Discussion in 'Commuting' started by HJ, 19 Apr 2010.
This blog post on "Why do police target cyclists who jump red lights?" is worth a read.
6 points for being in an Advance Stop Box... that does seem a bit harsh.
I do agree with the lemming affect ... I have on more than one occasion started to roll forward because someone else went when it was red - I've stopped when I realised my mistake - I've even went to do it when the car beside me went through on red. Your first assumption is that you've missed the change of lights and are now holding up the rest of the traffic behind.
Nice to see, make sure that you read the authors blog on his day with City of London Police bike team.
Aveling sounds like a pretty smart cookie to me
Can't say I feel any need for police to enforce either mandatory cycle lanes or ASLs, and I'm quite happy for them to sort out any and all red light jumpers. Carry on, good work.
Interesting to see a policeman, in print, say: "If it's a courier doing it they maybe know what they're doing, but lots of others simply don't." Thus implicitly conceding that there is in fact a safe way to RLJ (so long as you 'know what you're doing'). But then this is a bike-riding cop, with daily experience of what's really going on on some of Britain's busiest roads...
Why, then, do I see so many City officers pulling over cyclists? The main answer, it seems, is public demand.
"When we ask the community what they want us to do, cycling comes up again and again," Cussen says. "It's the same in other police areas – when people are asked what they're most concerned about it's often anti-social behaviour rather than more serious crimes."
There's your public and our reputations.
More cars jump red lights now.(I wonder where they got that from)
So it must be safe.
Seriously this car RLJing thing worries me.
[quote name='swee'pea99']Interesting to see a policeman, in print, say: "If it's a courier doing it they maybe know what they're doing, but lots of others simply don't." Thus implicitly conceding that there is in fact a safe way to RLJ (so long as you 'know what you're doing'). But then this is a bike-riding cop, with daily experience of what's really going on on some of Britain's busiest roads...[/QUOTE]
I took it as meaning they know full well that what they are doing is illegal, wheras other riders seeing them go through might think it means it's fine.
Seems a bit of a silly guy to me. Criticising someone for not wearing a reflective fluorescent vest is bang out of order - presumably using his badge as credence in the area even more so. He's also got a pretty eccentric and poor knowledge/view of the law/highway code.
Criticising someone for not wearing hiviz is blatant victim blaming, and wrong.
I don't think anyone begrudges him his bit of PR for saying the obvious - police cyclists need some kind of training in a small and targetted way. But the thing is you and other police have't really helped themselves PR wise. You should have seen a mile off that a 93 page manual would get savaged. Getting pieces written like that is the way to do it if one strips out the crap that I highlighted. The problem being that adding in little 'snippets' like the hi-viz to look 'balanced' and 'cool' undermines it all.
Separate names with a comma.