Speeding on a bike? - Page 2

I don't believe the Tour de France participants get speeding tickets.

I also don't believe they have to compete with 3 lanes of traffic going 15, 20 or more miles overe the posted limit.

And stop lights.

Most of them don't ride mountain bikes with racks and lights.

And I've never heard of one of them work 10 hours before the ride and carry their lunch/daily essentials in a daypack on their back while riding.

(Not since the 1920's, anyway....)

So...yeah, I'm too slow for the TDF....;)

Ummm...I think you misread a stat somewhere.  The average speed for the TdF has been around 40 KILOMETERS per hour for several years now, which is about 25 MPH.

 

A quick Google search found this:

 

http://bikeraceinfo.com/tdf/tdfstats.html

 

Thanks for clearing that up, I did misread it, I thought that seemed fast, thinking: gee they really up the speed with new bike technology over the years!  Silly me.  But I will say this, at 58 with no race training going on and with balls to wall pedaling on flat ground I was able to obtain 34mph, I guess if an old geezer like me with no race training going on could do that...howbeit for a very short time...then I would assume a race trained young pro should be able to make that and then some.  If I'm now correct about this MPH vs km confusion then the fastest stage run during a TDF over a distance of 41.94 miles was done at 35.6mph...That's fast for maintaining that kind of speed for almost 42 miles.  But again that goes back to the balls to wall statement that pro riders do ride faster then 32mph and do so for a lengthy distance not for some short 5 second period like for me.
 

 

Back in the 1980's I was stopped on a Naval Base for doing 27mph in a 15 mph zone. The officer didn't know how to write up the ticket for a bicycle so he gave me a strong verbal warning. Out in the real world I am rarely able to even come close to the posted speed limits so I don't think that I will ever have to deal with this scenario.

 

To answer your question, it is at the discretion of the commander. 

 

The commander can say warn, charge-and-release, charge and arrest, arrest only, beat and mace mercilessly... 

 

In my opinion, in this day and age of violent crime, you are not going to get a ticket or arrested for anything on a bike. 

The prosecutors, courts, and cops, have bigger fish to fry. 

 

My experience is that as long as you present some kind of ID that checks out (valid),

are reasonably respectful and penetant after a potential stop, you will git a talkin'-to. 

 

EEven if you smash out the windshield of a moterrorist's mini-truck with a 33 oz. Zefal Magnum bottle full of water,

you will just get charged with destruction of private property and released; AS long as you don't give the cop any sh!t. 

 

The theory behind all of this... (under U.S. Law), is, that; you have the right to decline to self-incriminate. 

 

So, if there is no obvious reason to think that you have been operating a motor vehicle or are licensed tO operate one,

there is no reason to demand that a motor vehicle operator's license be presented,

no reason for you to present one and; no reason for you to be charged

with any violation of any provision of any motor vehicle operator's code of conduct. 

 

So, carry around a type -written ID card that does not correspond to any motor vehicle operator's license issued in your name and, 

with your name, CURRENT ADDRESS and valid phone # and offer it, only, as ID

at any bicycle traffic stop and be polite to any officer of the law. 

 

Don't talk about driving. 

 

Don't discuss whether or not you are licensed to operate unless you're ordered to. 

If you're ordered to discuss it w/o the benefit of counsel, it's automatic dismissal. 

 

 

 

I'm still Not Sure

 

We were discussing this at work the oher day, and UK law is interesting. The law applies to "motor vehicles". Under UK law a motor vehicle is:

"Any vehicle intended or adapted for use on the road".

Under that definition, you could get some tricky arguments at court. A road bike clearly fits the definition, but a mountain bike may not. Buy thin, slick, puncture proof road tyres for your MTB however, and now you've adapted it for road use and it DOES fit.

We searched to see if there have been any test cases to set a precident, but couldn't find any. I'm fairly confident on he above interpretation of UK
law though, so it IS possible to get a speeding ticket on certain bikes: however, its extremely unlikely unless you really annoy the cop!

 

Not having red the law to which you refer, my guess is that the law is written after roads were built. 

 

All roads having been built soon after bicycles were invented, "Any vehicle intended or adapted for use on the road", would refer to bikes and coaches 

which had been fitted with motors (motorcylces, motor-coaches). 

 

 

Bicycles have been around since the 1860s (1817 by some accounts).  

The first paved roads in America were paved in the 1870s.  

The first commercial automobile, the Duryea motor wagon was introduced to America in March 1896.  

Two months later, the nation's first traffic collision was recorded, when one a motorist hit a bicyclist, breaking the bicyclist's leg.   

 

 

 

The law is the Road Traffic Act 1988, so yes, bicycles were certainly around when it was written!

I think the argument in court would go down to whether the bike was "intended" for use on the road. That way, although the majority of people ride them on the road anyway, you may be ale to squeeze an excuse out of riding a mountain bike or a cyclocross bike, saying it doesn't fit the definition. A road bike though, you'd be screwed!

Incidentally, if you do get a ticket in the UK (I know of a cyclist ticketed for going through a red light) then you get points on your driving licence and a fine. If you don't have a driving licence, one is created for you, sitting ready with the points if you ever apply.

In the US the laws are specific to motor vehicles and then non- motor vehicle so a cyclist here would not get points on their drivers license- I wonder how many of these tickets are challenged in the UK

As a rule, very few tickets are challenged. However, in the UK you do not have to accept any fixed penalty from a police officer. However if you refuse to accept one, then the officer can simply summons you to a court hearing instead

However, a fixed penalty takes an officer five minutes to complete at the roadside, whereas a summons file takes a couple of hours work in a station. A lot of officers try to persuade you to take the ticket, as its less work for them. Even if you're summonsed to court, if you plead guilty at first heaing you can expect the same penalty as a ticket would have given you.

If I'm ever ticketted for anything at all, I'm refusing the ticket (politely) and hoping the officer is too busy to remember to do the file later!