Cyclist hit and run

Agreed.

 

They should simply change the law, make it clear what is and is not acceptable and then the police will know exactly where everyone stands (and cycles).

And until then you will always get people quite rightly pointing out that it is breaking the law, whether or not a couple of MP's think otherwise is acadmeic and TBH not relevant. The law is the law surely, or is there really one law for cyclists and another for everyone else?

How is it academic when they've specifically and officially instructed the police not to prosecute cyclists who are using the pavement safely? That sounds like the opposite of academic, it has a very real world effect and tells cyclists that they are free to use the pavement so long as they do so safely.

I'll mention again, how do people get their cars onto drives? If the law was to be strictly enforced you'd not be able to cross the pavement to reach your drive or garage...

How is it academic when they've specifically and officially instructed the police not to prosecute cyclists who are using the pavement safely? That sounds like the opposite of academic, it has a very real world effect and tells cyclists that they are free to use the pavement so long as they do so safely.

I think the problem is that such an "instruction" has no position in law. If the policeman decides to act on someone cycling on the pavement, then no amount of "the Home Secretary says I can" will change that. Any prosecution would stand, as a point of law. As such, it is a totally unsatisfactory situation.

The home secretary is in charge of the police... If he's telling them not to charge people for something then you'd hope they'd be doing as they've been told...

The home secretary is in charge of the police... If he's telling them not to charge people for something then you'd hope they'd be doing as they've been told...

I'm pretty sure she is only urging them to show discretion. She cannot instruct them.

They should just get the law changed to allow cyclists to use pavements safely.

Of course what's 'safe', that's a matter of opinion, and perhaps why they didn't change it.

I'm pretty sure she is only urging them to show discretion. She cannot instruct them.

When the police were over zealously[1] handing out fixed penalty notices last year the transport minister reminded them of the official guidance and they stopped - with the ACPO recirculating the guidance to all police forces.

[1] i.e. To cyclists who were riding on the pavement safely.

And then the police are warning 4 year olds for riding on the path. Its madness.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-31805312

Sophie's mum Emma Stephenson said she understood it was illegal to ride on the pavement.

 

I'll mention again, how do people get their cars onto drives? If the law was to be strictly enforced you'd not be able to cross the pavement to reach your drive or garage...

I think that even you would admt that there is a difference between crossing 6 foot of pavement to obtain legitimate access to your property and someone going along the path deliberately breaking the law. Whatever a couple of MP's tell cyclists it is STILL breaking the law until they change it. I assume that thier opinion might be used in a court case

---------- Post added 25-05-2015 at 16:26 ----------

The home secretary is in charge of the police... If he's telling them not to charge people for something then you'd hope they'd be doing as they've been told...

But it is STILL against the law, like it or not the law has NOT been changed or repealed If they were not talking tongue in cheek why didnt they use their power to change the law?

---------- Post added 25-05-2015 at 16:28 ----------

When the police were over zealously[1] handing out fixed penalty notices last year the transport minister reminded them of the official guidance and they stopped - with the ACPO recirculating the guidance to all police forces.

 

 

[1] i.e. To cyclists who were riding on the pavement safely.

Who says they were using the pavement safely? It is a matter of opinion after all. OK some cases can be cited where the penalty notices were excessive, but ALL of them?

---------- Post added 25-05-2015 at 16:30 ----------

Sophie's mum Emma Stephenson said she understood it was illegal to ride on the pavement.

It IS, no matter what a couple of vote chasiing MP's without the courage of their own convictions reckon

Come on guys. donotremove admits to being one of 'em.

It IS, no matter what a couple of vote chasiing MP's without the courage of their own convictions reckon

Isn't it one of those illegal things, that can be done safely when it carried out with the right amount of caution under the right conditions? A bit like doing 75mph on the motorway, you're not suggesting that the police start nicking people who drive safely at 75MPH on a clear motorway?

I think that even you would admt that there is a difference between crossing 6 foot of pavement to obtain legitimate access to your property and someone going along the path deliberately breaking the law. Whatever a couple of MP's tell cyclists it is STILL breaking the law until they change it. I assume that thier opinion might be used in a court case

Really, you're actually going to argue that it should be strictly enforced against bikes, but we should look the other way for cars if it's "only six foot"...

You can't have your cake and eat it. It's either illegal or it's not... Even if the home secretary tells you that you're allowed to drive over it to reach your driveway.