Police Officer with a chip?

[downfader]

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?

Again, you aint listening... Learn to read. That has already been established in case law that you CAN push a bike, but you CANNOT push a motorised vehicle.

I will say it again, please never give advise to other cyclists. You will confuse the wider picture.

 

[downfader]

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

I have no idea about how the rider acts, but when someone is doing something legal and without real risk we have to back them up. One day it could be one of us and thats why we need to be more black and white

 

[glenn forger]

Oh please. All grown-up people know that you don't argue with the police. This bloke's like those Free Men chuffers who reckon if you don't stand up in court it doesn't count and they can't touch you. He wasn't even listening to the officer, he was just arguing.

Do you really want to tackle junctions where you have people scuttling about pushing their bikes to beat the phasing?

 

[glenn forger]

Goes against every instinct I have. Be polite to the police and finish the encounter as fast as possible. All day long that copper deals with gobby little yobs, day in day out people arguing about their rights.

 

[downfader]

Oh please. All grown-up people know that you don't argue with the police. This bloke's like those Free Men chuffers who reckon if you don't stand up in court it doesn't count and they can't touch you. He wasn't even listening to the officer, he was just arguing.

Do you really want to tackle junctions where you have people scuttling about pushing their bikes to beat the phasing?

The few cops I have personally known wont respond like that. They will pause, let the person vent for a moment, even step/lean back with placid body language and then calmly respond. There are good ways to police and bad ways. The video make was hardly about to get violent or abusive, he was merely trying to (perhaps a little frustratingly) interject.

You seem to think I am encouraging others to run across junctions. I am not. I am assessing this one video based upon what is shown. I am clarifying the legal issue as I understand it.

 

[downfader]

And vice versa, and that was a very disappointing feature. The police officer had had all the time to evaluate the incident waiting for the lights to change, and react calmly. He could easily have caught up driving normally without the son et lumier. He could have passed, stopped a bit further on and got out to have a conversation. He chose to manage it all badly.

I can understand though if he wants to be behind the wheel, he may think he's about to chase a rider perhaps.

 

[doog]

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.

Im struggling here, in one breath you state the roads / laws are a shambles (and by their nature risky) then a few posts later you are agreeing with people who are saying we are all becoming too risk averse. You cant have your cake and eat it. There will never be an ideal solution, If the roads were great and safe for cyclists you would still get people abusing the 'system' and pushing the boundaries, which is exactly what the cyclist did.

 

[Feastie]

The cyclist didn't do anything illegal and didn't cause any risks to anyone, which would be the only really legit reason for the policeman to intervene. If you feel that crossing on a green man symbol is dangerous and reckless, I can't help but feel that you've missed the whole point of traffic lights. Pragmatically and legally, this is a non-event for which this guy was told off for no real reason.

Anybody still coming up with objections seems to me to just be plastering the situation in pointless red tape for ?reasons.

 

[jiberjaber]

The guy in this video has posted it on a couple of other forums, the majority of which are of the opinion he was a bit of a tool for what he did. He also has another video of an interaction with Police, this time for leaving a red light 4 seconds or so before it changed.



Given he probably has no idea of the inter-green settings for the junction or the staging of the ped phases, both videos are a bit of a gamble. Some signal sites can have ped phases which only partially effect the junction, or skip them totally, sometimes timetabled, so your running that risk as well.

It can be argued whether he was legal or not, but personally it isn't a maneuver I would have made!

Fed up of waiting at traffic lights:
For those who are being frustrated by having to wait at lights, you can often trigger the presence detection on the road more efficiently by forcing a 'shorted turn effect' on the loop in the road.

The loop is mostly tuned to the inductive effect of a larger lump of metal than is present in a bike, but by riding along the edge of the loop in the road (the bit in the same direction you are riding, parallel to the kerb), you in effect make the bike have more effect on the loop.

This works even with my fully carbon bike, and can save you waiting at the junction for some time. If the loop is broken anyway or there i a particular cycle the lights are programmed to move round then this wont work, but for most lights there is no harm in trying

 

[glasgowcyclist]

...you don't argue with the police...

You do if you're being unfairly dealt with. Most cops can do their job without being officious but there are a few who like to think their word is final, even when they're in the wrong.

Be polite to the police and finish the encounter as fast as possible. All day long that copper deals with gobby little yobs, day in day out people arguing about their rights.

Some cops need to be reminded that not everyone they encounter has to be spoken to as if he were a 'gobby little yob'. I've been on the receiving end of the bully cop who wants to abuse his position and ignore my rights, that's not something I'll meekly accept while tugging my forelock.

GC

 

[Sara_H]

Im struggling here, in one breath you state the roads / laws are a shambles (and by their nature risky) then a few posts later you are agreeing with people who are saying we are all becoming too risk averse. You cant have your cake and eat it. There will never be an ideal solution, If the roads were great and safe for cyclists you would still get people abusing the 'system' and pushing the boundaries, which is exactly what the cyclist did.

I didn't say we are becoming too risk averse, I said that people often use the H&S argument as a tool to control people without any good real reason, and I gave some examples of legal risky behaviour that generally speaking most adults decide for themselves if the wish to take the risk without intervention from the police.
The road system is a shambles, we have a system that for the most part prioritises motor traffic flow over the safety and convenience of other more vulnerable road users. It doesn't work for cyclists or pedestrians, so to be harassed by when not actually causing any risk to others or breaking the law is a bit much.

 

[winjim]

Irresistible twat meets immovable pillock.

So it goes.

 

[CopperCyclist]

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)

I haven't made any comment about whether it was a suitable use of the officers time, I was just asked what I thought the risk was and gave the answer of why I personally disapprove.

I wouldn't have stopped him personally - which shouldn't be mistaken as approval for his actions.

 

[Pale Rider]

[QUOTE 3722286, member: 45"]There's a noticeable difference between the attitude of this policeman and him of the OP.[/QUOTE]

Also the attitude of the cyclist.

 

[Pale Rider]

[QUOTE 3722377, member: 45"]Yes, but if an unprofessional bobby started overtalking me to dismiss the points he was wrong about, I'd be more likely to stand up for myself.

And if he'd said "this is a on-way conversation", meaning he'd speak horlicks and I'll listen and he's not interested in a conversation, then I'd certainly have something to say.

He needs training. He's got a stinking attitude, and I'd be worried about his performance in important matters if he can't deal with something so easy.[/QUOTE]

My policy when dealing with a copper is not to focus on winning the argument, but to focus on getting on my way as soon as possible with no meaningful sanction.

It's an art, not a science, but usually involves coughing the (non) job, an apology or two, and saying 'yes, officer' and 'no, officer' in what I deem to be the right places.