Three strikes and your out

[summerdays]

Well that's what an MP is calling for. He want people who are caught cycling on the pavement 3 times will have their bike confiscated and will have to pay the value of the bike to get it back.

Sounds OK to me ..... As long as a similar rule is brought in for motorists, I would start with mobile phone usage, and speeding! Do you think that would work? (Yes I know there are rules for this already but how many people seem to be able to carry on with over 12 points, whereas if their car was impounded, and fined the value of it.....

 

[Cycleops]

Is cycling on the pavement such a big problem and has it caused any injuries? I wouldn't have thought so. Sounds like more intervention from government when none is needed.

 

[jefmcg]

I just checked, mobile phone usage and speeding have minimum points value of 3, so that's 4 strikes for much more dangerous offences.

It's nonsense, but I do like the idea of fines relative to the value of your vehicle. Imagine if they did that with speeding?

(oh, and it's "you're")

 

[Brandane]

What fine do you pay if you get caught three times, but first was on the Argos BSO, then the Pinarello Dogma, and finally the Trek hybrid? Silly ideas invite silly questions!

 

[Beebo]

I don't condone pavement cyclists, but in my experience the vast majority are teenagers riding on bso's.
No one has thought this through.
Who is going to value the bike for the fine? The second hand value would often be around £20.
How do catch and identify the culprit?
who is going to keep a database of names and work out how many strikes they have had.
How do you prove the rider is also the owner?

 

[summerdays]

I can't see it happening, it's more the fact that he didn't think through what he was proposing.

Whilst I think some pavement cycling is done dangerously, I think the majority is done safely, and you are far more likely to be injured by a car or lorry on the pavement than a cyclist. Somehow those don't seem to register with the anti pavement cycling brigade.

 

[Venod]

What a load of b******s why do we vote for these people.

 

[Brandane]

Is cycling on the pavement such a big problem and has it caused any injuries? I wouldn't have thought so. Sounds like more intervention from government when none is needed.

No doubt someone will be along shortly to quote a Daily Scare article about a 17 year old drug dealer on a bike escaping from the Police, who rode into someone on a pavement and injured them. It does happen, but sensible riding on quiet footpaths should be dealt with by some discretion IMO..

 

[young Ed]

How do you prove the rider is also the owner?

you don't, if the police catch you driving a car that is not mot's or insured weather it is your car or jim from chinas they will take it and charge a £150 release fee
Cheers Ed

 

[jefmcg]

you don't, if the police catch you driving a car that is not mot's or insured weather it is your car or jim from chinas they will take it and charge a £150 release fee
Cheers Ed

Well, in that case it's the car that's the problem. That car should not be on the road, so they remove it from the road. Completely different to this situation.

Fundamental problem is this man clearly thinks that cycling is a privilege. I bet he thinks driving is a right.

 

[ufkacbln]

We had a similar local Councillor with an axe to grind

Her circulars were about how she was leading a clampdown, and if you reported a cyclist to her, she would immediately ensure the Police investigated.

So we started sending her pictures of the parked cars illegally obstructing every inch of pavement, access point, are of grass and even across drives that happems every Sunday at the Car Boot Sale, over 50 vehicles and her response was that as the parking was inadequate they "had to park somewhere"

 

[Tin Pot]

What's the big deal?

 

[classic33]

Well that's what an MP is calling for. He want people who are caught cycling on the pavement 3 times will have their bike confiscated and will have to pay the value of the bike to get it back.

Sounds OK to me ..... As long as a similar rule is brought in for motorists, I would start with mobile phone usage, and speeding! Do you think that would work? (Yes I know there are rules for this already but how many people seem to be able to carry on with over 12 points, whereas if their car was impounded, and fined the value of it.....

Fine in theory, making it work is another thing.
Can we plead hardship that would be caused by the loss of the bike as some drivers do.
Currently have one taxi/private hire driver with 39 points!! on his licence, going to plead hardship so he keeps his licence.

 

[classic33]

Well, in that case it's the car that's the problem. That car should not be on the road, so they remove it from the road. Completely different to this situation.

Fundamental problem is this man clearly thinks that cycling is a privilege. I bet he thinks driving is a right.

And in most cases the bike shouldn't be on the footpath.

 

[Dibs]

I agree that we need to stop this kind of silly riding, but they also need to ensure that there is a proper cycling network for us that is safe!