Police criticised for arresting and fining cyclist ignoring 'no cycling' signs; Astana end Miguel Ángel López suspension; The "vague personal hierarchy of traffic violations"; Ineos snap up second Hayter brother; Weekend round-up + more on the live blog

joe9090 wrote:

I got stopped many moons ago in Kensington Gardens wheeling along a path (at a jogging pace) and got pounced on by an agressive WPC. After some discussion and apologies, she let me off with just a verbal warning not to do it again.

A warning for jogging on a path...

Was there a 5mph speed limit?

Duh wut? Wheeling = cycling.
There, I hope I clarified your comprehension!

joe9090 wrote:

Duh wut? Wheeling = cycling.
There, I hope I clarified your comprehension!

I think the vast majority of readers would interpret "wheeling" to mean pushing your bike; in British English wheeling is defined as pushing or pulling a wheeled object. In American English it is sometimes used for cycling but I've never heard it or read it used by a British person, so quite understandable that a British reader would not get your meaning.

joe9090 wrote:

Duh wut? Wheeling = cycling.
There, I hope I clarified your comprehension!

Wheeling is not cycling in most people's usage. In addition your poor grammar did not aid my comprehension.

Wheeling = pushing one's cycle alongside, rather like wheeling a trolley, and not astride the vehicle e.g. https://www.cyclehoop.com/product/access-infrastructure/bike-wheeling-ramp/

Scooting is in between that and cycling (i.e. astride a bicycle), usually with one foot on the pedal nearer you.

These new (old) burial customs always attract controversy:

Quote:

Perhaps because he named his infant son Jesus Christ, but more likely because he tried to cremate him on top of a particularly scenic local hill in 1884, Dr William Price faced some rather fierce opposition from his neighbours.

https://www.affertons.co.uk/2022/03/04/the-controversial-birth-of-cremat...

Personally when I'm gone you can stuff me and mount me, posed making a suitable gesture, on a pole outside your least favourite local party / council office / parliament with a sign saying "it's what he would have wanted" *.  Because I'll be dead...

* Bonus points if this leads to specific legislation to deal with such protests.

brooksby wrote:

https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/20587832.watch-moment-screaming...

Motorist "clips" e-bike (hard enough to damage the bike) then throws the bike out of the way to carry on going.  Cyclist stands in front to stop him, so he drives into him and carries on with him on the bonnet.

The judge said that whilst it was “an offence which clearly passes the custodial threshold”, he posed “absolutely no danger to the public”.  He got 12-month sentence suspended by 18 months, was banned from driving for one year and ordered to pass an extended re-test before he can get his licence back, and paid £500 victim compensation.

(Meanwhile, in other news, a couple who buried their deceased dad deep in the Welsh woods in accordance with his wishes have both been sent straight to jail for four months each.  Discuss).

Speaking for myself, I live in constant fear that I'll be buried alive in Welsh woods, so that's probably the biggest danger to the public.

What's that? He was dead when they buried him? Oh, well maybe that's just their first taste of wild burying and it's almost certain they'll escalate to live burials if not locked up.

Wouldn't the biggest danger to the public be if they buried you ... but you came back?

chrisonatrike wrote:

Wouldn't the biggest danger to the public be if they buried you ... but you came back?

It's always a risk

chrisonatrike wrote:

Wouldn't the biggest danger to the public be if they buried you ... but you came back?

TBH I was really glad that didn't come out of the coronavirus pandemic.  At the beginning, there was a lot of newswatching, watching for the first reports of the dead rising...  Luckily, apocalypse averted

This time...

brooksby wrote:

...watching for the first reports of the dead rising...  Luckily, apocalypse averted

This time...

But are you sure it's not to early to say?

brooksby wrote:

(Meanwhile, in other news, a couple who buried their deceased dad deep in the Welsh woods in accordance with his wishes have both been sent straight to jail for four months each.  Discuss).

Correction: they only got a suspended sentence.

https://metro.co.uk/2022/08/01/daughter-sentenced-for-burying-fathers-bo...

Mea culpa - I must have misread it.

But still - four months for burying a body in the woods vs twelve months for driving a living person along on the bonnet of your car in anger....  Doesn't really seem proportionate, to me.

I don't see how he is allowed to drive if he is PSTD and is triggered so easily. How are the public protected ?

brooksby wrote:

The judge said that whilst it was “an offence which clearly passes the custodial threshold”, he posed “absolutely no danger to the public”.

He doesn't pose any danger to the public, just those stupid, annoying, entiled cyclists and no one likes them do they?

Isn't it a bicycle in a red circle, so 'cycling prohibited'?

brooksby wrote:

Isn't it a bicycle in a red circle, so 'cycling prohibited'?

Yeah, I think it's meant to be this sign, except it's greyscale so it probably causes some confusion. I imagine that's why the "no cycling" has been added too...

Surely a hot shot lawyer with expertise in road safety could have got the cyclist off that fine. If only we could think of someone that fits that decription.

IanMK wrote:

Surely a hot shot lawyer with expertise in road safety could have got the cyclist off that fine. If only we could think of someone that fits that decription.

You mean "a Top Lawyer (TM)"?

If it was a council park, then there are all sorts of possiblities for trying an appeal, if the colour had been lost on the decals so you believed they were marking a cycle route and the writing looks so suspiciously amateurish that you assumed it was vandalism (see the exhibit from a couple of months ago of "No cycing" or whatever it said). Councils are compelled to be reasonable by law - not that they always are.

However, I have a suspicion that Royal Parks are literally a law unto themselves and common sense and reasonableness might not legally be in their tradition, old charter or something. (I may of course be talking a load of old toot).

I think it would have made more sense to have the roundel up on a post, though, not inset into the pavement... 

brooksby wrote:

Is it possible that the cyclist didn't realise that the Royal Parks Police are "real" police, and thought that they were just Percy the Park-Keeper?  Hence not cooperating...

You wouldn't blame them, I have it on the authority of a real Met copper that up until 2005 the Royal Parks Constabulary (when the RPC became part of the Met) was where people went if they failed the entrance procedure for the Met, after 2005 they became Met officers by default, so if you meet one aged over about 37 s/he most likely was originally a Met reject, and my encounters with them have certainly tended to bear this out.

That second one, with 'going through a deep puddle at speed', was terrifying.  Can't imagine what was going through the head of the driver of the oncoming vehicle...