Police Campaign on Lights on Bicycles

[Cab]

<...and....breathe......>

Fabulous, eloquent outburst I agree with every word.

 

[domtyler]

The main people I see without lights are kids with hoodies on BMX/MTB's. They are admittedly hard to see, taking on an almost ghost like appearance.

 

[Cab]

In Cambridge its mostly students, with some locals too. The way to deal with this would be to encourage bike shops to advise on lights, to encourage the Universities to up-sell lights (even get them to bulk-buy for discount and to treat cycling without lights as a college offense), and to stop and advise cyclists on safe cycling. I've got our local beat bobbies to go along with that way of thinking. The city-wide campaign of blitzing cyclists for not having lights just isn't going to work; take action to reduce the problem, then concentrate on other cyclists who fall through that net.

Thats what makes this look like a daft publicity stunt. The complete lack of solid action other than the annual 'stop and fine'.

 

[Chuffy]

Thats what makes this look like a daft publicity stunt. The complete lack of solid action other than the annual 'stop and fine'.

Yes and no. Publicity stunt? Well, yes, it raises the issue. Surely that's the point. It's no more daft than, say, the annual firework safety campaign (he says, quickly picking something roughly equivalent while maintaining his stealth forumming activities at work).

 

[Cycling Naturalist]

In Cambridge its mostly students, with some locals too. .

If you can't persuade the intellectual elite of the value of lights at night, there's not much chance with the rest of us.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

the reason that plod show no interest in cars with dodgy lamps is that, by an old, yet to be repealed, law, plod must fit the bulb if the driver carries a spare. all very well in the days when you unscrewed the headlamp from the front, but some cars even require you to remove the whole front bumper to access the lights

so no wonder they don't bother. time this law was done away with maybe?

 

[Cab]

Yes and no. Publicity stunt? Well, yes, it raises the issue. Surely that's the point. It's no more daft than, say, the annual firework safety campaign (he says, quickly picking something roughly equivalent while maintaining his stealth forumming activities at work).

The difference being that people set fireworks off every year, whereas a very large part of the cycling population of Cambridge starts riding in, say, their second year of studies, and then they finish their degree two years later and they're no longer cyclists. Its just a waste of time and effort, or rather its a bad way to spend time and effort when there are better approaches. It smacks of a 'get tough' publicity stunt.

 

[Cab]

If you can't persuade the intellectual elite of the value of lights at night, there's not much chance with the rest of us.

If you saw 'em riding around here, you'd not be calling them the 'intellectual elite'

 

[Morrisette]

Fabulous, eloquent outburst I agree with every word.

Shucks!
This is not to say they shouldn't enforce the law on lights - just that some other laws could get enforced too.

 

[John the Monkey]

People will say "but you saw them"

Ignoring the the fact that it was, eventually, late, fleetingly

True enough - obviously I'm on a bike too, so I'm travelling slowly enough to see them in the lighted portions of the route (and as there's no turn off) be aware that they're somewhere ahead of me. Whether a faster cyclist, or a motorist would have done the same is doubtful. I did move out a bit more in the lane in the hope that a car going around me would be far enough out to still have room to pass the unlighted cyclists, even if they saw them late.

Cab: The approach you outline seems eminently sensible, and would do more good in the long run, I suspect.

 

[RPM]

5pm yesterday, dark, definitely need to have the lights on, it's a busy (with cars) street in Brixton Hill..(I was driving the van, unfortunately) coming towards us is a cyclist, no lights. I could only make him out as he got close. I thought to say something, but he probably wouldn't have appreciated being told he was breaking the law.

Especially seeing as he was a copper!

setting a great example eh?

 

[gbb]

Cambridge has a massive transient cyclist population. Blitz 'em every year, next year you've still got loads of cyclists without lights. It gives you no improvement proportional to the investment in police time. You can have a nice graph with 'number of notices issued', but I guarantee that a year later the same proportion of cyclists will have no lights. Thats why we get plod on our streets doing this every single year with no improvement evident.[/QUOTE]

Thats cos people in general are...to be blunt...thick
They need to be told over and over, doesnt matter whether its cycle lights, walking on the road when theres a path next to it, any situation, anywhere.

There are an extrordinary amount of thick people out there. It never ceases to amaze me.

Anyway....same story in Peterborough. Every year its the same message. But i posted the other week, i do believe there are more cyclists in Peterborough WITH lights than ive seen in a long time....so perhaps the message IS getting through.

That aside, it doesnt matter what the 'crime' is...if its being flouted, it should be dealt with. If its cyclists without lights....'do em' i say. They set us all a bad example.

 

[bonj2]

If it's any consolation to the view that cyclists are targetted, then I RLJed right in front of a police van today which must have seen me and they didn't do anything. Presumably either 'cos I did it quite safely, or 'cos it would have delayed the doughnut-eating session they were about to begin in infirmary road tesco's.

 

[Cab]

Thats cos people in general are...to be blunt...thick
They need to be told over and over, doesnt matter whether its cycle lights, walking on the road when theres a path next to it, any situation, anywhere.

They aren't being told over and over, its a largely transient cycling population that are responsible for most of the cyclign without lights here. Catch 'em, warn 'em, no difference, because next time you have a campaign its an entirely new set of students. Its a stupid, stupid campaign here.

And yes, plod sems to be out in force stopping cyclists in the city centre.

 

[gbb]

They aren't being told over and over, its a largely transient cycling population that are responsible for most of the cyclign without lights here. Catch 'em, warn 'em, no difference, because next time you have a campaign its an entirely new set of students. Its a stupid, stupid campaign here.

And yes, plod sems to be out in force stopping cyclists in the city centre.

Yes but surely the same tactics are therefor applicable...transient cyclists, how else are you going to get the message to them then,...surely...by doing it over and over.
Peterborough in my case doesnt have a particually transient cycling fraternity...but historically, the Police have still had to resort to the same tactics every year or so....because people just dont take it in, or dont want to...the answers the same.....if you break the law...you deserve whats coming.
Ultimately...it doesnt matter what 'vehicle' you use to 'educate' the masses...punishment is the final and most effective means of getting the message through. (for the majority of people anyway)...that said, some people NEVER learn.