Speeding cyclists

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Dirtylitterboxo, Feb 21, 2004.

  1. See

    http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/Content/News/story.asp?datetime=21+Feb+2004
    +11%3A28&tbrand=ENOnline&tCategory=NEWS&category=News&brand=ENOnline&itemi
    d=NOED21+Feb+2004+11%3A28%3A48%3A113

    or

    http://tinyurl.com/2mngt

    "Danger warning to speeding cyclists

    February 21, 2004 11:28

    CITY cyclists have been warned not to risk their lives hurtling down Grapes Hill trying to set off
    the speed camera.

    The warning follows reports that people have been reaching breakneck speeds descending the steep
    hill, in the hope that they can cross the 30mph barrier and get a flash from the camera.

    The cameras are designed to catch motorbikes and mopeds as well as cars and so would be triggered by
    pedal bikes travelling at more than 30mph.

    But because the bikes do not have license plates the riders cannot be fined and traced.

    Despite the reports of people trying, Bryan Edwards, Norfolk Casualty Reduction Partnership, said he
    was not aware that the camera had yet flashed any cyclists.

    But he warned them it was still an offence to exceed the speed limit on a bike and that they were
    putting themselves in great danger.

    He said: "It is a motoring offence and you can be prosecuted under the Road Traffic Act, just like
    you can be drunk in charge of a pushbike.

    "All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those speeds down Grapes Hill. You
    would risk life and limb on a pushbike. It sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

    "Cyclists are perhaps one of the most vulnerable of road users and they have no protection
    around them."

    Inspector Jeff Anderson, from Central Area Road Policing, said: "Norfolk Constabulary would
    discourage cyclists from pursuing such a stupid activity which could result in a serious collision
    injuring both the cyclist and other road users. The speed camera has been situated on Grapes Hill in
    order to prevent such collisions."

    The camera was installed in July 2003 in an effort to prevent accidents as traffic approaches the
    busy crossroads at the bottom.

    In the three years before it was put up, there had been 56 accidents on Grapes Hill, eight resulting
    in death or serious injury.

    Mr Edwards said that the road had been made safer by the camera."

    Whilst I think any cyclist deliberately trying to set off the speed camera is a fool, it would be
    "interesting" to see what would happen if they took a cyclist to court for *speeding* as described
    by the RTA as opposed to the furious pedalling or pedalling furiously - or whatever the correct
    offence is...

    Cheers, helen s

    --This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get correct one remove dependency on fame &
    fortune h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**[email protected]$*$a$$o**l.c**$*$om$$
     
    Tags:


  2. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers posted ...

    > Whilst I think any cyclist deliberately trying to set off the speed camera is a fool, it would be
    > "interesting" to see what would happen if they took a cyclist to court for *speeding* as described
    > by the RTA as opposed to the furious pedalling or pedalling furiously - or whatever the correct
    > offence is...

    Now there's a challenge ... ;)

    --
    Paul
     
  3. [email protected]l.comcomcom (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers)typed

    > Despite the reports of people trying, Bryan Edwards, Norfolk Casualty Reduction Partnership, said
    > he was not aware that the camera had yet flashed any cyclists.

    > But he warned them it was still an offence to exceed the speed limit on a bike and that they were
    > putting themselves in great danger.

    > He said: "It is a motoring offence and you can be prosecuted under the Road Traffic Act, just like
    > you can be drunk in charge of a pushbike.

    Oh dear! He really doesn't know, does he?

    > "All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those speeds down Grapes Hill.
    > You would risk life and limb on a pushbike. It sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

    Nah, Grapes Hill is smooth and wide. 30mph could be FUN!...

    > "Cyclists are perhaps one of the most vulnerable of road users and they have no protection
    > around them."

    Quite. They wouldn't try if there was any other traffic...

    > Inspector Jeff Anderson, from Central Area Road Policing, said: "Norfolk Constabulary would
    > discourage cyclists from pursuing such a stupid activity which could result in a serious collision
    > injuring both the cyclist and other road users. The speed camera has been situated on Grapes Hill
    > in order to prevent such collisions."

    Hmmm... Idon't think there are speed cameras on East Heath Road in Hampstead. I've done
    38mph there...

    > The camera was installed in July 2003 in an effort to prevent accidents as traffic approaches the
    > busy crossroads at the bottom.

    Anyone with sense would slow down long before the crossroads.

    > In the three years before it was put up, there had been 56 accidents on Grapes Hill, eight
    > resulting in death or serious injury.

    How many involved cyclists? EMWTK.

    > Mr Edwards said that the road had been made safer by the camera."

    > Whilst I think any cyclist deliberately trying to set off the speed camera is a fool, it would be
    > "interesting" to see what would happen if they took a cyclist to court for *speeding* as described
    > by the RTA as opposed to the furious pedalling or pedalling furiously - or whatever the correct
    > offence is...

    Quite!

    > --This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get correct one remove dependency on fame &
    > fortune h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**[email protected]$*$a$$o**l.c**$*$om$$

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email protected] Edgware.
     
  4. Ian Smith

    Ian Smith Guest

    On 21 Feb 2004, dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > But he warned them it was still an offence to exceed the speed limit on a bike and that they were
    > putting themselves in great danger.
    >
    > He said: "It is a motoring offence and you can be prosecuted under the Road Traffic Act, just like
    > you can be drunk in charge of a pushbike.

    Yet more proof that the powers-that-be are often at least as ignorant as the Daily Mail.

    regards, Ian SMith
    --
    |\ /| no .sig
    |o o|
    |/ \|
     
  5. dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:

    > CITY cyclists have been warned not to risk their lives hurtling down Grapes Hill trying to set off
    > the speed camera.

    Where? Where?

    My record freewheeling naughtiness was 48mph in a 30 zone...sadly no camera. And it isn't illegal,
    although I'm sure there's some 19th century law aimed at horse riders which you can be charged
    under. Didn't some guy get done in Cambridge a few years ago for "riding furiously" at 20mph? That's
    cruising speed for people on racing bikes!

    Going up to the North Pennines in April. I reckon I should be able to join the 100km/h (62.14mph)
    club coming off Killhope Moor :)
     
  6. Just spotted this:

    > He said: "It is a motoring offence"

    Hehe - anyone see the flaw in his logic?
     
  7. Tony Raven

    Tony Raven Guest

    Ian Smith wrote:
    >
    > Yet more proof that the powers-that-be are often at least as ignorant as the Daily Mail.
    >

    And the powers-that-be in this case is the Norfolk Casualty Reduction Partnership which comprises
    - Norfolk County Council Planning & Transportation Department,
    - Norfolk Constabulary,
    - Norfolk Magistrates Court,
    - The Highways Agency
    - Crown Prosecution Service (Norfolk Branch).

    Oh dear

    Tony.
     
  8. Mseries

    Mseries Guest

    Zog The Undeniable wrote:
    > dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
    >
    >> CITY cyclists have been warned not to risk their lives hurtling down Grapes Hill trying to set
    >> off the speed camera.
    >
    > Where? Where?
    >
    > My record freewheeling naughtiness was 48mph in a 30 zone...sadly no camera. And it isn't illegal,
    > although I'm sure there's some 19th century law aimed at horse riders which you can be charged
    > under. Didn't some guy get done in Cambridge a few years ago for "riding furiously" at 20mph?
    > That's cruising speed for people on racing bikes!
    >
    > Going up to the North Pennines in April. I reckon I should be able to join the 100km/h (62.14mph)
    > club coming off Killhope Moor :)

    Maybe we should have a u.r.c meet early one Sunday morning at the top of Grapes Hill and all of us
    give it a go ! Wheres Killhope Moor ? BTW My all time fastest speed was 56 mph descending the Col du
    Tourmalet during L'Etape du Tour in '94. 49 in the UK on Holme Moss. Maybe by the time I'm 40 I can
    join the 100 Club.
     
  9. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On 21 Feb 2004 16:40:41 GMT someone who may be
    [email protected] (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote
    this:-

    >He said: "It is a motoring offence and you can be prosecuted under the Road Traffic Act, just like
    >you can be drunk in charge of a pushbike.

    It would indeed be interesting to see him make a fool of himself with such a prosecution.

    >"All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those >speeds down Grapes Hill.

    Though he presumably thinks it fine to travel at such speeds in a motorised vehicle.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  10. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    <super snip>
    > He said: "It is a motoring offence and you can be prosecuted under the
    Road
    > Traffic Act, just like you can be drunk in charge of a pushbike.

    A cycling mate of mine who is still in the plod & former traffic officer assures me that the speed
    limit only applies to motorised vehicles & not to cycles.

    And as for drunk in charge it is only in the opinion of the arresting officer, you can't be
    breathalysed or get points on / loose your car license.

    --
    Andrew

    "Look laddie, if you're in the penalty area and aren't quite sure what to do
    with the ball, just stick it in the net and we'll discuss all your options
    afterwards."
     
  11. Gavin

    Gavin Guest

    "andrew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > And as for drunk in charge it is only in the opinion of the arresting officer, you can't be
    > breathalysed or get points on / loose your car license.

    This is interesting. A few years ago when I lived near Andover, I was stopped by the police on my
    bike. I had just come from the pub and had had a few. I was advised to get off the bike and push
    it home. Otherwise he would arrest me for drink driving. The policeman claimed I could lose my
    driving licence.

    I complied - I did not want to push my luck. I am interested that this warning seems not to be
    based on law.

    Gavin
     
  12. gavin wrote:
    >
    > This is interesting. A few years ago when I lived near Andover, I was stopped by the police on my
    > bike. I had just come from the pub and had had a few. I was advised to get off the bike and push
    > it home. Otherwise he would arrest me for drink driving. The policeman claimed I could lose my
    > driving licence.

    Even if you didn't have one?

    >
    > I complied - I did not want to push my luck. I am interested that this warning seems not to be
    > based on law.
    >

    It's a threat to get you to comply and not be arsey lest you lose your licence. Better to comply
    than to argue the toss.
     
  13. Sue

    Sue Guest

    In message <[email protected]>, dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers
    <[email protected]> writes
    >
    >http://tinyurl.com/2mngt
    >
    >Whilst I think any cyclist deliberately trying to set off the speed camera is a fool,

    Oh, come on - we've all had a go, haven't we? With our club jersey on? And the phone number of our
    mate who works at the police speed traps office ready on our mobile so we could ask him to grab the
    picture for us?

    Perhaps the location mentioned in the article isn't suitable for this activity, but there are lots
    of speed cameras in places that are.

    BTW I wasn't successful, I think you need a proper road bike.
    --
    Sue ];:))
     
  14. Vernon Levy

    Vernon Levy Guest

    Wheres Killhope Moor ? BTW

    NW Durham near Stanhope. You'll have been pretty close to it on the C2C.

    Vernon
     
  15. Simian

    Simian Guest

    dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
    >
    > He said: "It is a motoring offence and you can be prosecuted under the Road Traffic Act, just like
    > you can be drunk in charge of a pushbike."

    Ah, an idiot. Perhaps he should examine the the word 'motoring' in its relation to bicycles.

    > "All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those speeds down Grapes Hill.
    > You would risk life and limb on a pushbike. It sounds like an accident waiting to happen."

    In my youth I remember being dead chuffed to have finally broken the 50mph barrier going from Biggin
    Hill down to Bromley Common. On average, it used to take me 45 minutes to get from my house to the
    airport, and 12 to get back. Happy days...

    > Whilst I think any cyclist deliberately trying to set off the speed camera is a fool, it would be
    > "interesting" to see what would happen if they took a cyclist to court for *speeding* as described
    > by the RTA as opposed to the furious pedalling or pedalling furiously - or whatever the correct
    > offence is...

    Hmmm, if my MTB didn't have what seems to be a terminal velocity of 35mph, I think I'd quite enjoy
    setting off speed cameras. I think the offence is actually "wanton and furious cycling", or
    something like that.
     
  16. David Hansen wrote:
    > On 21 Feb 2004 16:40:41 GMT someone who may be [email protected]
    > (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote
    >
    >>"All I would say is that they would be exceptionally stupid to do those >speeds down Grapes Hill.
    >
    >
    > Though he presumably thinks it fine to travel at such speeds in a motorised vehicle.
    >

    Of course because we all know that motorised vehicles are inherently safer and controllable at those
    speeds... Ring, ring, hello, no im driving down the hill., what, yes, no terrible hangover, how are
    you feeling ...
     
  17. Simian

    Simian Guest

    gavin wrote:
    > "andrew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    >> And as for drunk in charge it is only in the opinion of the arresting officer, you can't be
    >> breathalysed or get points on / loose your car license.
    >
    > This is interesting. A few years ago when I lived near Andover, I was stopped by the police on my
    > bike. I had just come from the pub and had had a few. I was advised to get off the bike and push
    > it home. Otherwise he would arrest me for drink driving. The policeman claimed I could lose my
    > driving licence.
    >
    > I complied - I did not want to push my luck. I am interested that this warning seems not to be
    > based on law.

    It's one of those urban legend things - you can't lose your driving licence for being drunk in
    charge of a bicycle, tho you can be fined quite a large number of notes for it - 2500, iirc.
     
  18. Mseries

    Mseries Guest

    vernon levy wrote:
    > Wheres Killhope Moor ? BTW
    >
    > NW Durham near Stanhope. You'll have been pretty close to it on the C2C.
    >
    > Vernon

    Is it the one out of Stanhope to the moor, where the Rookhope wagonway meets the road. I missed the
    turn in Rookhope, some other cyclists were stood in front of the sign, and ended up riding up that
    very steep hill out of Stanhope.
     
  19. Gonzalez

    Gonzalez Guest

    On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:25:58 +0000, Vincent Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote:

    >gavin wrote:
    >>
    >> This is interesting. A few years ago when I lived near Andover, I was stopped by the police on my
    >> bike. I had just come from the pub and had had a few. I was advised to get off the bike and push
    >> it home. Otherwise he would arrest me for drink driving. The policeman claimed I could lose my
    >> driving licence.
    >
    >Even if you didn't have one?
    >
    >>
    >> I complied - I did not want to push my luck. I am interested that this warning seems not to be
    >> based on law.
    >>
    >
    >It's a threat to get you to comply and not be arsey lest you lose your licence. Better to comply
    >than to argue the toss.

    I have been prosecuted twice (and found innocent twice) of being drunk in charge of a bicycle.

    There was much hilarity in court during the first case where the police officer described driving at
    speeds of up to 25mph through the back streets of Greenwich to catch me. The magistrate (a fantastic
    old buffer with a spotted bow tie) asked the prosecutor if she expected him to believe that Mr
    *Gonzalez* could cycle like the *Yellow Jersey* in the Tour de France and still be drunk.

    The prosecutor replied that "Some people cycle better when they've had a few drinks."

    The magistrate turned to me and said, "What do you have to say to that, Mr *Gonzalez*"

    I replied that the prosector has seen to many Carling Black Label adverts and believed that beer
    refreshed the cyclists other beers couldn't reach.

    The magistrate puffed himself up and said, "NO! No! no! Mr *Gonzalez*. That is quite wrong! It
    wasn't Carling Black Label. It was Heineken.
     
  20. Gonzalez wrote:
    > On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:25:58 +0000, Vincent Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >
    > I have been prosecuted twice (and found innocent twice) of being drunk in charge of a bicycle.
    >
    > There was much hilarity in court during the first case where the police officer described driving
    > at speeds of up to 25mph through the back streets of Greenwich to catch me. The magistrate (a
    > fantastic old buffer with a spotted bow tie) asked the prosecutor if she expected him to believe
    > that Mr *Gonzalez* could cycle like the *Yellow Jersey* in the Tour de France and still be drunk.
    >
    > The prosecutor replied that "Some people cycle better when they've had a few drinks."
    >
    > The magistrate turned to me and said, "What do you have to say to that, Mr *Gonzalez*"
    >
    > I replied that the prosector has seen to many Carling Black Label adverts and believed that beer
    > refreshed the cyclists other beers couldn't reach.
    >
    > The magistrate puffed himself up and said, "NO! No! no! Mr *Gonzalez*. That is quite wrong! It
    > wasn't Carling Black Label. It was Heineken.

    Stunner. Ive oft wondered whether I would TT faster if I mounted a can of guiness on the end of the
    aero bars.
     
Loading...
Loading...