Police stop speeding cyclists

[jmn]

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/dartmoor...

Lots of accidents on these roads so I'm pleased to see that all road users are at least being given words of advice.

I didn't realise that cyclists don't have to obey national road speed limits.

[Djtemeka]

Bikes don’t have speedometers so it’s hard to judge your speed….. and most of us can’t hit 30 anyway

[anonymous-user]

I’m sure motorists would love it if the police starting pulling them over to say ‘here are some appropriate words of advice: you weren’t breaking any laws whatsoever just then’.

[Donbot]

The police must have been bored.

[Pica-Pica]

jmn said:

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/dartmoor...

Lots of accidents on these roads so I'm pleased to see that all road users are at least being given words of advice.

I didn't realise that cyclists don't have to obey national road speed limits.

But cyclists can be done for dangerous or for careless cycling.

[Solocle]

Pica-Pica said:

But cyclists can be done for dangerous or for careless cycling.

As can police officers for careless driving, an offence for which they have no exemption...

[RazerSauber]

I can see the point of this. If motorists are told to take great care of them because they're vulnerable, then it's surely prudent to make sure that they're riding safely. Like it mentions in the article, I wouldn't like to be hit by a cyclist at 40mph. I don't know what the stopping distance from 40mph is on a bike but considering there aren't any laws on their roadworthiness to my knowledge then I'm willing to bet that not all of them are kept in tip top condition.

[pavarotti1980]

Van Twerp is all over it on Twitter with his spam responses. He really is a sanctimonious patronising ar5e.

Happy to proclaim cyclists are exempt from speeding legislation whilst simultaneously banging on about cyclists being at the behest of dangerous drivers.

[ScoobyChris]

Pica-Pica said:

But cyclists can be done for dangerous or for careless cycling.

Isn’t “furious cycling” the one used to cover travelling too fast for the conditions? Maybe it’s been superseded now…

Chris

[Retroman]

RazerSauber said:

I can see the point of this. If motorists are told to take great care of them because they're vulnerable, then it's surely prudent to make sure that they're riding safely. Like it mentions in the article, I wouldn't like to be hit by a cyclist at 40mph. I don't know what the stopping distance from 40mph is on a bike but considering there aren't any laws on their roadworthiness to my knowledge then I'm willing to bet that not all of them are kept in tip top condition.

How often do you see cyclists doing 40mph?
Any cyclist who's capable of such a thing is extremely unlikely to be doing it on an unsafe bicycle.

[agtlaw]

ScoobyChris said:

Isn’t “furious cycling” the one used to cover travelling too fast for the conditions? Maybe it’s been superseded now…

Chris

Dangerous cycling is a non-endorsable summary offence. Level 4 fine.
Careless cycling is also a non-endorsable summary offence. Level 3 fine.
Causing injury by wanton or furious driving* is triable only on indictment. Maximum 2 years' custody.

• Driving in this context includes cycling.

[Riley Blue]

Years ago I had a friend who had been blinded in a car accident but still enjoyed the sensation of speed; he was once cautioned by the police for the rate at which he rode down Glastonbury High Street on the back of a tandem.

[remedy]

Retroman said:

RazerSauber said:

I can see the point of this. If motorists are told to take great care of them because they're vulnerable, then it's surely prudent to make sure that they're riding safely. Like it mentions in the article, I wouldn't like to be hit by a cyclist at 40mph. I don't know what the stopping distance from 40mph is on a bike but considering there aren't any laws on their roadworthiness to my knowledge then I'm willing to bet that not all of them are kept in tip top condition.

How often do you see cyclists doing 40mph?
Any cyclist who's capable of such a thing is extremely unlikely to be doing it on an unsafe bicycle.

Pretty obvious these guys are going downhill. They stop pedalling at points.
Going over zebra crossings and the likes through a built up area is different to down a country lane.
Ebikes make it more likely that the 30mph limit will be breached in these residential areas.

[Hungrymc]

I'm sure this will become more common. There has been plenty of recent noise around the issues of treating cyclists with more courtesy and allowing more space (rightly so). That has all brought more attention to cycling generally and unfortunately that includes attention on those who push the boundaries of what is safe and sensible. We see all the traffic light infringements, we see some very aggressive riding, I think it inevitable we see a ramp up in attention from the police. I wouldn't be surprised to see some new laws created to simplify policing of cycling behaviour.

[RECr]

remedy said:

Retroman said:

RazerSauber said:

I can see the point of this. If motorists are told to take great care of them because they're vulnerable, then it's surely prudent to make sure that they're riding safely. Like it mentions in the article, I wouldn't like to be hit by a cyclist at 40mph. I don't know what the stopping distance from 40mph is on a bike but considering there aren't any laws on their roadworthiness to my knowledge then I'm willing to bet that not all of them are kept in tip top condition.

How often do you see cyclists doing 40mph?
Any cyclist who's capable of such a thing is extremely unlikely to be doing it on an unsafe bicycle.

Pretty obvious these guys are going downhill. They stop pedalling at points.
Going over zebra crossings and the likes through a built up area is different to down a country lane.
Ebikes make it more likely that the 30mph limit will be breached in these residential areas.

Ebikes are limited to 15.5mph.

[Solocle]

RECr said:

remedy said:

Retroman said:

RazerSauber said:

I can see the point of this. If motorists are told to take great care of them because they're vulnerable, then it's surely prudent to make sure that they're riding safely. Like it mentions in the article, I wouldn't like to be hit by a cyclist at 40mph. I don't know what the stopping distance from 40mph is on a bike but considering there aren't any laws on their roadworthiness to my knowledge then I'm willing to bet that not all of them are kept in tip top condition.

How often do you see cyclists doing 40mph?
Any cyclist who's capable of such a thing is extremely unlikely to be doing it on an unsafe bicycle.

Pretty obvious these guys are going downhill. They stop pedalling at points.
Going over zebra crossings and the likes through a built up area is different to down a country lane.
Ebikes make it more likely that the 30mph limit will be breached in these residential areas.

Ebikes are limited to 15.5mph.

For any assistance. Of course the added weight is also a benefit for speed going downhill. Not a huge factor, though.

[Yellow Lizud]

RECr said:

Ebikes are limited to 15.5mph.

No they're not, you can pedal them as fast as you want (or are able!)

The motor is speed limited but pedalling isn't.

[Dog Star]

remedy said:

Pretty obvious these guys are going downhill. They stop pedalling at points.
Going over zebra crossings and the likes through a built up area is different to down a country lane.
Ebikes make it more likely that the 30mph limit will be breached in these residential areas.

Not true; a normal cycle is much faster on the flat than an e-bike - they get pretty hard to pedal over 15.5mph. Downhill they’re the same. Up a decent gradient they're faster, but generally speaking uphill it’s going to be max 15.5, but isn’t usually that high. So high speeds in these areas will (assuming it’s not down hill) be the preserve of the Lycra clad roadies or illegal electric motorcycles. A legal e-bike isn’t going 30mph and I doubt you’d be doing 30 or more on a MTB for long.

You may of course be erroneously referring to these Surron things, homebuilt 4kw heath robinson kits or derestricted e-bikes - those aren’t e-bikes: they’re motorbikes. Nothing to do with e-bikes or cycling. (I’m not being pedantic- the distinction is important as one of these days the government are going to come down on these unregistered/uninsured motorbikes like a ton of bricks and pound to a penny legal e-bike riders are going to be the ones who get fked, the illegal riders will just carry on).

[oyster]

RazerSauber said:

I can see the point of this. If motorists are told to take great care of them because they're vulnerable, then it's surely prudent to make sure that they're riding safely. Like it mentions in the article, I wouldn't like to be hit by a cyclist at 40mph. I don't know what the stopping distance from 40mph is on a bike but considering there aren't any laws on their roadworthiness to my knowledge then I'm willing to bet that not all of them are kept in tip top condition.

I’m willing to bet that these bikes are kept in absolutely tip top condition.

[RECr]

Yellow Lizud said:

RECr said:

Ebikes are limited to 15.5mph.

No they're not, you can pedal them as fast as you want (or are able!)

The motor is speed limited but pedalling isn't.

Correct, my post wasn't completely clear. I was responding however to someone saying that Ebikes would make exceeding 30mph more common.