Police Officer with a chip?

[CopperCyclist]

And how do you think those biased are going to react when they've read cyclists themselves getting the legalities wrong here? We all have to be clear on not just the law but also our rights. Some of you might have reaffirmed the myths many of these people believe.

We also need to not confuse "not illegal" with "a right to do something" for fear of devaluing the things we do have a "right" to do.

 

[Arrowfoot]

We also need to not confuse "not illegal" with "a right to do something" for fear of devaluing the things we do have a "right" to do.

Yes. This is where I suspect the confusion reigns. Not an illegal act but not the right thing to do. Its a safety issue in the main.

 

[fatblokish]

In a person-pushing-bicycle combination, there are two components: the person, who has the character of a pedestrian, and the bicycle, which has the character of a vehicle. The question is, in legal terms, which of the two contradictory categories applies to the combo? Pedestrian, in which the actions of the cyclist in the vid are legal, or vehicle, in which case they are not? C v. B says that when the person starts as a pedestrian, pushing the bike on the pavement, and ends likewise as a pedestrian on a pavement, it is sensible to treat them as a pedestrian even when they're on the carriageway. It seems to me (though I am not setting myself up as an expert) that the converse is also sensible: when they start the manoeuvre as a vehicle, on the carriageway, and finish it once again as a vehicle on the carriageway, and remain on the carriageway throughout, their predominant character during the ambiguous pushing-the-bike phase is also that of a vehicle.

I take a different view. The perceived offence here is crossing the traffic-light controlled white line, not that of pushing the bike on the carriageway. In the video the cyclist dismounted before the white line, began his journey across the white line on foot, fully crossed the white line on foot and then remounted. At no point did he "ride" the bike across the white line, just as in CvB at no point did she "ride" her bike across any part of the ped crossing as both began and intended to end their journeys across the confines of the road feature on foot. I think that the implication that somehow a quick trip to the footpath resets his legal obligations is wrong.
IMO, in order to more quickly cross the junction, all the cyclist had to do was to cross the white line on foot and he could have legally re-mounted his bike as soon thereafter as he liked and he did not need to scamper across the whole junction before re-mounting.
Not knowing the junction, light sequence or other conditions I can't say whether what the cyclist chose to do was in his opinion a reasonably safe manoeuvre.

 

[Falco Frank]

Interesting thread.

Just watched the video once again, I'm impressed at the cyclists skill level, in all honesty.

A few comments.
Unmarked police car had crossed the first ASL white line, with another cyclist in front of him, read into that what you will.
Unmounted cyclist, had fully crossed the junction before the cross-traffic lights changed to green, supporting the 'crossing during a pedestrian phase' claim.
Police car used flashing lights and siren over a section of road with 'sleeping policemen'???

Sorry, I wanted to end on something ironic.

 

[Sara_H]

We also need to not confuse "not illegal" with "a right to do something" for fear of devaluing the things we do have a "right" to do.

there are lots of things that may seem unsafe going on all the time that aren't illegal - climbing trees, swimming in the sea, smoking, drinking. They don't warrant blues, twos and an aggressive attitude.

 

[doog]

Prove it. I'll ask the same of you, Doog. Show me the law that says you cannot walk/run over a stop line whilst pushing a bike. Running a light is a legal black and white oddly enough. You have to be seated and propelling the machine whilst astride the bike:
http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/

I meant in the literal sense..ie ' ran ' , most got it but I can understand in the rush to prove their point some didnt . If you dont believe that his actions were slightly daft and reflect badly on cyclists then there really is no hope for us all. Actually lets all start doing it and watch the carnage ensue.

 

[Sara_H]

I meant in the literal sense..ie ' ran ' , most got it but I can understand in the rush to prove their point some didnt . If you dont believe that his actions were slightly daft and reflect badly on cyclists then there really is no hope for us all. Actually lets all start doing it and watch the carnage ensue.

Yes let's - because we somehow need to demonstrate what a complete shambles our roads and the laws around them are.
They're not fit for purpose.

 

[Sara_H]

I take it the Police do not have your consent from you as you assume the Police Officers intentions were as stated above. "easy opportunity to bully a member of the public".

I'm realistic about the fact that the police are as vulnerable to the fragilities of human nature as anyone else and I've seen many examples of police officers abusing their powers.
I don't tar all police officers with the same brush, I speak as someone who has recently been a victim of a serious assault, witnessed and reported crime against others, made numerous 999 calls for police assistance in the course of my work and also as someone who works with Police officers as part of my multi agency team 2 - 3 times a week on average. In all these scenarios I've seen good and bad practice. Unfortunately the public at large will generally only get to see the bad examples on YouTube etc and I'm afraid in this particular video the officer was in the wrong and he behaved badly.

 

[Pale Rider]

Why do we have this attitude? .

Because many cyclists have an 'us and them' bunker mentality.

Too many are also far too interested in what and how others are riding.

Ride your own bike, and leave other cyclists alone to ride theirs.

 

[downfader]

We also need to not confuse "not illegal" with "a right to do something" for fear of devaluing the things we do have a "right" to do.

You're all making a mountain out of molehill. The Police need to save their efforts for REAL threats and REAL lawbreaking not something they DEEM unsafe. (Capitals for emphasis)

Otherwise we'd all be prosecuted for cycling on the pavement when pushing the bike: http://www.commonlii.org/int/cases/EngR/1861/97.pdf

The Policeman has not been an effective judge of the circumstance. I REALLY hope you all do not advise other cyclists as to their rights.

 

[glenn forger]

I'd say pick your fights Downfader. This rider isn't a safety campaigner, he's an argumentative squit.

 

[Brandane]

A worrying thread.
The guy with the bike did nothing illegal, and as an adult he is able to calculate any risk for himself and decide whether it is safe to walk/run across the road while pushing a bike.
Yet there are posters on here who want to eradicate all forms of risk from our lives; or so it seems. As @Sara_H has pointed out, there are all types of activities which carry an element of risk but are not illegal. This is where all this OTT health and safety stuff worries me. I am all for health and safety done with a common sense approach, but it is now being used as a method of control; and some posters on here are falling in line with it. Hook, line and sinker.

 

[mick1836]

Technically, even morally, he isnt running a red. He's a pedestrian the moment his feet touch the ground and his legs are no longer astride. Plenty of pedestrians will cross diagonally it should be noted, rather than going around the long way

What a load of tosh.........so if you get out of your car you can push it through a red traffic light because you are no longer a driver but a pedestrian?

 

[Sara_H]

What a load of tosh.........so if you get out of your car you can push it through a red traffic light because you are no longer a driver but a pedestrian?

No, that's illegal. It's been covered already.

 

[Sara_H]

A worrying thread.
The guy with the bike did nothing illegal, and as an adult he is able to calculate any risk for himself and decide whether it is safe to walk/run across the road while pushing a bike.
Yet there are posters on here who want to eradicate all forms of risk from our lives; or so it seems. As @Sara_H has pointed out, there are all types of activities which carry an element of risk but are not illegal. This is where all this OTT health and safety stuff worries me. I am all for health and safety done with a common sense approach, but it is now being used as a method of control; and some posters on here are falling in line with it. Hook, line and sinker.

Very succinctly put. I agree that the H&S angle is often used as a method to control the activities of others, in this case to bully and harass, and as a general cover all for sloppy laziness.