Richmond Park - Cops campaign v speeding cyclists !



T

Tim Henderson

Guest
Following the introduction of the 20 mph speed limit in Richmond Park,
there is a lively correspondence in my local rag. Including one from
the Inspector of the Park Police who observes :

<<<<
It is noticeable that many cyclists are now overtaking the cars,
travelling above the speed limit.

A campaign is underway to deal with them as the law equally applies.

>>>>>>>


Further text below,

Regards,
Tim


SIR - Regarding the letters from the public in your newspaper.

Since the introduction of the new speed limit, approximately 300
warnings have been issued to drivers for exceeding this limit. Most
of them were travelling just over 30 mph.

The warning made it clear to them that any future offences would lead
to prosecution.

The warning campaign finished at the end of May and normal daily
enforcement by Patrol Officers is implemented.

The majority of drivers are complying with the new limit, or are
driving just slightly above it.

It is noticeable that many cyclists are now overtaking the cars,
travelling above the speed limit.

A campaign is underway to deal with them as the law equally applies.

As stated by, one of your readers, some major speed offenders still
use the park roads and these offenders are reported and brought before
the local magistrates. One was reported last week.

These high speed offenders will be targeted and dealt with.
Regarding the commercial vehicles enforcement.......

The enforcement of these offences will contine to be dealt with on a
daily basis as they form part of the overall 'Policing Plan
Objectives' for Richmond Park.
In addition to this my officers deal with numerous other offences that
form part of the plan.
My policing unit will also have the added advantage of additional
staff from July, ie six Police Community Support Officers have been
assigned.
This will help the unit considerably and free up staff to carry out
further enforcement of the matters raised and other matters. .
Anyone who has concerns can contact my sector officers or myself:
Sergeant Valerie Trinkwon, Sergeant Nick Byrant or PC Kelvin Clarke.

Ron Cook
Inspector
(West London Royal Parks)
Richmond Park Police Office,
Holly Lodge, Richmond Park
 
"Tim Henderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Following the introduction of the 20 mph speed limit in Richmond Park,
> there is a lively correspondence in my local rag. Including one from
> the Inspector of the Park Police who observes :
>
> <<<<
> It is noticeable that many cyclists are now overtaking the cars,
> travelling above the speed limit.


The roadies won't be pleased ... good ;)




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.709 / Virus Database: 465 - Release Date: 23/06/2004
 
elyob wrote:
>
> The roadies won't be pleased ... good ;)
>


I guess we'll now get to see whether all those who avowed you couldn't be done
if you didn't have a speedo were right or not

Tony
 
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 20:22:54 +0100, "Tony Raven"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>elyob wrote:
>>
>> The roadies won't be pleased ... good ;)

>
>I guess we'll now get to see whether all those who avowed you couldn't be done
>if you didn't have a speedo were right or not


Not really, because the roadies have all got them.

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. - Mark Twain
 
I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
cyclist exceeding 20 mph. Mind you .......they'll have to catch us
first !!!!!!!!!!






Dave Kahn <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 20:22:54 +0100, "Tony Raven"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >elyob wrote:
> >>
> >> The roadies won't be pleased ... good ;)

> >
> >I guess we'll now get to see whether all those who avowed you couldn't be done
> >if you didn't have a speedo were right or not

>
> Not really, because the roadies have all got them.
 
On 29/6/04 5:18 pm, in article
[email protected], "Paul"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
> the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
> cyclist exceeding 20 mph. Mind you .......they'll have to catch us
> first !!!!!!!!!!


I got stopped by a parks police officer for riding off road in the park.
Gave me a telling off and not to do it again.

That was in about 1985 or so..

...d
 
"Paul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
> the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
> cyclist exceeding 20 mph. Mind you .......they'll have to catch us
> first !!!!!!!!!!
>

You're lucky! Here it's 20kph and 10kph in an effing off-leash area for
dogs!
Graham
 
On 29 Jun 2004 09:18:51 -0700, [email protected] (Paul) wrote in
message <[email protected]>:

>I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
>the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
>cyclist exceeding 20 mph.


20 +/- what? And measured with what?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2004 09:18:51 -0700, [email protected] (Paul) wrote in
> message <[email protected]>:
>
>> I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
>> the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
>> cyclist exceeding 20 mph.

>
> 20 +/- what? And measured with what?



Measured by the cop car doing 20mph behind and the roadies zooming away!
Tht'a enough evidence to convict for speeding.

a mate was stopped on the Tamsin trail a while ago (gravel cycle track
around the park limit 15mph) and told to watch his speed by a park policeman
who had clocked his speed from the park road and followed him to richmond
gate where the track crosses the road.

pk
 
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:03:06 +0000 (UTC), "PK"
<[email protected]> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:

>> 20 +/- what? And measured with what?


>Measured by the cop car doing 20mph behind and the roadies zooming away!
>Tht'a enough evidence to convict for speeding.


But 20 +/- what? Surely the limts of speedometer error are such that
prosecuting for speeds below, say, 25mph, would be problematic? And
how many people are going faster than that? And if the cyclists are
overtaking the cars, how can the "cop car" pace them? And how many
"cop cars" have speedometers calibrrated for offences at 20mph? And
how many will be interested in a Parks matter?

I find the whole thing baffling, given that the practical limit of
most bikes in that context is only going to be a few mph above 20
anyway!

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2004 09:18:51 -0700, [email protected] (Paul) wrote in
> message <[email protected]>:
>
>
>>I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
>>the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
>>cyclist exceeding 20 mph.

>
>
> 20 +/- what? And measured with what?
>
> Guy


Where I've seen speed limits imposed on cyclists its done with a laser
speed gun. They are accurate enough I guess they would give you the
same tolerance as they would a motorist

Tony
 
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:03:06 +0000 (UTC), "PK"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >> 20 +/- what? And measured with what?

>
> >Measured by the cop car doing 20mph behind and the roadies zooming away!
> >Tht'a enough evidence to convict for speeding.

>
> But 20 +/- what? Surely the limts of speedometer error are such that
> prosecuting for speeds below, say, 25mph, would be problematic? And
> how many people are going faster than that? And if the cyclists are
> overtaking the cars, how can the "cop car" pace them? And how many
> "cop cars" have speedometers calibrrated for offences at 20mph? And
> how many will be interested in a Parks matter?


...

These cops aren't ordinary cops. I think you'll find they're
Royal Parks police. When I last went round there years ago there
were always issus with motorists using the place as a short cut,
and also issues with deer encroaching on the roads during maybe
the rutting season. Maybe in order to placate the motorists they'e
having to be seen to be fair. But there are certainly on or two
long stretches depending on what direction you're circuiting
the park where its easily possible to exceed 30 mph.


Curious

....




>
> I find the whole thing baffling, given that the practical limit of
> most bikes in that context is only going to be a few mph above 20
> anyway!
>
> Guy
> --
> May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
>
> 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington

University
 
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 19:52:17 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>> On 29 Jun 2004 09:18:51 -0700, [email protected] (Paul) wrote in
>> message <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>I spoke to a road cop in the park just prior to the introduction of
>>>the speed limit. He definately confirmed that they WOULD fine any
>>>cyclist exceeding 20 mph.

>>
>> 20 +/- what? And measured with what?

>
>Where I've seen speed limits imposed on cyclists its done with a laser
>speed gun. They are accurate enough I guess they would give you the
>same tolerance as they would a motorist


How is the *cyclist* measuring their speed? When asked "Did you know you
were speeding?" you can quite honestly say "No." unless you have a cycle
computer, that's correctly configured, and that's not compulsory.

Thing about speed limits is a car doing 20mph can do far more damage
than a cycle doing 20mph, and cycles have different stopping distances
to cars as well, so the limit itself is totally meaningless when applied
to bikes, let alone cyclists being unable to tell how fast they're
actually going.

Frink

--
Doctor J. Frink : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail'
See his mind here : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/
Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook
"No sir, I didn't like it!" - Mr Horse
 
Doctor J. Frink wrote:

>
>
> How is the *cyclist* measuring their speed? When asked "Did you know you
> were speeding?" you can quite honestly say "No." unless you have a cycle
> computer, that's correctly configured, and that's not compulsory.
>


Not relevant. Ignorance of the fact you are breaking the law is not a
defence that is accepted I'm afraid. Just the same as "Did you know you
were over the drink drive limit?" "No, officer I didn't" "Well I'm
arresting you......"

Tony
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 18:03:06 +0000 (UTC), "PK"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>> 20 +/- what? And measured with what?

>
>> Measured by the cop car doing 20mph behind and the roadies zooming
>> away! Tht'a enough evidence to convict for speeding.

>
> But 20 +/- what? Surely the limts of speedometer error are such that
> prosecuting for speeds below, say, 25mph, would be problematic? And
> how many people are going faster than that? And if the cyclists are
> overtaking the cars, how can the "cop car" pace them? And how many
> "cop cars" have speedometers calibrrated for offences at 20mph? And
> how many will be interested in a Parks matter?
>
> I find the whole thing baffling, given that the practical limit of
> most bikes in that context is only going to be a few mph above 20
> anyway!



not on the hills in the park!

I regularly do 20 mph plus on my mtb on the gravel track when the park is
empty, on the road speeds well inexcess of the 20mph limit are easy.

pk
 
"Doctor J. Frink" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> How is the *cyclist* measuring their speed? When asked "Did you know you
> were speeding?" you can quite honestly say "No." unless you have a cycle
> computer, that's correctly configured, and that's not compulsory.



There are or at least used to be standard times for doing circuits
around Richmond park. When you take account of the gradients etc those
guys could tell you their likely maximum speeds as readily as the
weight of their bikes.

With a bit of mathematical wizardry, probably all the cops need do
is sit in their car and time the laps.



Curious

>
> Frink
>
> --
> Doctor J. Frink : 'Rampant Ribald Ringtail'
> See his mind here : http://www.cmp.liv.ac.uk/frink/
> Annoy his mind here : pjf at cmp dot liv dot ack dot ook
> "No sir, I didn't like it!" - Mr Horse
 
Dr Curious wrote:

>
> These cops aren't ordinary cops. I think you'll find they're
> Royal Parks police. When I last went round there years ago there
> were always issus with motorists using the place as a short cut,
> and also issues with deer encroaching on the roads during maybe
> the rutting season. Maybe in order to placate the motorists they'e
> having to be seen to be fair. But there are certainly on or two
> long stretches depending on what direction you're circuiting
> the park where its easily possible to exceed 30 mph.
>


There has been extensive discussion of the need for speed limits in the
park and the local community voted strongly in favour of it. The Park
is intended to be for relaxation, recreation and wildlife, not a
convenient high speed short cut for commuters.

Tony
 
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:12:11 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>Ignorance of the fact you are breaking the law is not a
>defence that is accepted I'm afraid. Just the same as "Did you know you
>were over the drink drive limit?" "No, officer I didn't" "Well I'm
>arresting you......"


Although in that case the driver presumably knew he'd been drinking.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
 
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:12:11 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
> wrote in message <[email protected]>:
>
>
>>Ignorance of the fact you are breaking the law is not a
>>defence that is accepted I'm afraid. Just the same as "Did you know you
>>were over the drink drive limit?" "No, officer I didn't" "Well I'm
>>arresting you......"

>
>
> Although in that case the driver presumably knew he'd been drinking.
>


As in the other case he presumably knew he was not stationary. So one
didn't know how fast he was going relative to the speed limit and the
other didn't know how high his blood alcohol was relative to the drink
limit.

Tony
 
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:25:13 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
wrote in message <[email protected]>:

>> Although in that case the driver presumably knew he'd been drinking.


>As in the other case he presumably knew he was not stationary. So one
>didn't know how fast he was going relative to the speed limit and the
>other didn't know how high his blood alcohol was relative to the drink
>limit.


I thought of addressing thatin the previous post, but thought the
point was so obvious as to be superfluous. Apparently not.

While it is possible to proceed through the park without the
consumption of alcohol, it is not possible to do so without moving.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University