When the Police do this stuff, what hope .......

[growingvegetables]

http://road.cc/content/news/217650-hampshire-police-threaten-fine-cyclists-wearing-helmet

"Endorseable" offences - £50 minimum fine

• wearing "a helmet correctly".
• "Poor interaction with other road users' (sic)/ members' (sic) of the local community.
• and various other things, they obviously think/want ...

WTAF.

 

[jefmcg]

Thanks

• "Poor interaction with other road users' (sic)/ members' (sic) of the local community.

Yeah, that was my favourite.

 

[Bimble]

Clickable headline aside, I don't think it's the actual bobbies who've put this out. It's pretty crap though that no one checked it before it was published. What an expensive and embarrassing mistake.

 

[DRHysted]

They have apologised, apparently it was released without authorisation or proofing.
It was actually released at a secondary school 1 mile from where I live, so keeping with the New Forests cycling attitude really

 

[mjr]

Sadly, neighbourhood police often perpetuate junk about cycling, mostly passing on stuff submitted by some cycling-hater without checking it properly. I suspect even the more enlightened ones like West Midlands might be vulnerable to this sort of attack.

Most constabularies also put a bit too much belief into official statements from the likes of the local/national government, Brake and RoSPA when there's no evidence for them - or sometimes even when they are contradicted by evidence.

 

[mjr]

apparently it was released without authorisation or proofing.

If you believe that, I've a famous bridge I'd like to sell you... HQ might not have approved it (hence the mention of "final approval" in the quoted response) but I suspect someone said it looked OK despite the obvious errors.

 

[Bimble]

If you believe that, I've a famous bridge I'd like to sell you...

I expect it is entirely possible given that quite a few "community" organisations are associated / supportive of the police, but not directly involved - so putting out a leaflet could quite easily bypass the force's media and legal teams.

 

[mjr]

I expect it is entirely possible given that quite a few "community" organisations are associated / supportive of the police, but not directly involved - so putting out a leaflet could quite easily bypass the force's media and legal teams.

I'd be more inclined to believe it if the police sent any of them a cease-and-desist, or if the police statement appeared on www.hampshire.police.uk somewhere.

Also, even their corrected list of offences is shoot: the Boateng principle means they shouldn't be trying to scare people off the footway when they feel it's safer; and some standard bicycles are built to carry passengers.

 

[Racing roadkill]

That's my patch. Every copper I've spoken to here, has laughed their pointy helmet off about it.

 

[Drago]

They'd have to chuck me in jail for having no helmet at all.

 

[screenman]

I listed that in the joke section yesterday.

To defend the police, they did say they did not approve the flyer handed out by a school.

 

[MichaelW2]

Thanks


Yeah, that was my favourite.

Its' enough to make a grocer sic

 

[I like Skol]

They'd have to chuck me in jail for having no helmet at all.

Me too, but they would have to catch me first! Maybe I am a bit quicker than you?


They'll never take me alive.......

 

[mjr]

They'd have to chuck me in jail for having no helmet at all.

No no no, you've misread it: having none at all was fine, as was wearing it incorrectly (so even most helmet-wearers would be fine ). It's wearing it correctly that attracts a £50-minimum fine, according to that leaflet, as does "due care and consideration for other road user's". (Other user's what?)

To defend the police, they did say they did not approve the flyer handed out by a school.

They said "We have looked into this and it would appear that a final version was issued without final approval by Hampshire Constabulary" which raises more questions than it answers: yes, it appears like that, Malcolm Tucker, but was that what actually happened? Did an earlier version get final approval from them? Did this version get some sort of non-final "it looks OK to me but let me run it past HQ" approval?

 

[Julia9054]

I love the picture accompanying the article - caption competition?