Cyclists should be forced to use designated cycle lanes, according to the traffic lawyer commonly known as Mr Loophole. On his firm’s website, Nick Freeman calls on Transport Minister Patrick McLoughlin to make it mandatory for cyclists to use facilities “which have been paid for from the public purse.”
The lawyer acquired his ‘Mr Loophole’ nickname – which he has trademarked – after helping a string of high-profile clients escape conviction for motoring offences. He believes that a vocal cycling lobby is adopting ‘an extremely aggressive stance’ towards motorists.
“Government at both local and national levels seem hell bent on making it increasingly difficult for car users to get around towns and cities, when what they actually should be doing is making it easier.
“Instead, they are dancing to the tune of a very vocal cycling lobby, which adopts an extremely aggressive stance to roads and other road users, especially motorists. Cyclists often say roads are too dangerous for them, and I totally agree. However, when it comes to designated cycle lanes, many elect to ignore them, which is not only futile but utter madness.
“The government must introduce legislation to make the use of these lanes compulsory. If not, what’s the point in them? Each one comes at a cost to the tax payer, be it in paint and signs or, as in London’s case, constructing them.”
In August, Freeman waded into the debate about cyclists’ use of helmet cams by saying: “The time has come for motorists to fight back and film cyclists breaking the law or riding irresponsibly.”
“I’m not against cyclists and motorcyclists using headcams, far from it,” he said. “But what I am against is provocative and dangerous cycling, which is designed to goad motorists, knowing full well the responses will be captured on video and then uploaded on to the internet. Motorists can be easily identified by their registration plates, but cyclists are relatively anonymous.”
That last point is a common theme for Freeman, who has previously urged the government to force cyclists to be registered, carry insurance and be required to wear helmets and hi-visibility clothing.
“The Government must look at introducing a raft of legislation which deals with identification, visibility, compliance with road traffic regulations, insurance, cycle excise licence and compulsory use of a helmet,” he said, before adding: “This list is not exhaustive.”
While defending a driver who hit and killed a rabbi in Manchester, he also suggested that pedestrians be made to wear reflective clothing at night.
Add new comment
55 comments
He should also campaign to make pedestrians share the shared use paths, make them stay on the pavement, use pedestrian crossings built specially for them and to obey the crossing signals.
He failed to mention we are also a danger to national security.
Knob. End.
It's a difficult balance to know whether this stuff needs publication as opposed to not giving this Troll the media space he so cravenly is addicted to.
Parasite.
I know that you have to report the news but, can we PLEASE stop giving free publicity to this bottom feeding lawyer-slime?
Let’s imagine the government conceive a need to create a motorway from Oxford to Cambridge, but due to cost saving measures, no new bridges or tunnels are constructed, instead the new motorway must give way to every single existing lane it crosses, in addition part of the route is along an ancient footpath and so use on this section is shared with pedestrians, who either wander about aimlessly or stretch wires across the road attached to small mammals. Consequentl for this section the speed limit will be 5mph
Now, in order to justify the cost of this flawed infrastructure, we should legislate that any motorist going in that general direction must use the new road rather than other quicker or more efficient routes.
That is the point we would have got to if Mr loophole gets his way, this numpty needs to realise that those of us who cycle, and consequently reduce the number of motor vehicles on the road, are making it easier for cars to get around (which he states is his aim) and stop trying to make it harder for us to achieve some sort of balance with the congestion faced by motorists (all caused by excessive numbers of motorists).
if the legislation were passed, I would have to aquire a bmx in order to ride straight over all the cars parked in the cycle lane, which I would be obliged to use.
Well there's next to F all cycle lanes around where I live so he can go feck himself!
I don't know why this cock womble keeps getting air time when all he's famous for is getting criminals off a charge!
What an idoit, this is completely not possible.
I live in Worthing and last year they put all cycle paths to 5mph, now I know for a fact that me and the other riders from my club go much faster than that.
On top of the speed restrictions we now have angry pedestians hitting out at cyclists on the paths. Even when they are poodling along at >5mph
This is just for publicity! Clearly he's not had any clients speed or drink drive recently so needs to remind the world that he exists.
Definitely Mr ***hole!!!
Sunk cost fallacy
It always strikes me as odd that "Mr Loophole" speaks publicly about enforcing laws when his business is built upon helping people to sidestep laws.
Perhaps he sees a future market in getting people off charges of not cycling in the cycle lane?
That's an easy one: "the cycle lane wasn't fit for purpose..."
That's an easy one: "the cycle lane wasn't fit for purpose..."
I have to cycle 9 miles to find the first cycle lane in a town, then another 14 miles to find the shortest cycle lane in the next town. Thank god I live in the countryside. It will never happen until cycle lanes are complete between towns.
From his practice's website.....
"A father of 2 children Nick is a keen golfer with a 3.5 handicap and enjoys vigorous exercise with his Staffordshire Bull Terrier."
Vigorous exercise with his Staffordshire Bull Terrier eh?
I always liked the penultimate track of Suede's eponymous debut album.
A quality twunt.
Always reminds me of this short film.
A New York City filmmaker and cyclist has launched a painful online crusade to push authorities to ticket motorists who park in bike lanes.
In May, a policeman gave Casey Neistat a $50 (£31) fine for riding in a traffic lane, dismissing his plea that the bike lane was dangerously blocked.
To prove his point, Mr Neistat created a video in which he is shown crashing into a series of bike lane obstacles.
https://youtu.be/bzE-IMaegzQ
They first have to make all cycle paths:
1. useable
2. joined up
3. omipresent
Unless they plan ferrying cyclists between cycle paths by helicopter.
They would also need radically re-word chapter 13 of the DfT bikeability manual (cyclecraft), which devotes most of its space to cautioning cyclists not to use cyclepaths.
That's the law in Belgium - use lanes where they exist.
I remember getting told off by a policeman at the end of the Tour of Flanders sportif for not using the path.
However, Nick Freeman is clearly a complete c*ck too.
The PUBLIC HIGHWAY is a cycle lane.
Force all drivers to only use the special roads provided soley for their use - i.e. motorways, whih have been provided at great expense from the public purse
Mr Poophole.
I thought we'd get at least a week into 2016 without the first potential winner of 'nobhead of the year' award. Guess I was wrong.
Mr ****hole.
Professional attention seeking twerp.
What a complete arse"
Pages