|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 20:06, Bod wrote:
On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote: On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. there are problems, such as this one: http://road.cc/content/news/75569-te...clist-southend |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 20:14, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 14/03/2015 20:06, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote: On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. there are problems, such as this one: http://road.cc/content/news/75569-te...clist-southend And how many people are killed or seriously injured by vehicles on the roads every day? You've found *one* instance. Not exactly carnage on shared pathways, is it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 20:19, Bod wrote:
On 14/03/2015 20:14, Mrcheerful wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:06, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote: On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. there are problems, such as this one: http://road.cc/content/news/75569-te...clist-southend And how many people are killed or seriously injured by vehicles on the roads every day? You've found *one* instance. Not exactly carnage on shared pathways, is it. You stated 'there are no problems' I point out that you are wrong, conflicts and crashes between cyclists and pedestrians on shared use paths are common, some have even ended in fatalities, usually the pedestrian. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 20:25, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 14/03/2015 20:19, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:14, Mrcheerful wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:06, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote: On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. there are problems, such as this one: http://road.cc/content/news/75569-te...clist-southend And how many people are killed or seriously injured by vehicles on the roads every day? You've found *one* instance. Not exactly carnage on shared pathways, is it. You stated 'there are no problems' I point out that you are wrong, conflicts and crashes between cyclists and pedestrians on shared use paths are common, some have even ended in fatalities, usually the pedestrian. You *are* a drama queen........ and ICMFP ;-) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 21:30, Bod wrote:
On 14/03/2015 20:25, Mrcheerful wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:19, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:14, Mrcheerful wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:06, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote: On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. there are problems, such as this one: http://road.cc/content/news/75569-te...clist-southend And how many people are killed or seriously injured by vehicles on the roads every day? You've found *one* instance. Not exactly carnage on shared pathways, is it. You stated 'there are no problems' I point out that you are wrong, conflicts and crashes between cyclists and pedestrians on shared use paths are common, some have even ended in fatalities, usually the pedestrian. You *are* a drama queen........ and ICMFP ;-) Just admit it, you were wrong. Name calling is not very grown up. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On 14/03/2015 22:50, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 14/03/2015 21:30, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:25, Mrcheerful wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:19, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:14, Mrcheerful wrote: On 14/03/2015 20:06, Bod wrote: On 14/03/2015 16:44, Judith wrote: On Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:43:41 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster wrote: snip You are only telling part of the story. Going by the guidance put forward by the two ministers, it seems clear that the intention of parliament was to give the police powers to deal with cyclists who cycle on the pavement in a way which poses a danger or annoyance to pedestrians. Paul Boateng specifically said that the law was not aimed at 'responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users', and Robert Goodwill reiterated that guidance. I have already pointed out that what Boateng said was not "guidance" whatsoever. It has no legal basis whatsoever. If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. They didn't. It is illegal for anyone to cycle on the pavements. Hope this helps. Not on shared pathways, where, miraculously, there are no problems. You're one of the drama queens in this ng. there are problems, such as this one: http://road.cc/content/news/75569-te...clist-southend And how many people are killed or seriously injured by vehicles on the roads every day? You've found *one* instance. Not exactly carnage on shared pathways, is it. You stated 'there are no problems' I point out that you are wrong, conflicts and crashes between cyclists and pedestrians on shared use paths are common, some have even ended in fatalities, usually the pedestrian. You *are* a drama queen........ and ICMFP ;-) Just admit it, you were wrong. Name calling is not very grown up. nice to see that the child's helmet is on back to front http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/activ...-pavement.html |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 4:44:44 PM UTC, Judith wrote:
If Parliament had wanted to permit one class of cyclists to use the pavements then they would have made it clear in the law. Are you claiming that parliament has not made it clear that a person under 10 is not committing a criminal offence by cycling on the pavement? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Grantham girl, 4, gets cycling-on-path police warning
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
discount girl easter dress baby girl briggs washington state northface metropolis girl | [email protected] | Recumbent Biking | 0 | March 24th 08 01:37 PM |
Police on the Innocent Railway Path (NCR1) Edinburgh | Tom Orr | UK | 7 | March 16th 06 04:23 PM |
The Age: Police warning for iPod users | daveL | Australia | 68 | February 22nd 06 10:31 AM |
[media] TheAge (AU) Police warning for iPod users | Alan J. Wylie | UK | 12 | February 17th 06 07:26 PM |