- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Metropolitan Police New Scotland Yard.jpgLondon police stopping cyclists without helmets in "advice & education" exercise
Met Police stopping unhelmetted cyclists to provide “advice and education”
As part of Road Safety Week, the Metropolitan Police is stopping cyclists and lorry drivers in three locations in central, east and south London to offer “education and advice” to cyclists who are seen riding dangerously. Conrtoversially, the police are also stopping cyctlists who are not wearing helmets.
A spokesman for Scotland Yard told road.cc that cyclists were being stopped “where there are concerns about their behaviour - for instance cutting corners, performing other dangerous manoeuvres or wearing headphones while riding.”
He also acknowledged that officers were stopping riders who were not wearing helmets. While there is no legal requirement to wear a helmet while riding a bicycle in the UK, the spokesman said: “If you want to be safe it’s a very good idea to put one on.” That’s an opinion that some in the cycling community might perhaps take issue with.
London Assembly member Jenny Jones told road.cc she had contacted the Met and a superintendent had agreed that helmets and high vis are not required by law.
Baroness Jones said: "The Met’s ‘advice’ on cyclists wearing a helmet and high vis is not based on any scientific research. As an informed cyclist I ride my bike without either. Their efforts would be better focussed on enforcing the laws we have, for example on not driving vehicles while using a mobile, not driving a vehicle into ASLs when the lights are red, which would make our roads much safer.
"Clearing our roads of illegal and dangerous drivers has to be the priority, not hassling cyclists who are obeying the law."
Scotland Yard said that the intention was not enforcement and when asked if, for example, a cyclist riding through a red light would be issued a fixed penalty notice, said that no fixed penalty notices had been issued to cyclists. “It’s about advice and education rather than cracking down,” said the spokesman.
A total of 45 officers are involved in the operation, and police are also stopping lorry drivers. Their vehicles have been checked for any issues and in one instance a lorry was found to have a dangerously over-inflated tyre that left it unfit to continue its journey.
According to LBC, police at one location have stopped 20 HGVs and found a total of 60 offences, including vehicles in dangerous condition and drivers who had been working too long.
Chief-Superintendent Glyn Jones, who is in charge of the operation, told LBC: "If you're going to cycle in London, wear a helmet, wear high-vis, make sure your bike has the right lights, don't wear headphones and obey the rules of the road.
"That way you will be a lot safer."
In a ten-day period to last Thursday, five cyclists were killed in collisions with large vehicles on London's roads. It is not known how many of them were wearing helmets or whether their riding was a factor in the crashes.
John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.
He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.
Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.
John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.
He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.
Latest Comments
- Simon E 43 min 32 sec ago
That's what we are told. Edge-of-town housing developments are progressing at haste here in Shropshire, all with the same car-centric, profit...
- ktache 46 min 49 sec ago
Or lezyne tubeless pro plugs. I've got a set, but had no chance to try them out. I want to use those mushrooms.
- chrisonabike 1 hour 28 min ago
That's a bit forward! But yes; pop up any time you like. Except when the buses have been at the bridges.
- TheUntypicals 3 hours 32 min ago
If businesses are suffering on Linthorpe Road it is entirely their own fault, most of the destination type shops moved out long before the cycle...
- giff77 3 hours 49 min ago
So where is the entitlement of wanting to get from A to B in relative safety? The city centre is dire regarding cycling infrastructure and while...
- whosatthewheel 3 hours 53 min ago
I live in a mostly flat town and can maintain 22-25mph. Makes no difference to drivers who still overtake frantically even only to slow down to my...
- wtjs 7 hours 55 min ago
And we can be sure that Police Scotland would be similarly disinterested...
Add new comment
130 comments
There are no anti-helmet activists in the UK. I have heard a lot or people claim helmets should be compulsory but never ever heard anyone say they should be banned. There are just folks who are pro-choice, such as myself, and folks who are anti-choice, as I take it you are. This article is not, in any case, about whether helmets are any good or not, or whether they should be compulsory or not, it is about the police stopping people for doing something which is entirely legal and where there is no suspicion that any crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
There is a lot of truth to what you say. We all need a Tyler Duerden character to smack us in the head with a bicycle pump to make us wake up to the reality and demands of cycling.
I just googled "cycling levels Australia" and found these:
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/11/australian-cycling-levels-prepost.html
http://cyclehelmets.org/1194.html
Could you provide your "facts" that prove that cycling in Australia is now safer than it was before mandatory helmet laws?
Convenient... ; )
Thanks for the advice, I'll bear that in mind next time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabio_Casartelli
If you google his name and look at 'images' associated with it, you can see why.
I rode the Col de Portet d'Aspet this year, and to be honest you need a lid going down that, especially on a wet day.
However, interestingly the wiki link shows that there continues to be debate about whether a helmet would've helped. Certainly there have been no deaths in the Tour since.
But just to show how finely balanced the argument is Woulter Weylandt died as a result 'due to facial and basal skull fractures, as his injuries were too severe to allow resuscitation' after crashing at 50mph, and he was wearing a helmet.
I personally am not necessarily convinced that they are necessary, but I do think that they would do a job in some cases (and wear one). Ultimately I would recommend them, but don't want them to be compulsory.
I would have preferred if they had focused on telling RLJs about blind spots, especially the sort the Met were promoting where you can sit in the cab of a truck.
3579625010_08dff5b6c7.jpg
Seriously? Data from a nation where cycling plummeted after legislation! I've no problems with folk choosing to wear helmets and hi viz. knock yourselves out. But when we have the police stopping and 'advising' cyclists what they should wear. Where those who choose not to wear helmets are called idiots and dickheads. And the chain retailers pressing you to buy a helmet when you buy a bike. It all becomes a bit ridiculous.
I've been cycling for near enough 40 years. I can count on one hand the number of times I've fallen off and never on my head. In fact, in the last 7 years (50,000 commuting miles) I've fallen of once and that was when a ped stepped out in front of me and I pulled my shoulder.
The authorities are incredibly reticent to deal with the real issues at hand - speeding, tailgating, punishment passes. And even when it does come to the courts the judges/sheriffs would sooner blame the victim for their attire rather than deal with the motorist appropriately.
No problems mate.
I'll not even charge you for it.
Thanks Colin much appreciated...
Nahh, real pro's land on their butt - clenched of course
On the same page as your first link is a report saying "Benefit of Cycle Helmet Laws to Reduce Head Injuries Still Uncertain"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130514213148.htm
I note that you are very selective in your 'research'. If you find something that supports your pet theory about polystyrene hats then you promulgate it __ if it doesn't then you ignore it.
This is a PR stunt with the police following Boris's lead, suggesting there wouldn't be deaths on the roads in London, if only cyclists wore helmets. It's complete bollocks and a waste of time and they know it.
So they stop 20 trucks and uncover 60 offences, or an average of three offences per truck, and now you know why trucks are the main killer of cyclists, because clearly these guys do not give a **** about the law or road safety.
Putting a helmet in between a Cyclists plus Heavy Vehicles campaign is a bit of a nonsense.
If they stop someone who isn't wearing a helmet, does it automatically count as wasting police time?
I don't pay my taxes to have the Police handing out pamphlets - they should be out catching criminals!
I would never wear a helmet.
They have no power to do this whatsoever, ignore them and ride on.
Every time I'm in London I use a hire bike to get around. Never worn a helmet then. Although I do carry gloves and a hat and a couple of little LEDs - should I wish to hire a bike I don't want cold hands or a cold head and I'd like some additional light so an Exposure Flash/Flare combo is perfect to carry round.
One can trip on a paving slab and the head will be doing the same speed when it hits the ground as it would falling off a bike.
Why not get everyone to apply for a license to go outside on a bike if they can prove they will be wearing 2 mm thick cowhide leathers with carbon fibre inserts on the elbows and knees and up the back, thick gaunlet style gloves, armoured boots and a full face helmet.
Oh hang on, thats motorcycling.....im getting the two confused.
Here in amsterdam/holland day to day cycling traffic is so slow that helmets would not really help with a crash - above 30kph a helmet is more useful, and from that speed it's racing bike speed.
Keeping your eye on the road, and thinking a few steps ahead is the way to go! cyclist should be aware of the dead points in the mirrors of car drivers, even if they can car drivers often don't look back or sideways. I'm always standing in front of the cars and not next to them on a traffic light.
Also have proper lights on your bicycle, when dark a car can hardly see cyclists. (the Bike-lights is were the focus of police should be, that worked well in amsterdam a few years back forcing a fine or buy a light on the spot.)
Also i don't know how it's in london, but forcing cars to go at slower speeds on small roads is a good thing - most of amsterdam centre is 30kph max zone - with that cars and cyclist move at more similar pace. roads with separate bicycle lanes have higher speeds for cars.
For me as a cyclist the road to work is still the most dangerous route each day - for me with speeds up to 45 in town i should wear a helmet, but for most town-cyclist this is overkill and a killjoy for the benefit of cycling.
I would implore your policy makers to enforce slower speeds for cars in town, tax parking spaces in town higher per hour, that has also the benefit of getting more people out of cars and with larger numbers on the bike, car drivers have adhere to the power oft the cycling masses as the dominant form of transport.
(that said, cyclist could be more social on the road also (looking at myself) but with my behavior on the bike i don't endanger anybody, while a car is a potential murder weapon)
Anyone know a location where this is happening? I'm currently under doctors orders not to wear a helmet (seriously!) and quite fancy a chat on the way home.
There's a problem with too many people being killed or injured on the roads. Stopping cyclists who are riding dangerously to advise them accordingly is not a bad idea.
That does not take away from the fact that dangerous driving must be addressed and prosecuted wherever possible.
Instead, everyone has started up the helmet debate again
It was the police who started it up. Myself, I only talk about helmets when someone tells me I should wear one, or says that they should be compulsory.
Whilst the police are harassing cyclists they cannot be addressing dangerous driving.
well, just to re-visit this thread - look what they're doing now.. (massive operation to catch careless drivers)
I strongly believe that education and enforcement needs to apply to all road users in order to promote road safety.
Need to look at the bigger picture here, rather than getting hung up on one small aspect of the debate (poor cyclists being picked on by nasty policeman who has the cheek to suggest I should be wearing a helmet, how dare he?!)..
For those advocating choice making you a criminal, what is the minimum standard of helmet you will be hoping to be made law?
Surely you all have a minimum set standard in mind? And what happens if you buy a helmet from a European manufacturer that isn't certified to the British standard required? Will you be handing yourselves in as criminals too?
Or are you happy that as long something is on your head you are magically protected? If so, can I just wear one of my casquettes?
Seriously? Do people really cycle around London not wearing a helmet?
My bike slipped from under me at the weekend whilst taking a slippery country lane and I went down smashing head first into the tarmac. I'm only replacing my helmet as opposed to my wife replacing her husband. I'm glad I chose to wear one.
And this is the only scenario a helmet will help in, if you are hit by a car it will make precious little difference.
And can we stop with the pointless helmet saved my life anecdotes, you don't know if it helped, you don't know if it didn't.
Humans have been falling out of trees for millions of years, as we are still here it is pretty safe to say the skull is tougher than some give it credit for being.
Why, what did the helmet do for you?
To be honest you probably shouldn't be let out of the house without supervision let alone be allowed to ride a bike.
Ridden properly, bikes do not just 'slip from under me'.
Wearing a helmet will not help you much if you do not know how to ride at an appropriate speed according to the prevailing conditions.
Pages