Police stopping cyclists in Preston

[User482]

that is an argument for never putting any police on the streets ever!

Only if you're an idiot.

 

[User482]

Good and bad in all walks of life User482, even if it's only a tiny minority. The police do more than the public realise to root out the bad apples, infact they can be quite ruthless with their own.

I'm sure they do. But I'm not sure that it's a good idea to introduce any policy that gives those bad apples more freedom to be bad apples.

I feel conflicted about this initiative, as in general I would applaud any police effort to reduce cycle thefts.

 

[Cubist]

I'm sure they do. But I'm not sure that it's a good idea to introduce any policy that gives those bad apples more freedom to be bad apples.

I feel conflicted about this initiative, as in general I would applaud any police effort to reduce cycle thefts.

But, and I hope you will be reassured by this, this is an initiative, not a policy.

The news is that cops are stopping cyclists and checking to make sure they aren't on stolen bikes.

The legal premises are in place to allow them to do this.

The PACE Act 1984 allows officers to take various steps within the law to prevent and detect crime, and this sort of initiative MUST comply with legislation. The Force in question will also have all sorts of policies which ensure that the way in which PACE is applied and delivered, including various checks and scrutiny stages, is correct and controlled.

What appears to make you suspicious about this (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that were you to be asked what make your bike is, you wouldn't be able to explain to a non-cyclist cop that you built it yourself, and haven't got receipts etc proving its provenance. Regardless of this fact, by explaining this to any officer on the initiative you will immediately have allayed any suspicions.

Cops will genuinely be able to tell from the way you interact with them whether or not you are a villain, and you have nothing to fear.

No amount of typing will reassure Little Yellow Brompton, and I'm genuinely sorry he feels the way he does about policing in the UK. He may however be reassured that even if he fails to interact with the police in a way which Joe Average does, there is in fact no law in the land to prevent people from acting as they choose. The results will be messy and at times uncomfortable (on both sides) but the truth will prevail and he will remain a free person.

 

[User482]

But, and I hope you will be reassured by this, this is an initiative, not a policy.

The news is that cops are stopping cyclists and checking to make sure they aren't on stolen bikes.

The legal premises are in place to allow them to do this.

The PACE Act 1984 allows officers to take various steps within the law to prevent and detect crime, and this sort of initiative MUST comply with legislation. The Force in question will also have all sorts of policies which ensure that the way in which PACE is applied and delivered, including various checks and scrutiny stages, is correct and controlled.

What appears to make you suspicious about this (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that were you to be asked what make your bike is, you wouldn't be able to explain to a non-cyclist cop that you built it yourself, and haven't got receipts etc proving its provenance. Regardless of this fact, by explaining this to any officer on the initiative you will immediately have allayed any suspicions.

Cops will genuinely be able to tell from the way you interact with them whether or not you are a villain, and you have nothing to fear.

No amount of typing will reassure Little Yellow Brompton, and I'm genuinely sorry he feels the way he does about policing in the UK. He may however be reassured that even if he fails to interact with the police in a way which Joe Average does, there is in fact no law in the land to prevent people from acting as they choose. The results will be messy and at times uncomfortable (on both sides) but the truth will prevail and he will remain a free person.

LYB's quote from Niemoller was in poor taste, but I think that there was an underlying kernel of truth in what he/ she said. It's a pity that the hyperbole prevented a rational discussion.

I think all we can do with this is see how it works out.

 

[MontyVeda]

...

It's a pity that the hyperbole prevented a rational discussion.

...

What!?!? Are you trying to say that simply pointing an incident where an innocent civilian was pulled off his bike by a heavy handed and corrupt copper, thrown against a wall before the copper demanded he answer twenty questions about his bike is somehow irrational !!!

 

[chillyuk]

Cops will genuinely be able to tell from the way you interact with them whether or not you are a villain, and you have nothing to fear.

I did time many years ago, so must be classed as a villain regardless of 40+ years completely straight. Although my bikes are legal, going by your logic I DO have reason to fear.

 

[MontyVeda]

I did time many years ago, so must be classed as a villain regardless of 40+ years completely straight. Although my bikes are legal, going by your logic I DO have reason to fear.

I think you're confusing 'are' with 'were'... there is a big difference.

 

[Cubist]

I did time many years ago, so must be classed as a villain regardless of 40+ years completely straight. Although my bikes are legal, going by your logic I DO have reason to fear.

If tortuous logic for the sake of debate is your thing, then yes, I'm talking out of my arse.

 

[Cubist]

Hmm

That does sound a bit like the more succinct

"Papieren, Bitte!"

Out of context I can see your point. Back in the context of the Preston initiative it is pretty wide of the mark!

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

I think your argument is "how dare you suspect me as I am a middle class graduate"

If you fitted a description of a suspect becuase of your manner of dress, height and build then it's perfectly reasonable for you to be stopped and asked a few questions - equating that however with the old sus laws is shrill posturing and fairly offensive to those who really did suffer under them.

No my argument is " I have done nothing wrong, you have no reason to think I have, I don't need to have my time wasted by your fishing trip"

We are not talking about anyone fitting a description , the report is of cyclists being randomly stopped.

 

[Cubist]

No my argument is " I have done nothing wrong, you have no reason to think I have, I don't need to have my time wasted by your fishing trip"

We are not talking about anyone fitting a description , the report is of cyclists being randomly stopped.

Little Yellow Brompton

Would it help you to know that failing to stop at the direction of a constable is an offence? It matters not at this stage why the officer chooses to stop you, s/he is empowered by legislation to do so. Random therefore is immaterial. Whether you then choose to engage in a discussion on the ownership of your bike is up to you. There are no powers to force you to speak.

Here's the wording from the 1988 RTA






163Power of police to stop vehicles
http://

(1)​

A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

http://

(2)​

A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

http://

(3)​

If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence

 

[Nortones2]

The word random does not appear in the initial report. The stop requirement appears to be targeted at the sore thumbs any sentient person might be suspicious of: "if an officer believes that the bike could be stolen, Lancashire Police told us. For instance, a man who is riding a woman’s bike or a child’s bike will be stopped as that instantly rouses suspicion." In Preston the city centre and certain estates are factually known as thieves kitchens. Not too hard to spot the ebb and flow of the light, but grubby, fingered.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

Little Yellow Brompton

Would it help you to know that failing to stop at the direction of a constable is an offence? It matters not at this stage why the officer chooses to stop you, s/he is empowered by legislation to do so. Random therefore is immaterial. Whether you then choose to engage in a discussion on the ownership of your bike is up to you. There are no powers to force you to speak.

Here's the wording from the 1988 RTA






163Power of police to stop vehicles

(1)​

A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(2)​

A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.

(3)​

If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence

Thank you very much, you illustrate the problem of mission creep perfectly...

Can't use the first bit of legislation to get what you want, cast around until you find another...

If all else fails fall back on "breach of the peace" or maybe even the new catch all "terrorism"

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2011/10/10/police-threatened-me-for-taking-pictures-of-daughter-in-shopping-centre-dad-claims-86908-23478831/

Remind me again, why shouldn't I be worried about powers being misused?

 

[Cubist]

Mission creep? How? I'm simply pointing out that your assertion that you would not stop for the police under these circumstances as being fraught with danger. You run a real risk of a court summons.

What I can't understand is your phrase "Get what you want" What this initiative sets out to do is to prevent and detect the theft of bicycles. You have turned it into an exemplar of some mission to "get what they want" which appears to be to make life as difficult as possible for Little Yellow Brompton and co.

Can you explain succinctly exactly what that mission is? What are the police trying to achieve that requires them to pretend to be after stolen bikes, but clearly have some hidden agenda which you are clear on, but I , sadly, am not?

So,please, for the benefit of all, what exactly do the police want?

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

Mission creep? How? I'm simply pointing out that your assertion that you would not stop for the police under these circumstances as being fraught with danger. You run a real risk of a court summons.

What I can't understand is your phrase "Get what you want" What this initiative sets out to do is to prevent and detect the theft of bicycles. You have turned it into an exemplar of some mission to "get what they want" which appears to be to make life as difficult as possible for Little Yellow Brompton and co.

Can you explain succinctly exactly what that mission is? What are the police trying to achieve that requires them to pretend to be after stolen bikes, but clearly have some hidden agenda which you are clear on, but I , sadly, am not?

So,please, for the benefit of all, what exactly do the police want?

It seems they want cyclists to stop, and answer questions, on pain of having their bikes confiscated.