Dorset Police ClampDown

[subaqua]

To see just how pathetic Thames Valley plod are, watch "Police camera action" next time it's on TV.

Just watch how the police suck-up to motorists when they stop them, its all "Mate this and mate that" and all too nicey nicey, its almost like they are apologising for actually stopping them - Pathetic!!

Then try ringing them to come out to actually do something about rural speeding, it's a pointless waste of a phone call - wasters, there worse than the crims!

nothing wrong with being polite to your customers.would you like it if they were all abusive. if you speak to somebody like dirt then you get that back generally.

Sorry if I've mentioned this before Summerdays, but there's been a lot of discussion around North East Bristol about this very thing. The Polices response was that they need to be pragmatic - the roads around here weren't designed for the number of cars on them and they openly admit that if everyone parked 'in the roads' (i.e. no wheels on the pavement) that the roads would be blocked. They are currently investigating a scheme (I think trialled in London) where a white line is painted along the pavement, at a distance away from the wall to allow a pushchair to get through. A motorist can park upto this line, but an inch over and they'll book you. Of course, this scheme also relies on households keeping shrubs etc. cut back and not overhanging. I've not heard anything recently, but it was discussed at a community meeting about 9mths ago.

there have been bays like this for a long time in London. and yes park over the line and you , rightly, get a ticket. removal of the vehicle would be a better option.

 

[gaz]

no, it means i drive within the laws of the country.

Didn't you say you had received fines and points in the past?

 

[Mr Celine]

also in section 36 of RTA 1988 if you would like to read it.

Which basically states that you must comply with road signs.

If you actually read the TSRGD and the RTRA 1984 you might learn that the signs that you think mean 'speed limit' actually mean 'speed limit for motor vehicles'.

A bicycle is not a motor vehicle. The rider of a bicycle cannot fail to comply with a road sign that does not apply to bicycles.

 

[subaqua]

Which basically states that you must comply with road signs.

If you actually read the TSRGD and the RTRA 1984 you might learn that the signs that you think mean 'speed limit' actually mean 'speed limit for motor vehicles'.

A bicycle is not a motor vehicle. The rider of a bicycle cannot fail to comply with a road sign that does not apply to bicycles.

fine, ride like a cock and watch what Dorset plod will nick you for.

its knobbers who ride like they own the road that give cyclists a bad name.

 

[benborp]

Steady on subaqua. People are trying to get their point across quite reasonably and you've responded several times by being just a little offensive.

 

[gaz]

Which basically states that you must comply with road signs.

If you actually read the TSRGD and the RTRA 1984 you might learn that the signs that you think mean 'speed limit' actually mean 'speed limit for motor vehicles'.

A bicycle is not a motor vehicle. The rider of a bicycle cannot fail to comply with a road sign that does not apply to bicycles.

Exactly!!!catch me if you can

 

[subaqua]

Steady on subaqua. People are trying to get their point across quite reasonably and you've responded several times by being just a little offensive.

oh i can be just as offensive as many other posters on here have been.

the simple thing is nobody is above the law, as much as they like to think they are.

Knobber drivers and cyclists all give the other operators of these machines a bad name. it isn't big it isn't clever. if people want to alienate one group about another group then fine continue, but it isn't going to help in changing attitudes of ALL parties.

your classic RLJer needs to have the attitude of " it makes me safer" changed.
just the same as the driver who drives so close the paintwork on his car smears it top layer on you, needs his attitude changing.

to trot out a load of cliches

people in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones
people need to get their own house in order before ranting about others.

i am heartily sick of the holier than the motorist attitude prevalent here, that cyclists don't break laws and clean up others dogmess, help grannies aross road , pick birdies up and pop em back in nests etc.

 

[Dan B]

the simple thing is nobody is above the law, as much as they like to think they are.

But that has no relevance to the point made several times which you don't seem to have grasped: that the laws on speed limits are (with certain exceptions like the Royal Parks in London) laws on speed limits for motor vehicles. It is no more possible to break the speed limit on a bicycle than it is to be prosecuted for illegal parking as a pedestrian in a deckchair.

 

[gaz]

oh i can be just as offensive as many other posters on here have been.

Please point out where anyone was offensive towards you?

 

[turnout]

Subaqua, I haven't been abusive, I've made a series of points you've ignored.

 

[gambatte]

That's the cops offering excuses for people who break the law. If I cycled on the pavement and said in mitigation it's too dangerous on the roads I'd still get nicked. (I don't cycle on pavements).

Very silly.

"when the Home Office introduced fixed, on-the-spot penalties for riding on the pavement towards the end of the last decade, it followed up by issuing an additional piece of guidance. In a letter to an MP, who had questioned the new fines, then Home Office minister Paul Boateng wrote the following: "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users."Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required."

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/comment/james-daley-the-cycling-column-400076.html

 

[ComedyPilot]

But that has no relevance to the point made several times which you don't seem to have grasped: that the laws on speed limits are (with certain exceptions like the Royal Parks in London) laws on speed limits for motor vehicles. It is no more possible to break the speed limit on a bicycle than it is to be prosecuted for illegal parking as a pedestrian in a deckchair.

Obstruction?

 

[benborp]

Obstruction?

You illustrate Dan B's point. In the case of the deckchair lout it might be possible that they could be prosecuted for obstruction of the highway but they could not be prosecuted for a parking offence. And then, that is only if their use of the deckchair was unreasonable - I think you would have to try quite hard to get up quite a few peoples noses, or be extremely unlucky, before anyone would consider prosecution. Even then you might find that deckchair users are entitled by law to behave in a manner that non-deckchair users consider quite unreasonable.

Deckchair users are our brothers cyclist comrades!