in Clapham just after a bank robbery) - loads more as a youngster, less so now (but it happens, although it is no longer the same statute). Why make it a problem? If something looks unusual, checking it out is what Police are employed to do.
For more clarity if it is required:
Sus' laws? I am a white male and have been stopped under them plenty of times (including "We have been told to stop and question anyone out at this time of night", me: <smiles> "What? Is there a curfew then?"), walking back from a party (20 miles - I was young once!), coming home from shift-work ... or just in the wrong clothes in the wrong place (boots and combat jacket in Clapham just after a bank robbery) - loads more as a youngster, less so now (but it happens, although it is no longer the same statute). Why make it a problem? If something looks unusual, checking it out is what Police are employed to do.
ComedyPilot
Secret Lemonade Drinker
- Location
- The Kingdom of Yorkshire
But has been published nationally, people will read it and believe/be influenced by it.
And that IMO is WRONG.
Irresponsible crap journalism.
OP
OP
downfader
extimus uero philosophus
- Location
- 'ampsheeeer
Another thing about the web and newspapers is how they have their own blogs now. I understand they aint constricted by PCC guidelines. That makes crap journalism even crapper
The article and the woman are correct, the police did stop him for riding a commuting bicycle at the wrong time of day. That's exactly why they stopped him, because they know that the people who ride those sort of bikes are normally at work at the time he was riding it. They were right to stop him. She's a silly cow not to realise that.
ComedyPilot
Secret Lemonade Drinker
- Location
- The Kingdom of Yorkshire
But how many thousand people will have read the same article, and formed a negative opinion of the police?
ComedyPilot
Secret Lemonade Drinker
- Location
- The Kingdom of Yorkshire
99% who possibly can vote.....and drive cars..........
All printed articles should be assessed for the pertinent facts and conclusions drawn thereon. Sadly people don't look at facts, and prefer to clamour to journalism that slags off one element or another, rather than being impartial.
Then again, impartiality never sold papers, and wouldn't get money out of the idiots.
All printed articles should be assessed for the pertinent facts and conclusions drawn thereon. Sadly people don't look at facts, and prefer to clamour to journalism that slags off one element or another, rather than being impartial.
Then again, impartiality never sold papers, and wouldn't get money out of the idiots.
gemsno4
Active Member
- Location
- Southampton
Just to put the article in context, this journalist writes in G2 the "fluffy" bit of the paper and is the columnist who writes about what she personally did/saw this week. So anyone reading it in the actual paper would judge it from that point of view. So not some kind of fully researched article, it was basically the footer to her serious piece - which ironically enough was about how no one's perfect and things aren't clear cut
With regard to stop and search I wonder if those who have admitted being stopped by the police would also have been so willing to be searched? My recollections of this policy were that the police needed proof of a crime being committed in the area, by someone meeting your description before they could do this. The only time it happened to me when I asked for these details (cocky law student that I was) the police apologised profusely and sent me on my way
With regard to stop and search I wonder if those who have admitted being stopped by the police would also have been so willing to be searched? My recollections of this policy were that the police needed proof of a crime being committed in the area, by someone meeting your description before they could do this. The only time it happened to me when I asked for these details (cocky law student that I was) the police apologised profusely and sent me on my way
Amheirchion
Active Member
- Location
- Northampton
I've been stopped and searched a few times in my 'youth' (a couple of years ago).
For walking through town at 2am on a Tuesday morning.
"What are you doing out at this time?"
"Just finished work."
"Oh really, where do you work?"
"Local supermarket."
"And they have staff working 'til this time do they?"
"Yes, they have a full night shift too, I can get my uniform out my bag if you'd like?"
"Oh, er, no need, get home safely."
"No chance of a lift then? It's bloody freezing."
Didn't get searched, nor a lift.
Another time I got stopped and searched with 2 friends, as there had apparently been a mugging by 3 lads who vaguely matched our description.. Unlikely, especially as I was carrying around a huge duffle bag and 2 ruck sacks having gone straight to the pub from the train station.
Pretty much all the other times were the same, police felt I looked dodgy so stopped me on any pretext. Quite annoying to be honest, but meh, it's how it goes.
For walking through town at 2am on a Tuesday morning.
"What are you doing out at this time?"
"Just finished work."
"Oh really, where do you work?"
"Local supermarket."
"And they have staff working 'til this time do they?"
"Yes, they have a full night shift too, I can get my uniform out my bag if you'd like?"
"Oh, er, no need, get home safely."
"No chance of a lift then? It's bloody freezing."
Didn't get searched, nor a lift.
Another time I got stopped and searched with 2 friends, as there had apparently been a mugging by 3 lads who vaguely matched our description.. Unlikely, especially as I was carrying around a huge duffle bag and 2 ruck sacks having gone straight to the pub from the train station.
Pretty much all the other times were the same, police felt I looked dodgy so stopped me on any pretext. Quite annoying to be honest, but meh, it's how it goes.
ComedyPilot
Secret Lemonade Drinker
- Location
- The Kingdom of Yorkshire
I can't begin to count the number of people I have 'stopped/searched' in my previous career.
Most were stopped following an 'incident' where a general description was passed out - police have radios to communicate you know.
Other times it was people acting oddly; I can't put a finger on it, but they just do something that makes you think 'what are they up to?'
Then you get the best ones, people driving cars with lights out, not indicating, no seatbelts, weaving etc. You pull them to have a word, smell what you believe to be cannabis/see drugs paraphinalia on the floor, so search from there.
2 people I spotted like that had their houses and cars etc taken from them under POCA
Most were stopped following an 'incident' where a general description was passed out - police have radios to communicate you know.
Other times it was people acting oddly; I can't put a finger on it, but they just do something that makes you think 'what are they up to?'
Then you get the best ones, people driving cars with lights out, not indicating, no seatbelts, weaving etc. You pull them to have a word, smell what you believe to be cannabis/see drugs paraphinalia on the floor, so search from there.
2 people I spotted like that had their houses and cars etc taken from them under POCA
OP
OP
downfader
extimus uero philosophus
- Location
- 'ampsheeeer
Just to put the article in context, this journalist writes in G2 the "fluffy" bit of the paper and is the columnist who writes about what she personally did/saw this week. So anyone reading it in the actual paper would judge it from that point of view. So not some kind of fully researched article, it was basically the footer to her serious piece - which ironically enough was about how no one's perfect and things aren't clear cut
With regard to stop and search I wonder if those who have admitted being stopped by the police would also have been so willing to be searched? My recollections of this policy were that the police needed proof of a crime being committed in the area, by someone meeting your description before they could do this. The only time it happened to me when I asked for these details (cocky law student that I was) the police apologised profusely and sent me on my way
I used to read Amateur Photographer every week, quality journal but kept getting letters and emails off its readers that the Police kept stopping them, searching them and telling them it was illegal to carry and use a camera in public. So naturally they did some prodding into this and found it was a little too common. I kept telling my family of these stories, saying it was a little too prevailent to be just the usual bluster but none beleived me..
so que a couple of years back, we head into Maplin to get some cdrs or something, Bro says he'll wait outside as the shop is packed. Height of summer so it was nice out and he's facing the Bargate gates 2 lions. He sees this lad of about 14 walk up and start taking pictures of of Southampton's favourite lions with an SLR. Perhaps part of a school project. He barely took any notice until all of a sudden three cops ride up at speed and dismount infront of the lad on MTBs.
They gave the guy a S&S and told him to go home and stop taking photos and were very firm with him. I come out after this is finished, but Bro says to me "I have to speak to those Police officers, I think I've just seen what your mag has described..?"
So for about 3 minutes my Brother asks the Police some polite but firm questions: why, how? And why did they tell the lad it was illegal to take photos of a popular tourist attraction (it is actually one of our few) when infact the truth was counter? They really were confused and thrown by the fact a member of public had asked them, and questioned their motives and policies.
I was silently proud to be honest. I asked my Brother to send an official complaint to the Police but sadly he forgot. Within a month photographers' right were national news in the Telegraph, the Guardian and on BBC National news. It was even raised in Parliament under the terrorism guidelines. It turned out most people were stopped and told "you could be a peado or a suicide bomber!"
My friends [esp. FLETCH456 above], its not always what it seems. The police are capable of some really stupid things but perhaps the article could be more descriptive and make them look like morons....
I think it could be like this....
The area the van may have been operating in may have been in an area known for high number of cycle thefts and drug usage.
The person they stopped in mid-afternoon may have been behaving suspiciously [such as seeing police from a distance and appearing to make off - this can give grounds for a stop].
Upon stopping him, police can [esp the ones with an intrest in cycling] may see that the person on the bike 'doesnt belong on that bike' cos its the wrong size, has SPD pedals, has heavy customisation, is expensive and the guy on it is 17yrs old wearing all the wrong clothes for cycling and no SPD clips on his Nike trainers. Scum dont tend to 'purchase' folders/commuters.
The cops would then [as you would want to think] take their time to ID the person, run checks on the frame number and ask an array of questions which may trip that 17yr old into saying something he should not have - with the aim to ensure the bike is not stolen and that it does belong to him.
People getting stopped in mid-afternoon possibly may not be at work- scum dont tend to have an occupation during social hours you see - only between say 9pm and 6am.
People in the past have been stopped [for minor things] and found out to be the orchestrator of more serious crimes. The writer of the harsh but meaningless article may like to know that - i believe in the proper use of the s.1 PACE stop and search power. One may criticise the police for not being proactive in seeking out scum, what then would you call this and could you come up with another perhaps more 'inoffensive' way to do it? May the cuts not fall on this sort of police action.
At the end of the week, wouldn't you rather there were 'six of them' taking there time to tackle what the writer of the article might consider a waste of resource than let them roam cos theres 'more important things' to police? Is it not important to proactively detect crime and maybe reunite owners with their bikes. Police are paid to be suspicious - do you not want that?
I think it could be like this....
The area the van may have been operating in may have been in an area known for high number of cycle thefts and drug usage.
The person they stopped in mid-afternoon may have been behaving suspiciously [such as seeing police from a distance and appearing to make off - this can give grounds for a stop].
Upon stopping him, police can [esp the ones with an intrest in cycling] may see that the person on the bike 'doesnt belong on that bike' cos its the wrong size, has SPD pedals, has heavy customisation, is expensive and the guy on it is 17yrs old wearing all the wrong clothes for cycling and no SPD clips on his Nike trainers. Scum dont tend to 'purchase' folders/commuters.
The cops would then [as you would want to think] take their time to ID the person, run checks on the frame number and ask an array of questions which may trip that 17yr old into saying something he should not have - with the aim to ensure the bike is not stolen and that it does belong to him.
People getting stopped in mid-afternoon possibly may not be at work- scum dont tend to have an occupation during social hours you see - only between say 9pm and 6am.
People in the past have been stopped [for minor things] and found out to be the orchestrator of more serious crimes. The writer of the harsh but meaningless article may like to know that - i believe in the proper use of the s.1 PACE stop and search power. One may criticise the police for not being proactive in seeking out scum, what then would you call this and could you come up with another perhaps more 'inoffensive' way to do it? May the cuts not fall on this sort of police action.
At the end of the week, wouldn't you rather there were 'six of them' taking there time to tackle what the writer of the article might consider a waste of resource than let them roam cos theres 'more important things' to police? Is it not important to proactively detect crime and maybe reunite owners with their bikes. Police are paid to be suspicious - do you not want that?
That is stupid. It's like saying I'm not riding my Mountain Bike down a muddy hill so I'm doing wrong. Coppers eh!
Contrary to the beliefs of certain people the Police are not clairvoyant. They rely mostly on common sense and good old fashioned questioning. If I had a bike stolen I would expect the Police to stop and speak to anyone that appeared 'wrong' on a bike (e.g. wrong person, wrong bike, wrong area and so on). This serves as both an investigative and deterrent function. It may not get my bike back but may prevent or detect the theft of another.
If the person was genuine they would be sent on their way probably in a few minutes. Questioning will increase or reduce suspicion. If it increases I would expect the Police to enquire further - check serial number/description against stolen property list, confirming true identity of rider (and owner if different), checking person against the Police National Computer, and asking why they are in the area if they are not a resident. Asking the rider to turn their back on the bike and then ask them to describe it in detail including any distinguishing marks or damage sometimes works!
Officers are often in 'units' on public order duty but unsurprisingly can still be proactive when it comes to investigation of crime. Presumably this 'journalist' would only want one officer to attend any crime she reported or maybe she thought the Police in her nice neighbourhood on a Sunday afternoon was for her unsavoury or lowered the tone.
If the person was genuine they would be sent on their way probably in a few minutes. Questioning will increase or reduce suspicion. If it increases I would expect the Police to enquire further - check serial number/description against stolen property list, confirming true identity of rider (and owner if different), checking person against the Police National Computer, and asking why they are in the area if they are not a resident. Asking the rider to turn their back on the bike and then ask them to describe it in detail including any distinguishing marks or damage sometimes works!
Officers are often in 'units' on public order duty but unsurprisingly can still be proactive when it comes to investigation of crime. Presumably this 'journalist' would only want one officer to attend any crime she reported or maybe she thought the Police in her nice neighbourhood on a Sunday afternoon was for her unsavoury or lowered the tone.
Davidc
Guru
- Location
- Somerset UK
I've been stopped in the past, usually in the early hours of the morning.
Last time was leaving Bristol on my mtb, last October, at about 1:45 am on a Tuesday morning. It took about 2 minutes for the policeman to decide I was who I said I was and let me get on my way.
I just have to accept that a 58 year old man riding a bike through Hotwells at that time of day is a bit unusual and that being stopped was perfectly reasonable. The police are doing what they're paid to do and don't need silly articles from stupid journalists to make it more difficult.
Last time was leaving Bristol on my mtb, last October, at about 1:45 am on a Tuesday morning. It took about 2 minutes for the policeman to decide I was who I said I was and let me get on my way.
I just have to accept that a 58 year old man riding a bike through Hotwells at that time of day is a bit unusual and that being stopped was perfectly reasonable. The police are doing what they're paid to do and don't need silly articles from stupid journalists to make it more difficult.
