Drunk in charge of a bicycle
Discussion
gopher said:
Serious question, can any one tell me what the maximum penalty is and is there a "limit" and if not what definition of "drunk" is used?
Cheers
Paul
Cheers
Paul
Max
One month imprisonment
£200 fine
Discretionary disqualification of driving licence
Drunk = Police officer's opinion.
(No breath test etc)
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 21st July 21:59
vonhosen said:
gopher said:
Serious question, can any one tell me what the maximum penalty is and is there a "limit" and if not what definition of "drunk" is used?
Cheers
Paul
Cheers
Paul
Max
One month imprisonment
£200 fine
Discretionary disqualification of driving licence
Drunk = Police officer's opinion.
(No breath test etc)
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 21st July 21:59
As ever from VH a factual and informative answer!
Very interesting to know that there are still serious repercussions against your driving licence and even jail based on an 'opinion' of drunkeness, and despite there being adequate scientific and accurate methods of measurement they dont need to be used.
vonhosen said:
gopher said:
Serious question, can any one tell me what the maximum penalty is and is there a "limit" and if not what definition of "drunk" is used?
Cheers
Paul
Cheers
Paul
Max
One month imprisonment
£200 fine
Discretionary disqualification of driving licence
Drunk = Police officer's opinion.
(No breath test etc)
Thanks VH
I notice the Discretionary disqualification of driving licence and it seems this is an option for an increasing number of crimes (I think the old chap warning drivers of a speed trap had a ban, although I can't remember the exact charge - sorry that was an aside).
I can get to a very nice pub mainly via bridleways and woodland tracks 3 miles away by bicycle very easily, and I am not sure about the legality of been "drunk in charge" on these anyway, but the last 2-300 meters would be public road.
I wonder how confident I could be to cycle to this pub consume 3 or 4 pints of bass (a fair deal over the DD limit) and cycle home. I know I can ride a bicycle after 4 pints (not saying how
), but to think of spending a month as "Big Bill's Bitch" £200 worse off and losing my licence maybe I'd better stick to the taxis. gopher said:
vonhosen said:
gopher said:
Serious question, can any one tell me what the maximum penalty is and is there a "limit" and if not what definition of "drunk" is used?
Cheers
Paul
Cheers
Paul
Max
One month imprisonment
£200 fine
Discretionary disqualification of driving licence
Drunk = Police officer's opinion.
(No breath test etc)
Thanks VH
I notice the Discretionary disqualification of driving licence and it seems this is an option for an increasing number of crimes (I think the old chap warning drivers of a speed trap had a ban, although I can't remember the exact charge - sorry that was an aside).
It was obstructing Police he was convicted of & yes you can get disqualified for many varied offences if the court deems it suitable.
gopher said:
I can get to a very nice pub mainly via bridleways and woodland tracks 3 miles away by bicycle very easily, and I am not sure about the legality of been "drunk in charge" on these anyway, but the last 2-300 meters would be public road.
I wonder how confident I could be to cycle to this pub consume 3 or 4 pints of bass (a fair deal over the DD limit) and cycle home. I know I can ride a bicycle after 4 pints (not saying how
), but to think of spending a month as "Big Bill's Bitch" £200 worse off and losing my licence maybe I'd better stick to the taxis. The offence is commited on any highway OR public place.
FPN (when sober & released) is more likely than prison IMHO.
I was just giving the maximums as requested.
I think so.
I also know a German bloke was banned from driving because he mowed a grass verge outside his home (as in beyond garden gates) with a lawn mower tractor whilst under the influence. This was in 2002.
In 2004 - spring und I think it was Nottingham.. I hear similar case occurred in UK. Bloke received driving ban because of this.
I think there ist some paragraph somewhere within the RTA 1988 which says riding bike or being on a lawn mowing tractor constitute offence if over limit for any substances.
I also know a German bloke was banned from driving because he mowed a grass verge outside his home (as in beyond garden gates) with a lawn mower tractor whilst under the influence. This was in 2002.
In 2004 - spring und I think it was Nottingham.. I hear similar case occurred in UK. Bloke received driving ban because of this.
I think there ist some paragraph somewhere within the RTA 1988 which says riding bike or being on a lawn mowing tractor constitute offence if over limit for any substances.
gopher said:
It does seem an odd law that can see you lose your driving licence on the opinion of a police officer for something non-motoring related, but when actually driving a motor vehicle it requires proof. I think that seems slightly out of kilter.
You can lose your driving licence for offences that have nothing to do with drunkeness.
The blood alcohol level is of little consequence, it is a different matter all together.
You can be drunk whilst still being under the drink drive level & you can be over the drink drive level & not be drunk. The evidence of drunk is about impairment not the proportion of alcohol in blood or breath.
puts you back on your bike... If you fell off again you had to walk vonhosen said:
gopher said:
It does seem an odd law that can see you lose your driving licence on the opinion of a police officer for something non-motoring related, but when actually driving a motor vehicle it requires proof. I think that seems slightly out of kilter.
You can lose your driving licence for offences that have nothing to do with drunkeness.
The blood alcohol level is of little consequence, it is a different matter all together.
You can be drunk whilst still being under the drink drive level & you can be over the drink drive level & not be drunk. The evidence of drunk is about impairment not the proportion of alcohol in blood or breath.
Ist an argument my cousin und even Mad Doc used.. if body ist used to substance .. then ist "normal" to that person. Ist true.. und there ist also the Mellanby effect.
A nun in Manchester attended a christening. She toasted the baby with one drink. She was not really "drunk" in reality - but unluckily the Sister stopped over a white line at a traffic light und a GMP Bib saw this. He breathalysed her und because her body was not used to champagne und she drank the bubbly on empty stomach.. the full alcohol registered her "over the limit" - but cognitively she was not "drunk" She still lost licence for 12 months though..
Unfortunately lieber von..the law seems to go off the alcohol in breath und I will admit that this does not always reflect the level of impairment.
Having said that.. I do know how long it takes my own body to excrete a glass or two of wine
.. und I do not drive for full 24 hours after a drink or two. vonhosen said:
gopher said:
It does seem an odd law that can see you lose your driving licence on the opinion of a police officer for something non-motoring related, but when actually driving a motor vehicle it requires proof. I think that seems slightly out of kilter.
You can lose your driving licence for offences that have nothing to do with drunkeness.
The blood alcohol level is of little consequence, it is a different matter all together.
You can be drunk whilst still being under the drink drive level & you can be over the drink drive level & not be drunk. The evidence of drunk is about impairment not the proportion of alcohol in blood or breath.
Agreed, but the impairment is back to an opinion, which despite police officers being expert witnesses, they are still prone to such human traits such as conscious and sub-conscious bias, assumption and thought.
However the accurate method to assess drunkeness or impairment would be the amount of effect on the brain, which is closely related to the amount of alcohol in the blood, which I guess is why the blood test is taken in DD cases.
However, it is my guessing that the 'spirit' of the drink driving law with regard to bicycles is in practice quite different. And the 'way it used to be' as the previous poster has mentioned is closer to the truth. For example I would like to hope that an assessment of a 'drunken' cyclist would be one who sways all over the road, or indeed falls off. In this case they would need to be drinking way above the 4 unit(ish) yardstick whilst driving a motor vehicle.
A few years ago my old man was being picked up from the pub around closing time and on that particular night my cousin had called by to see my mum and offered to pick the old boy up in old boy’s car. On their way back they were stopped by bib and were questioned to why he had his fog lights on when there was no fog about. Up the road cycles my uncle (who had been drinking all day, watching the cricket at Grace Rd), notices the car and decides to join the police officer, by sticking his head in the driver’s windows and saying something along the lines of ‘ello ello ello’. The police officer basically told him to piss off and mind his business and off uncle bob went. Only to be stopped half a mile up the road by said copper and was later banned for 6 months from cycling on his bicycle. At the actual time of ‘arrest’ the police officer reprimanded bob for being a danger to other road users, to which my uncle just looked left and right (seeing an empty road) and shrugged his shoulders.
Is the old yardstick still current:
B ....reath
A.....ctions
G.....ait
S.....peech
...at least two and deemed to be drunk?
Wheeling said pedal cycle on any highway: i.e. drunk in charge of a carriage: £200 fine/1 months imprisonment.
Licensing Act 1872 S 12 as amended
dvd
B ....reath
A.....ctions
G.....ait
S.....peech
...at least two and deemed to be drunk?
Wheeling said pedal cycle on any highway: i.e. drunk in charge of a carriage: £200 fine/1 months imprisonment.
Licensing Act 1872 S 12 as amended
dvd
Edited by Dwight Vandriver on Saturday 22 July 08:16
justinp1 said:
vonhosen said:
gopher said:
It does seem an odd law that can see you lose your driving licence on the opinion of a police officer for something non-motoring related, but when actually driving a motor vehicle it requires proof. I think that seems slightly out of kilter.
You can lose your driving licence for offences that have nothing to do with drunkeness.
The blood alcohol level is of little consequence, it is a different matter all together.
You can be drunk whilst still being under the drink drive level & you can be over the drink drive level & not be drunk. The evidence of drunk is about impairment not the proportion of alcohol in blood or breath.
Agreed, but the impairment is back to an opinion, which despite police officers being expert witnesses, they are still prone to such human traits such as conscious and sub-conscious bias, assumption and thought.
However the accurate method to assess drunkeness or impairment would be the amount of effect on the brain, which is closely related to the amount of alcohol in the blood, which I guess is why the blood test is taken in DD cases.
However, it is my guessing that the 'spirit' of the drink driving law with regard to bicycles is in practice quite different. And the 'way it used to be' as the previous poster has mentioned is closer to the truth. For example I would like to hope that an assessment of a 'drunken' cyclist would be one who sways all over the road, or indeed falls off. In this case they would need to be drinking way above the 4 unit(ish) yardstick whilst driving a motor vehicle.
Agreed.
The level of drunkeness to be arrested for this offence, is where you are considered to be incapable of looking after your own & others safety. There would be corroborative opinion that someone was unfit.
& to think we get rat arsed most weekends & ride home, on tracks mind you, last time we did it my lass crashed in to a bridge! Good old times... If your half decent on a mountain bike i have to admit if bib tried to stop me when i had a few i'd leave him for dead, they wouldnt catch me & i wouldnt stop...no way would i risk my precious clean licence for riding a bike, they'd prob catch my lass though as no dout she would hit the bridge on the way home & fall off again... 
(shes actually a good down hill rider but after 5 or 6 stellas...)
(shes actually a good down hill rider but after 5 or 6 stellas...)
Hmmm. That's weird. S35 and 37 RTA seem to make it illegal not to stop if you're in a vehicle or on foot when a constable requires you to. But not on a pushbike. Where's the law for that?
Similarly S36. Mind you, around here most cyclists seem to think they have a S36 exemption in any case...
Similarly S36. Mind you, around here most cyclists seem to think they have a S36 exemption in any case...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff