Should truck drivers have their licences suspended for using mobile phones?‏

[spen666]

I think the problem here is your repeated reference to the officer 'acting in the course of his duty'.
This is a red herring since at the time of the instruction to stop, the driver/rider will have no idea of the purpose for the stop.

The scenario you initially suggested was outwith the powers of police to stop a cyclist for was cycling while using a mobile phone. I say that it would be perfectly lawful for a police officer to stop the cyclist in those circumstances. (Before it became a specific offence for motorists, drivers were charged with careless driving or not being in proper control of their vehicle.)

GC

Not a red herring at all

You are only required to stop for a constable acting in the course of his duty.



You are confusing what the legal position is with whether it is sensible or not to ignore the police officer. I have repeatedly said it is up to you to decide whetrher in any given situation to stop. The fact you stop does not make the actions of the police officer iin the course of his duty.



The constable is not acting in the course of his duty to stop a cyclist who is acting lawfully to lecture him about the constables views on what is sensible or not. Under what authority are you suggesting the police officer has the power to stop you carrying out a lawful (albeit perhaps stupid ) activity

 

[glasgowcyclist]

You are confusing what the legal position is with whether it is sensible or not to ignore the police officer. I have repeatedly said it is up to you to decide whetrher in any given situation to stop. The fact you stop does not make the actions of the police officer iin the course of his duty.

The legal position is that it is an offence to ignore the instruction to stop.

Under what authority are you suggesting the police officer has the power to stop you carrying out a lawful (albeit perhaps stupid ) activity

Road Traffic Act 1988
S163 Power of police to stop vehicles..

(1) A person driving a mechanically propelled 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.
​

GC

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Run the policeman down and then sue him for standing in the road.

I'd stop and warn him or her about the dangers of walking in the road and tell him what happened to that copper in the Giro.

 

[spen666]

This one

Which post number was that in? I'm confused. I am happy to respond but what I think I am answering and what you are asking seem to be different issues

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I think what spen is trying to point out is that the power to stop is not a blanket one that a police officer can exercise on a whim.

What spen has been saying is that "it is up to you to decide whetrher in any given situation to stop." That is plainly wrong.

GC

 

[tincaman]

On a related note, going through London the use of mobile phones by vehicle users of all types is staggering. I have frequently been behind car drivers who are stationary at a green light because they are busy on the phone and then suddenly realise and shoot forward with no glance around them. On tailbacks on the mile end road I reckon I often see well over 25% of drivers fiddling with mobiles. Closest I have been to being knocked off on the bike have all involved car drivers on mobiles who clearly haven't looked before setting off.

I was in London last week, did a few trips on the top floor of the buses, you can see down into the cars below, I couldn't believe how many people were fiddling with phones down on their laps

 

[Markymark]

I was in London last week, did a few trips on the top floor of the buses, you can see down into the cars below, I couldn't believe how many people were fiddling with phones down on their laps

That's becuase driving on the phone is illegal...but if its on your lap or you're talking to it away form your ear its fine....apparently

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Will it? Care to suggest what it would be covered by?

It could be covered by riding without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road.

GC

 

[spen666]

The legal position is that it is an offence to ignore the instruction to stop.

Road Traffic Act 1988
S163 Power of police to stop vehicles..

(1) A person driving a mechanically propelled 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.
​

GC

This still requires the officer to be acting in the course of his duty

 

[glasgowcyclist]

There is no offence of 'riding without due care and attention' - there is an offence of 'careless cycling' but the threshold for that cycling offence is similar to that for the equivalent driving offence.

A person can be only regarded as cycling carelessly if (and only if) the way he or she cycles falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful cyclist. The problem is defining what what would be expected of a competent and careful cyclist - and that's one reason why the careless cycling offence isn't charged that often.

I wasn't providing the title of an offence. What I gave was the description (lifted from the RTA) of what the behaviour described could be regarded as.

29 Careless, and inconsiderate, cycling.
If a person rides a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.
​

GC

​

 

[MontyVeda]

This still requires the officer to be acting in the course of his duty

If a police officer signals one to stop... is stopping optional or not?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

This still requires the officer to be acting in the course of his duty

You keep repeating this and miss the point.

The stopping part is not optional for the rider/driver. Do you agree?

GC

 

[glasgowcyclist]

If we're talking about sufficient reason to stop, the test is 'reasonable grounds' so... if they can't demonstrate that they had reasonable grounds to believe an offence was being committed (e.g. that someone was posing a substantive risk to a third party or to property) then they're unlikely to have grounds to stop.

Reg, that's wrong. Police have the authority to stop any vehicle on a road even when there is no offence committed or suspected.

GC

 

[spen666]

You keep repeating this and miss the point.

The stopping part is not optional for the rider/driver. Do you agree?

GC

Of course I do not agree


The law is clear that you are not committing an offence in failing to stop if the officer is not acting in the course of their duty.
how you determine that is a completely different issue

I am talking about the legal position, not whether it is a sensible course of action or not

 

[spen666]

I would say that cycling whilst using a mobile would fit S29 quite comfortably. "If a person rides a cycle on the road without due care and attention........."

clearly it doesn't or they would not have had to introduce specific offences for motorists re using mobile phone. They could have used careless driving if you were right.