You shouldn't be there! - Long

[Tony Raven]

Tim Forcer wrote on 08/05/2007 08:57 +0100:
>
> Be fair, there is so much law (and more every Parliamentary session)
> that nobody can keep up with all of it. Interested cyclists will tend
> to be expert in relevant road-use law, but perhaps not on (say) public
> order, drugs, sex offences, evidence admissibility, etc, etc. Yet
> police are expected to have all that expertise and to be up to date.
> Of course, in an ideal world, they would all have the up-to-date
> comprehensive knowledge, but it's not an ideal world, police forces
> often don't have the resources to do all the updating training they
> would like to provide, etc, etc. Therefore, coppers being human
> beings, they pick up at least some of their "knowledge" from
> inaccurate sources.
>

That's fine except a) its their job and that of their employer to make
sure they do know - that's what they are paid for. They won't accept
ignorance of the law as an excuse from a member of the public so it can
hardly be an excuse for a law professional and b) if they don't know the
law then they should hold off and not as in this and the Daniel Cadden
case invent laws that have been broken.


--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ekul Namsob <[email protected]> wrote:

> > At present, cycling into town isn't an option most
> > of the time as my not-quite-four-year-old daughter and I are not yet
> > confident enough with the Trailgator to make the trip. Any advice on
> > that would be well appreciated, particularly around this bit:
> > <http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?q=&ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=1120047456
> > 07520906437.0000011267ff84e340052&ll=53.760827,-2.691286&spn=0.005987,0.
> > 013583&z=16&om=1>
> >
> as the buses are forced into the same traffic ie no bus lane, or not
> enought any way. i very rarely use bus, i tend to use car or bike.
> locally and car for longer.
>
> looks a big busy road yes i can see that it's going to itmidating to
> father and daughter. maybe quieter routes in?

I've wracked my brains to think of one and cannot. The council and
Sustrans have provided a section of the NCN6 which connects us with the
city centre. Unhelpfully, it relies on descending Brockholes Brow
(average of one death and several injured each year), taking a hairpin
left at the bottom, riding over a good hundred yards of mud and
traversing two kissing gates and a stile before climbing an even steeper
hill into town.

Yay Sustrans. :-(

> i'd of thought that traffic would keep a fairly clear of you? but i've
> never used a tailgater nor likely too.

I too would hope that traffic would keep clear but it only takes one
idiot.

Cheers,
Luke



--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

 

[Roger Merriman]

Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:

> Tim Forcer wrote on 08/05/2007 08:57 +0100:
> >
> > Be fair, there is so much law (and more every Parliamentary session)
> > that nobody can keep up with all of it. Interested cyclists will tend
> > to be expert in relevant road-use law, but perhaps not on (say) public
> > order, drugs, sex offences, evidence admissibility, etc, etc. Yet
> > police are expected to have all that expertise and to be up to date.
> > Of course, in an ideal world, they would all have the up-to-date
> > comprehensive knowledge, but it's not an ideal world, police forces
> > often don't have the resources to do all the updating training they
> > would like to provide, etc, etc. Therefore, coppers being human
> > beings, they pick up at least some of their "knowledge" from
> > inaccurate sources.
> >
>
> That's fine except a) its their job and that of their employer to make
> sure they do know - that's what they are paid for. They won't accept
> ignorance of the law as an excuse from a member of the public so it can
> hardly be an excuse for a law professional and b) if they don't know the
> law then they should hold off and not as in this and the Daniel Cadden
> case invent laws that have been broken.

indeed it really is the police's job to know the laws if not they are in
the wrong job. there is no to be fair to be had here.

roger

 

[Roger Merriman]

Ekul Namsob <[email protected]> wrote:

> Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Ekul Namsob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > At present, cycling into town isn't an option most
> > > of the time as my not-quite-four-year-old daughter and I are not yet
> > > confident enough with the Trailgator to make the trip. Any advice on
> > > that would be well appreciated, particularly around this bit:
> > > <http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?q=&ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=1120047456
> > > 07520906437.0000011267ff84e340052&ll=53.760827,-2.691286&spn=0.005987,0.
> > > 013583&z=16&om=1>
> > >
> > as the buses are forced into the same traffic ie no bus lane, or not
> > enought any way. i very rarely use bus, i tend to use car or bike.
> > locally and car for longer.
> >
> > looks a big busy road yes i can see that it's going to itmidating to
> > father and daughter. maybe quieter routes in?
>
> I've wracked my brains to think of one and cannot. The council and
> Sustrans have provided a section of the NCN6 which connects us with the
> city centre. Unhelpfully, it relies on descending Brockholes Brow
> (average of one death and several injured each year), taking a hairpin
> left at the bottom, riding over a good hundred yards of mud and
> traversing two kissing gates and a stile before climbing an even steeper
> hill into town.
>
> Yay Sustrans. :-(
>
sounds less than ideal.

> > i'd of thought that traffic would keep a fairly clear of you? but i've
> > never used a tailgater nor likely too.
>
> I too would hope that traffic would keep clear but it only takes one
> idiot.

indeed, i guess then maybe use the tailgater on quieter roads and get
into town other ways for the time being?
>
> Cheers,
> Luke

roger

 

[permajeo]

That says it can be not it is.


It is:

http://www.motorcycle-training.f2s.com/filtering.html[/QUOTE]

 

[[email protected]]

On May 9, 10:26 am, permajeo <permajeo.2qb...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> That says it can be not it is.
>
> It is:
>
> http://www.motorcycle-training.f2s.com/filtering.html
>
That has an interesting danger for motorcyclists that cycle lanes can
cause that I hadn't thought of before:

When filtering in urban traffic, keep an eye open for cycle lanes and
expect your gaps to narrow (particularly when there are cycle lanes on
both sides of the road).

He also says:

You may have noticed the massive increase in the use of 'advisory'
cycle lanes across the UK as the government attempts to encourage more
people to use pedal cycles. As a pedal cyclist (as well as
motorcyclists) I hold the opinion that on-road cycle lanes do little
to encourage pedal cycling as they are often in inappropriate and in
inconvenient places. I have also found that they discourage car
drivers from giving you space when passing as the driver tends to see
you as segregated in a different lane.

Which is something often discussed here.

Tim.

 

[Roger Burton West]

Ekul Namsob wrote:

>I've wracked my brains to think of one and cannot. The council and
>Sustrans have provided a section of the NCN6 which connects us with the
>city centre. Unhelpfully, it relies on descending Brockholes Brow
>(average of one death and several injured each year), taking a hairpin
>left at the bottom, riding over a good hundred yards of mud and
>traversing two kissing gates and a stile before climbing an even steeper
>hill into town.

See, the trick is to keep up your speed over the gates and stile, then
the uphill's much easier. With wide enough tyres you should be able just
to surf across the mud.

R

 

[David M]

Good story, but disturbing that the Young Plod was so daft. Hopefully
he *will* have learned a bit about safe cycling the next time he's
on patrol. It really should be the case that traffic police should
receive special training about cyclists, and even including actual
cycling experience to help them understand the situation better.


Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote in uk.rec.cycling
about: You shouldn't be there! - Long

> Young Plod - "What do you do for a living"
> Me - "I train people"
> Young Plod - "Who for"
> Me - "The police"
> Young Plod - "Oh"
> Me - "Does that make a difference"
> Young Plod - "Err"
> Me - "Do I get a copy of a stop form then"

...umm, what's a stop form?

Or if I were to try this trick would I get done for "impersonating a
police officer"? :-(


--
David M. -- Edinburgh, Scotland. --[en,fr,(de) <-- corrections welcome]
*Please remove quotes not needed for context and interleave reply text*
*No-context, excess-quoted, slug-trailed, zero-content posts filtered.*

 

[Roger Merriman]

Roger Burton West <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ekul Namsob wrote:
>
> >I've wracked my brains to think of one and cannot. The council and
> >Sustrans have provided a section of the NCN6 which connects us with the
> >city centre. Unhelpfully, it relies on descending Brockholes Brow
> >(average of one death and several injured each year), taking a hairpin
> >left at the bottom, riding over a good hundred yards of mud and
> >traversing two kissing gates and a stile before climbing an even steeper
> >hill into town.
>
> See, the trick is to keep up your speed over the gates and stile, then
> the uphill's much easier. With wide enough tyres you should be able just
> to surf across the mud.
>
> R

over the gate and stile? some bike. as the idea is to safely transport a
child i suspect that high speed charging over mud would probably not go
down well.

roger

 

[_]

On Wed, 9 May 2007 22:19:54 +0100, David M wrote:

> Good story, but disturbing that the Young Plod was so daft. Hopefully
> he *will* have learned a bit about safe cycling the next time he's
> on patrol. It really should be the case that traffic police should
> receive special training about cyclists, and even including actual
> cycling experience to help them understand the situation better.
>
>
> Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote in uk.rec.cycling
> about: You shouldn't be there! - Long
>
>> Young Plod - "What do you do for a living"
>> Me - "I train people"
>> Young Plod - "Who for"
>> Me - "The police"
>> Young Plod - "Oh"
>> Me - "Does that make a difference"
>> Young Plod - "Err"
>> Me - "Do I get a copy of a stop form then"
>
> ..umm, what's a stop form?
>

http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/rec61.htm

> Or if I were to try this trick would I get done for "impersonating a
> police officer"? :-(

Shouldn't.

Unless you have another clone of YP in front of you...

 

[Tony Raven]

_ wrote on 10/05/2007 02:21 +0100:
>
> http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/rec61.htm
>

What would happen in CM if the whole assembly requested one when it was
stopped. They would be there writing out forms all night and sending
for more books of forms ;-)


--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[Don Whybrow]

_ wrote:
>
> http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/rec61.htm

Is this still in trials or has it been rolled out to the rest of the UK yet?

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Sense is not cognition but sensation. (Douglas Robinson)

 

[John Kane]

On May 10, 3:05 pm, Don Whybrow <[email protected]> wrote:
> _ wrote:
>
> >http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/rec61.htm
>
> Is this still in trials or has it been rolled out to the rest of the UK yet?
>
> --
> Don Whybrow
>
> Sequi Bonum Non Time
>
> Sense is not cognition but sensation. (Douglas Robinson)

See where sniper says

Me - "Do I get a copy of a stop form then"
Young Plod -"Err"
Me - "I really think I should get a copy of a stop form"

so it sounds like it in his area.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

 

[Sniper8052(L96A1)]

John Kane wrote:
> On May 10, 3:05 pm, Don Whybrow <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>_ wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/rec61.htm
>>
>>Is this still in trials or has it been rolled out to the rest of the UK yet?
>>
>>--
>>Don Whybrow
>>
>>Sequi Bonum Non Time
>>
>>Sense is not cognition but sensation. (Douglas Robinson)
>
>
> See where sniper says
>
> Me - "Do I get a copy of a stop form then"
> Young Plod -"Err"
> Me - "I really think I should get a copy of a stop form"
>
> so it sounds like it in his area.
>
> John Kane, Kingston ON Canada
>

Stop records have technically always been required. Even the notorious
section 66 of the Metropolitan Police Act 1839 required a record to be
made.

Stop records were formally required after the Phillips Commission report
1981 and the Policy Studies Institute report 1983 were published and
became part of PACE 1984.

The requirement for a copy to be given to the person stopped came about
relativly recently, perhaps three or four years ago. Before then a
duplicate was to be kept for inspection if requested by the person
stopped; they had a year from the date of the stop to request a copy.

Stop forms must now be kept for 12 years from the date of the stop.

This is a national provision and an entitlement for the public however
it is only a requirment if the interaction is a 'Stop' and not an
'Encounter'.

A 'Stop' is where a police officer asks a person to account for their
movements, ownership of property, requests personal details, delays a
person for any period of time or makes a search of a person or a vehicle
in which that person is travelling.

An encounter is a short interaction where a person may be asked brief
details that are less specific.

So, technically - An officer stops a vehicle and asks "Is this your
vehicle, can you tell me the registration number" is a 'Stop' and
requires a record to be made as it asks the driver to account for the
vehicle and reveal personal information.

In practice it would be unreasonable for an officer to delay a person
just to fill out a Stop Form to say that they had asked the registration
number of a vehicle for screening and then let it go so Stop Forms a
rarely filled out for this. If the driver didn't know and was then
pulled over to prove the ownership of the vehicle a Stop Form would
definitly need to be completed.

An encounter might be where an officer stops a vehicle and asks the
driver "Can you tell me where the tax disc was purchased". This does
not require the driver to reveal any personal information but may reveal
ownership of the vehicle for a screening check. No record would be
required.

It's a little bit of a mismatch as to what qualifies as a Stop and what
qualifies as an encounter but in very general terms anything over a
couple of quick questions, or any question that asked you to account for
your movements might well be getting into the area of requiring a Stop
Form although each situation is different and should be assessed on the
interaction at the time and in the light of 'common sense'.

Also a Stop Form must be completed if one is requested by the person
stopped except where it is impracticable for this to be done.

You do not have to give your name or address unless an offence has been
committed and the officer suspects or reasonably suspects you to be
guilty of the offence and requires the information for service of a
summons or to issue a ticket for the offence.

If a ticket is issued for the offence a Stop Form does not need to be
completed.

Sniper8052

 

[Tony Raven]

Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote on 10/05/2007 23:18 +0100:
>
> Also a Stop Form must be completed if one is requested by the person
> stopped except where it is impracticable for this to be done.
>

The Metropolitan Police Authority says even if it was not a Stop "if you
want to you can ask for a form and the officer must fill one out and
give it to you."
http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/leaflet.htm

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[[email protected]]

On 10 May, 23:37, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote on 10/05/2007 23:18 +0100:
>
>
>
> > Also a Stop Form must be completed if one is requested by the person
> > stopped except where it is impracticable for this to be done.
>
> The Metropolitan Police Authority says even if it was not a Stop "if you
> want to you can ask for a form and the officer must fill one out and
> give it to you."http://www.mpa.gov.uk/issues/stop-search/leaflet.htm
>
> --
> Tony
>
> "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
> is no good evidence either way."
> - Bertrand Russell

What has to be accepted is that this is one line in a short
description where as the full home office document runs to 88 pages
and appends the guide lines in PACE and from ACPO.

Perhaps though it was inadvisable to use the word 'stopped' in this
context as it could easily have been misconstrued.

An officer must complete a 'Stop Form" if one is requested by the
person subject to delay or to whom the officer has been speaking even
where such conversation or delay might not be classed as a Stop under
Home Office or ACPO guide lines.
This requirement does not apply where it would be impractical for an
officer to complete a record IE: In public order situations, football
matches etc

Sniper8052

 

[Peter Amey]

[email protected] wrote:
[snip]
>
> Perhaps though it was inadvisable to use the word 'stopped' in this
> context as it could easily have been misconstrued.
>
> An officer must complete a 'Stop Form" if one is requested by the
> person subject to delay or to whom the officer has been speaking even
> where such conversation or delay might not be classed as a Stop under
> Home Office or ACPO guide lines.
> This requirement does not apply where it would be impractical for an
> officer to complete a record IE: In public order situations, football
> matches etc
>
> Sniper8052
>

Sniper please don't ever leave this group! The benefit of informed
factual knowledge over speculative twaddle makes you invaluable.

Peter

--
www.amey.org.uk

 

[MatSav]

Ekul Namsob wrote:
>
> I've only once had an issue with a copper...

More than 20 years ago, when I were a student, I'd been for a night out
- and was "cycling" back to my digs. I'd registered the presence of an
ambulance, moving very slowly, on the opposite carriageway with a police
car escorting it.

Without stopping, the passenger door opens - and "plod" got out from the
car and walks over to me:

"Do you think you should be riding that machine, sir?"

"Ermm....p'rapsh not", I slurred.

"Well, get off and F**kin' WALK it then!" was his response, as he
returned to the still moving car and got back in to continue the journey
escorting the ambulance!

--
MatSav

 

[Robin]

"Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Clive George wrote on 07/05/2007 00:00 +0100:
>>
>> (snip story)
>>
>> It's like a Frank Spencer programme
>>
>> Hopefully he'll have learned his lesson early..
>>
>
> The problem being the police are institutionally anti-cyclist especially
> at the "too much power for their own ego" constable level. If it had not
> been Sniper on the bike we could have had Daniel Cadden II here. Its just
> not good enough.
>

hehe Dan is my Brother, I have just forwarded this to him