Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
1 2
4 5 6 7
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

daz3210

5,000 posts

126 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
XG332 said:
Found this.

Did John O'Groats to Landsend in '97 and was stopped for speeding by a nice officer with a radar gun doing 38 in a 30 zone just outside Jedburgh. He let us off as we were doing the ride for chrity but the received a lettr when I got back home with a caution and the next time 3 points would be added to my driving licence. Does that mean you have to do the theory test as part of your cycling proficiency now??
I would love to see a scan of that letter.

But I would lay odds that you lost it.


CDP

5,048 posts

140 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
DocSteve said:
Interesting. I'm sure it will be a valuable use of pubic money that will stop the many needless deaths and maimings inflicted by dangerous cyclists each year.
Pedestrians can get pretty badly injured or worse. A bike has sharper edges than a car and isn't a lot slower in an urban environment. The father of one of my classmates was knocked down by a cyclist and killed, it can happen.

Marvib

336 posts

32 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
DocSteve said:
Interesting. I'm sure it will be a valuable use of pubic money that will stop the many needless deaths and maimings inflicted by dangerous cyclists each year.
Is that what prostitutes earn? smile

DocSteve

322 posts

108 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
Marvib said:
Is that what prostitutes earn? smile
Good spot!

As to the other poster, anything can happen but the reality is that deaths caused by dangerous riding are vanishingly rare and, in my view, unllikely to be made rarer still by some costly new legislation. Fortunately it appears that this has been halted.

swerni

22,493 posts

96 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
Hooli said:
TonyHetherington said:
Yes.
No.
No

Advertisement

Pontoneer

3,464 posts

72 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
barker22 said:
I would say no.
How does an officer issue a FPN if a cyclist doesn't have a license? They can't surrender their license for points etc.
Also, what if the speeding was within range of a speed awareness course? sending a cyclist on one with no license wouldn't be any good.
People need to accept the fact that, at least at present, cyclists will not be done for speeding.
The absence of a licence is no barrier to conviction ; this has been covered many times : DVLA can and do create a 'dummy' licence to put points onto if the accused does not have one .

Anyway , most adult cyclists will have driving licences .

garrykiller

4,058 posts

44 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
XG332 said:
Found this.

Did John O'Groats to Landsend in '97 and was stopped for speeding by a nice officer with a radar gun doing 38 in a 30 zone just outside Jedburgh. He let us off as we were doing the ride for chrity but the received a lettr when I got back home with a caution and the next time 3 points would be added to my driving licence. Does that mean you have to do the theory test as part of your cycling proficiency now??
what if you dont have a driving licence? crazy!

With these feet

4,437 posts

101 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
XG332 said:
Found this.

Did John O'Groats to Landsend in '97 and was stopped for speeding by a nice officer with a radar gun doing 38 in a 30 zone just outside Jedburgh. He let us off as we were doing the ride for chrity but the received a lettr when I got back home with a caution and the next time 3 points would be added to my driving licence. Does that mean you have to do the theory test as part of your cycling proficiency now??
I dont believe that. What if the rider didnt have a driving license? Hold the points till they got a provisional?
There'd be points for jaywalking, crossing on the red man flashing, stepping on cracks of the pavement....

SS2.

8,073 posts

124 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
garrykiller said:
XG332 said:
Found this.

Did John O'Groats to Landsend in '97 and was stopped for speeding by a nice officer with a radar gun doing 38 in a 30 zone just outside Jedburgh. He let us off as we were doing the ride for chrity but the received a lettr when I got back home with a caution and the next time 3 points would be added to my driving licence. Does that mean you have to do the theory test as part of your cycling proficiency now??
what if you dont have a driving licence? crazy!
The point is moot - as has already been mentioned in this thread, speed limits apply to motor vehicles, not pedal cycles.

heebeegeetee

21,637 posts

134 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
Pontoneer said:
On the principle that ignorance is no excuse , and nothing prevents you from fitting a speedometer , then the absence of one would be no obstacle to being charged .
My understanding is that it is precisely because bicycles are not required to have a speedometer that means that speed limits do not apply to them.

RBOnline said:
Going off what I see on a daily basis, cyclists don't have to adhere to any rules of the road, do they?

Especially red lights. They definitely don't seem to apply.
Not to the level of car drivers though, eh? Each year millions of drivers are done for speeding, millions done for other infringements, millions of cars fail the MOT each year, millions are uninsured and thousands of people are killed and injured each year.

There is simply no point in even discussing what cyclists do, unless of course hypocrisy matters.

CDP

5,048 posts

140 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
heebeegeetee said:
Not to the level of car drivers though, eh? Each year millions of drivers are done for speeding, millions done for other infringements, millions of cars fail the MOT each year, millions are uninsured and thousands of people are killed and injured each year.

There is simply no point in even discussing what cyclists do, unless of course hypocrisy matters.
Car drivers are already covered by a raft of legislation, those you refer to are already breaking the law and if caught punished. Most of these laws also apply to cyclists and equestrians but never seem to be applied.

There's a small band of very aggressive cyclists who are a danger to themselves and more importantly others. To say their actions aren't worth bothering with is indeed very hypocritical.

Remember how many more miles cars cover than cycles, several orders of magnitude. I wonder what the odds of injuring somebody per mile is in a car compared with a bicycle?


Aretnap

871 posts

37 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
rs1952 said:
Red 4 said:
DocSteve said:
What is the point of this thread? The answer to the OP's question is of course no but is anyone seriously advocating new speeding legislation that also governs pedal cyclists??
The government is, although not specifically in relation to excess speed. (I'm not sure exactly what the new offences will be)

The Dangerous and Reckless Cycling Bill is currently going through parliament.
Oh no its not:

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/danger...
I'm not surprised - it seems to have been trying to give a magistrates court the power to send you down for 14 years.

A silly MP said:
(2) A person guilty of an offence under this Act is liable—
(a) on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years, an unlimited fine, or both
Must try harder Mrs Leadsom. See me after class.

oyster

6,643 posts

134 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
CDP said:
heebeegeetee said:
Not to the level of car drivers though, eh? Each year millions of drivers are done for speeding, millions done for other infringements, millions of cars fail the MOT each year, millions are uninsured and thousands of people are killed and injured each year.

There is simply no point in even discussing what cyclists do, unless of course hypocrisy matters.
Car drivers are already covered by a raft of legislation, those you refer to are already breaking the law and if caught punished. Most of these laws also apply to cyclists and equestrians but never seem to be applied.

There's a small band of very aggressive cyclists who are a danger to themselves and more importantly others. To say their actions aren't worth bothering with is indeed very hypocritical.

Remember how many more miles cars cover than cycles, several orders of magnitude. I wonder what the odds of injuring somebody per mile is in a car compared with a bicycle?
So which is it, are you worried about the danger posed by dangerous cyclists or are you just peeved that they don't get caught as much as drivers?


tigger1

7,663 posts

107 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
There's so much nonsense in this thread.

Speeding not being an offence on a pushbike has nothing to do with the (lack of) a speedo. It's because the RTA defines the offence of speeding w.r.t. motor vehicles.

Cyclists do collide with pedestrians. On the occasions this causes death / serious injury to the pedestrian, it's big news - because it's RARE. And there is already legislation in place to deal with this. Between 2001 and 2009, 18 pedestrians were killed by cyclists in Britain, and 434 seriously injured.

Much as with driving, we need better training for cyclists BEFORE they're let out on the roads, to understand the risks and deal with them appropriately. Thankfully, if a cyclists flouts a law, the chances of a serious injury to a pedestrian (or indeed anyone) are very low. If a cyclist is involved in ANY collision, the most likely party to be killed / seriously injured is...the cyclist.

(Full disclosure: cyclist + motorist, now doing more journeys by bike each week than by car, lit up like a Christmas tree, and not running red lights)

CDP

5,048 posts

140 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
oyster said:
So which is it, are you worried about the danger posed by dangerous cyclists or are you just peeved that they don't get caught as much as drivers?
I'm not that worried about the cyclists, except when walking around Cambridge when you always have to be careful.

It was this point that annoyed me:

heebeegeetee said:
There is simply no point in even discussing what cyclists do, unless of course hypocrisy matters.
There seems to be an attitude among the hardcore cycling community that laws should not apply to them, all motorists are evil and pedestrians have got it coming to them.


oyster

6,643 posts

134 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
tigger1 said:
Cyclists do collide with pedestrians. On the occasions this causes death / serious injury to the pedestrian, it's big news - because it's RARE. And there is already legislation in place to deal with this. Between 2001 and 2009, 18 pedestrians were killed by cyclists in Britain, and 434 seriously injured.
Have to admit, that's higher than I expected.

I'd bet my house on it that most involve chavs on bikes on pavements though - so POBs rather than pedestrians.

And given the title of this thread, I wonder how mnay of those 18 fatalities involved the cyclist breaking a speed limit, probably none.

creampuff

3,921 posts

29 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
Pontoneer said:
The absence of a licence is no barrier to conviction ; this has been covered many times : DVLA can and do create a 'dummy' licence to put points onto if the accused does not have one .

Anyway , most adult cyclists will have driving licences .
I thought we established that cyclists cannot be charged with the specific offence of speeding as that applies only to motor vehicles.

In that case, what is the FPN for? What specific offence would the FPN allege? Is it for a specific cycling offence like furious cycling?

CDP

5,048 posts

140 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
oyster said:
I'd bet my house on it that most involve chavs on bikes on pavements though - so POBs rather than pedestrians.
I wouldn't. There's no indication of blame in those figures.

Bikes travel in near silence. It's all too easy for a pedestrian to step out but a bike has far more in the way of projections than cars. But riding on pavements and in pedestrianised areas is still a fair bet.

Liquid Knight

12,202 posts

69 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
Greg66 said:
The correct answer is no. The relevant legislation applies to vehicles and defines them in a way that does not include cyclists.
But...

The Road Traffic Act was renamed with the intention to include all Road Traffic. A cyclist using the road is traffic and therefore the Road Traffic Act should apply and soon I'm sure it will.

As for speeding on a cycle. At the moment there is no law making it compulsory for cycles to have speedometers. If you do not have a speedometer you can not be held accountable for your velocity provided you are following the flow of traffic.

The last time I was stopped for speeding I was marking time behind a van. The van's registered keeper got a fpn in the post and as I don't have number plates I was stopped. I didn't have a speedometer I didn't get a ticket either. wink



Edited by Liquid Knight on Friday 5th October 11:29

SS2.

8,073 posts

124 months

[news] 
Friday 5th October 2012 quote quote all
Liquid Knight said:
The last time I was stopped for speeding I was marking time behind a van. The van's registered keeper got a fpn in the post and as I don't have number plates I was stopped. I didn't have a speedometer I didn't get a ticket either. wink
The lack of a speedometer had nothing to do with it - you didn't receive a fixed penalty for excess speed because the speed limit didn't apply to you.

1 2
4 5 6 7
Reply to Topic