It took two years for Sussex Police to issue just 100 fines to cyclists using pavements in the county. But following complaints from residents of Kemp Town about two-wheelers abusing Marine Parade, police handed out 45 in just 120 minutes last week.Now, doesn't that bring a smile to everyone’s face?
Cycling groups have criticised the police, declaring the measures over the top.Oh. Well, they would. Wouldn't they?
Becky Reynolds, from the cyclers’ campaign group Bricycle, said: “The police don’t always definitively know where it is and isn’t legal to cycle.
“In the past there have been errors where cyclists have been given fixed penalty notices when they were not cycling illegally and fines have had to be cancelled after we have challenged the action.“
“Fixed penalty notices were never intended for responsible cyclists, who sometimes use the pavement out of fear of traffic. “Really? I guess no-one remembered to write that little exception clause, eh?
“I have previously had to challenge the use of the phrase ‘zero tolerance’ by police for pavement cycling. “Oh, really? And what came of this ‘challenge’?
“Cyclists should always behave responsibly, but pedestrians have far more to fear from contact with motor vehicles. “Which is very, very rarely a problem on pavements…
“With police resources spread thinly I would hope that the police and PCSOs are prioritising enforcement against the most dangerous road behaviour, not picking on people, particularly children, who are avoiding traffic or unfriendly road design. Education is preferable to fines.”What, you think the cyclists who do this don’t know it’s illegal? Someone should challenge their actions, then. Isn't that a job for…errrr….you?
And as for ‘most dangerous behaviour’, well, what do you call breaking someone’s hip?
Update: Panic over! It's back to 'normal'...
I'm very disappointed-no pictures of angry cyclists with their arms crossed staring at the camera.
ReplyDeleteJaded
I fucking hate pikeys AND militant head cam wearing in your face road blocking pavement riding lycra clad fuckpig cyclists.
ReplyDeleteFixed penalty notices were never intended for responsible cyclists, who sometimes use the pavement..?
ReplyDeleteA responsible cyclist wouldn't - Oh never mind.
This all sounds a bit like Critical Mass..
Nothing to beat a two-wheeled excursion to the Dales....without lights but just back ahead of lighting-up time!
ReplyDeleteAny thrills down your end, Julia?
"I'm very disappointed-no pictures of angry cyclists with their arms crossed staring at the camera."
ReplyDeleteIf there were, they'd certainly appear here.
"A responsible cyclist wouldn't - Oh never mind."
Quite!
"Any thrills down your end, Julia?"
My end had had its share of thrills, Melvin. Thanks for asking.. ;)
Bunny
ReplyDeleteWhen I was 10 I did my cycling proficiency, I was taught where I could legally ride a bike. That was well over thirty years ago, I still remember it. Stop complaining you idiots! A few years I used to use the commuter forum at Bikeradar, a cyclist website. The discussion was raised about red light jumping, with arguments for or against, then one very weird chap joined and all the for rlj'ing commenters changed, the man was stating how safe and good it was. His stupidity changed the others opinions, put a really stupid cyclist on the telly and watch how soon you will change other cyclists opinions.
“Cyclists should always behave responsibly, but pedestrians have far more to fear from contact with motor vehicles. “
ReplyDeleteWhich is very, very rarely a problem on pavements…
http://www.etatrust.org.uk/2012/11/cars-driving-on-pavements-american-vs-british-police-response/
roughly 40 people a year killed by cars on pavements, vs. roughly 0 a year by cyclists.
Great blog, apart from the occasional pathological bit of cycle hatred.
The ETA Trust?
ReplyDeleteOh, there's a neutral body... :/