Cycling after a few drinks

[ebikeerwidnes]

This is categorically wrong.

Police have no power to require a sample of breath, blood or urine from a cyclist.

Please see earlier links to the relevant legislation up thread.

If you claim you have not had more than a half and they doubt you
they could suggest a breath test - and if it says you are OK to drive a car then that shows you were right

if not then they have reason to doubt that you were telling the truth

which sounds like a good reason to refuse it

 

[Ming the Merciless]

they could suggest a breath test

Not if you’re on a bike they couldn’t, no more than if you were walking down the road.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Not if you’re on a bike they couldn’t, no more than if you were walking down the road.

I was wondering that

clearly they have no power to enforce it in any way
but I was wondering if they could suggest it

or, for that matter, if you could suggest it to prove you are not drunk

I suppose suggesting it could be interpreted as gentle coercion??

 

[glasgowcyclist]

clearly they have no power to enforce it in any way
but I was wondering if they could suggest it

Why would they, when it has no bearing?

If they think you’re unfit through drink they’ll just charge you based on their visual assessment of your riding. It serves no purpose to ask you for a breath sample because, even if it indicates you are below the limit for driving, your level of control is sufficiently impaired for them to be able to prosecute you.

 

[Alex321]

ok seen that a few times in this thread, technically it is, under the Road Traffic Act 1988,it is a criminal offence to ride a bicycle on a road or public place while in an unfit state through drinking alcohol or taking drugs.

That does not make it an offence to ride a bike after a couple of pints, unless your tolerance for alcohol is remarkably low.

now fine you can argue a couple of pints wont impact your ability to safely control your bike and put you in an unfit state, so no offence is being commited, but unlike drink driving theres no specific limit to rely on (though the police can breathalyse you as a cyclist and it would stand as strong evidence for the offence being committed if you were over the drink drive limit)

False on both counts.

The police have no power to requests a breathalyser for anybody not in charge of a motor vehicle.

And as you say, there is no specific likit. You have to be visibly not in full control before it is an offence.

its a purely subjective test by the police who stop you, and their view may well be that a couple of pints is too many, or it might not.

They will not go on how many you have drunk, or anything to do with your blood alcohol level. THey will only stop you if you appear to be riding erratically.

so its worth remembering that, and for those that say ah but the police will never catch you, sure its unlikely, but there was a guy in our local pub the other week who cycles to the pub, who was complaining he got stopped by the police on the way home as "he was all over the road" and now has a court appearance, with a potential minimum £1000 fine, criminal record etc to worry about. now he drinks far far more than a couple of pints for sure per pub visit, and completely denies he was all over the road, but still I think he's going to struggle to contend it.

Probably. But if he was "all over the road", then he clearly fits what I said above, namely he was riding erratically.

 

[Profpointy]

To be fair I don't think anyone's claiming beer enhances performance !

Actually, now I think about it, when I used to play in fairly low level chess league (well, I was low level at any rate), I'd play better after a couple of pints (specifically 2) as I'd be less nervous and not as fixated on my own plans at the expense of my opponent's threats.

 

[stephec]

I remember the first time I got my leg over my old ten speed racer after a few pints when I was seventeen, the first part of the journey was downhill and I somehow made it home without incident, I did giggle quite a lot though. 😂

 

[katiewlx]

It would be interesting to see how he gets on if he contests it!

I would assume that the Police will have a good reason to stop a person on a bike for being drunk

personally, I would avoid doing things like right turns ona bike if I had "had a few"
riding along a cycle path would be OK - roads somewhere in the middle

agreed, Ive no idea obviously how he was riding at the time, Ive seen him riding home from the pub before and he looked as fine as all the e-bike riders they dont bother stopping, I walk btw before anyone casts aspersions on me,so who knows whether that night he had more or was just riding badly, it was probably just one of those unfortunate just happened to be a bit wobbly, got stopped, faced with a bit of officialdom and a few beers and it probably spiralled out of control from there.

 

[katiewlx]

To be fair I don't think anyone's claiming beer enhances performance !

tbf Ive found it as good as an energy drink at a stop, its got sugar, its got carbs and it comes in an easy to consume package, whats not to like

 

[katiewlx]

This is categorically wrong.

Police have no power to require a sample of breath, blood or urine from a cyclist.

Please see earlier links to the relevant legislation up thread.

the police can demand you do whatever the hell they want you to do, and they can breathalyse cyclists, whilst they legally cannot back that up in so far as if you refuse you dont break the law stance, if you do so voluntarily simply because they asked you to, then check mate.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

the police can demand you do whatever the hell they want you to do

Police have specific legal powers and cannot do whatever they want; they must follow laws and procedures.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

the police can demand you do whatever the hell they want you to do

Cite the relevant authority, please.

They can't and they won't demand for the reasons I've already stated. It would be pointless and unenforceable.

 

[katiewlx]

That does not make it an offence to ride a bike after a couple of pints, unless your tolerance for alcohol is remarkably low.

read what I wrote, as I said a couple of pints might be perfectly ok, and yet it might also not be at the same time ,because its purely a subjective assessment based on the police officer who stops you, what they believe makes you fit to ride a bicycle.

False on both counts.

The police have no power to requests a breathalyser for anybody not in charge of a motor vehicle.

nono your misunderstanding what Im saying there, the police have no powers to force you as a cyclist to do a breathalyser test, thats an important distinction, theyre perfectly at liberty to still ask you to submit to one, if you do so voluntarily the results will be used as evidence in a court of law against you.

And as you say, there is no specific likit. You have to be visibly not in full control before it is an offence.

no you have to be in the opinion of the police officer who stops you not to be fit to ride a bicycle, that doesnt at all mean you have to be visibily not in control at all, simply in their opinion not fit to be riding, obviously riding not in control is a big indicator of that, but its not the only one.

and you are reacting to this exactly as Ive no doubt my guy from my local did who is now up facing a court case, instead of just accepting the lecture and walking home instead, he probably got the hump and went all you dont have the right to tell me I cant drink as much as I like and ride a bicycle, those drink driving laws dont apply to me.

so I dont understand why people are trying to be so...lets say getting around this, the law is quite clear, you cannot ride a bicycle if under the influence of alcohol or drugs makes you unfit to ride it. Yes its a bit of a moving target what unfit actually means whilst riding a bicycle, unlike drink driving in cars, but if you are stopped by the police for this, theyve stopped you because they think you are unfit. so youve already crossed the threshold for the charge in their eyes, and the law.

 

[katiewlx]

Police have specific legal powers and cannot do whatever they want; they must follow laws and procedures.

they can ask you to do whatever they want, you are mistaking forcing you to comply, if you comply voluntarily there are no laws or procedures they need to follow...

 

[katiewlx]

Cite the relevant authority, please.

They can't and they won't demand for the reasons I've already stated. It would be pointless and unenforceable.

so if a police officer simply asks you to do something, will you do it, or will you ask them to cite their authority first ? youd be amazed at how many people go for option a.