Police stopping cyclists in Preston

[totallyfixed]

Blimey, they can't do anything right according to some on here, like the OP said, chill. I think it would be great if every force took the same initiative. Bikes are easy to steal and easily disposed of, any move to combat bike crime gets a tick in my book.

 

[screenman]

The people shouting the loudest about how they would not let the police dictate to them are also the one's that will be moaning the police did nothing when their bike was nicked.

Proactive policing I am all for it.

 

[Red Light]

I was thinking similar. Ive got snaps of my bike(s) on my phone, dating back to March.

Was March when you stole it?

 

[Red Light]

I think if I were stopped I would want to know the grounds for their "reasonable suspicion" that it was stolen. Just stopping people at random on the streets they can't have any grounds for reasonable suspicion AFAICS

 

[Bman]

All they have to do is stop a cyclist and ask them a few questions about when and where they got the bike. The way they present their answers and/or defend themselves will make it pretty obvious if they are telling the truth.

That coupled with what they are wearing where they are etc, is enough for reasonable suspision.

 

[HovR]

The issue is having a fool proof method of linking a bike to its owner. Sure, you could present an image of the frame number, or you riding the bike, but what is stopping a bike thief from also doing that after they have had the bike for a day or two?

Receipts aren't designed for proof of ownership over a long period of time, and as such they are made of cheap materials and inks. I have a receipt from August 2011 in my wallet, and already the ink has rubbed off to near-unreadable.

I believe that for this to work effectively, there would need to be a mandatory centralized government run ownership system, similar to that of cars - But then of course we have a whole new range of inconveniences, with displaying tax discs/sticker equivalents, and ownership transfer etc.

 

[MontyVeda]

well judging by most of the comments not many of you have ever been stopped by the police when they're keeping their eye out for a stolen bike. It goes something like this...


Policeman: "Hello sir, without looking at your bike, can you tell me what make or model it is?"

Me on my bike: "Yeah its a blah blah blah."

Policeman: "OK Cheers."

or alternatively...

Policeman: "Hello sir, without looking at your bike, can you tell me what make or model it is?"

Me on a bike: "Er... no... i er.... just borrowed it off a mate... um"

Policeman would then ask you to step off the bike whilst he/she asks who your 'mate' is, etc...



it's really not worth getting your knickers in a twist over.

 

[semislickstick]

The issue is having a fool proof method of linking a bike to its owner. Sure, you could present an image of the frame number, or you riding the bike, but what is stopping a bike thief from also doing that after they have had the bike for a day or two?

Receipts aren't designed for proof of ownership over a long period of time, and as such they are made of cheap materials and inks. I have a receipt from August 2011 in my wallet, and already the ink has rubbed off to near-unreadable.

I believe that for this to work effectively, there would need to be a mandatory centralized government run ownership system, similar to that of cars - But then of course we have a whole new range of inconveniences, with displaying tax discs/sticker equivalents, and ownership transfer etc.

...the immobilise site lets you register the frame number, load a photo and add a scan of the receipt if you want. The Police use the immobilise site to check items, don't they?

I wouldn't really be able to prove my bike was mine either, I assume the local police know/suspect who are riding on iffy bikes and this is to scare them.

 

[thnurg]

Sigh. Go on, I'm ready now. Let loose with the police state posts, the arguments of your right to not be hassled, and basically all the other complaints that some people tend to love using - until the moment they actually become a victim of crime.

I don't mind being stopped and asked to cooperate with a few questions. It's their heavy handed statement that annoys me. As for moaning until I'm the victim of a crime, if you don't want your bike nicked then get it registered / postcoded and report it if stolen. I'll happily show the police that my bike does not have a stamp on it that correlates to a stamp that is recorded as stolen but they're not depriving me of my transport home just because "I don't look right".

 

[HovR]

...the immobilise site lets you register the frame number, load a photo and add a scan of the receipt if you want. The Police use the immobilise site to check items, don't they?

Most police forces do, and this almost solves the issue, however sadly it has yet to become the register for all bikes, and I would suggest that only a minority of bikes are registered there. If ALL bikes were registered, including frame numbers, a passport style photo of the owner, and a photo of your bike, it could work flawlessly.

It also appears that the police force in question were not using this as an acceptable method of proof of ownership. (Maybe because it is not extremely widely known.)

 

[Red Light]

All they have to do is stop a cyclist and ask them a few questions about when and where they got the bike. The way they present their answers and/or defend themselves will make it pretty obvious if they are telling the truth.

That coupled with what they are wearing where they are etc, is enough for reasonable suspision.

The reasonable suspicion has to precede stopping you, not from digging around afterwards to find an excuse. http://www.met.police.uk/stopandsearch/what_is.htm

 

[LosingFocus]

Was March when you stole it?

 

[colly]

The reasonable suspicion has to precede stopping you, not from digging around afterwards to find an excuse. http://www.met.polic...rch/what_is.htm

And reasonable suspicion might well be a sleek carbon road bike being ridden by Joe Slob wearing a pair of holey jeans and a loose fitting hoodie. In much the same way a 17 yr old with a baseball cap on driving a Bentley might be stopped.

Both might well be innocent of any crime but it looks suspicious.

 

[Jezston]

Sigh. Go on, I'm ready now. Let loose with the police state posts, the arguments of your right to not be hassled, and basically all the other complaints that some people tend to love using - until the moment they actually become a victim of crime.

There doesn't seem to be any of that going here.

I'm more concerned by your statement suggesting an attitude from a police officer that people shouldn't make complaints of heavy handed policing if they want help from the police if they become victims of crime themselves. I'm perfectly comfortable praising the efforts of the police that caught and build a successful case against the two men who abducted and robbed me some years ago, along with condemning the misuse of anti terror legislation to arrest and seize the assets of peaceful protesters and an increase in surveillance of ordinary citizens.

 

[Norm]

I think if I were stopped I would want to know the grounds for their "reasonable suspicion" that it was stolen. Just stopping people at random on the streets they can't have any grounds for reasonable suspicion AFAICS

I think failing the Attitude Test like that would be grounds for reasonable suspicion.