Police pick on cyclist

On 2 Dec, 18:30, JNugent wrote:
nightjar cpb@ wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
...
On 2 Dec, 09:00, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk
wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...
...

Anyway, he was arrested for refusing to giv to give e his name and
address
which is quite common.
Which are you saying is quite common? Failing to give a name and address
or
being arrested for failing to do so when legally required?

Arrested for failing to do so whether legally required or not.

I see the goalposts are moving again.

On reflection, the whole thread should have been x-posted to
alt-usage.english (and maybe uk.legal).

Why is it that the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are always
trying to dictate to others what should or should not be posted
there?

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008, JNugent wrote:
Ian Smith wrote:

But you might reasonably argue that Ss. 28/29 don't cover riding during the
hours of darkness without (adequate) lights. And in that case, the principal
power (for any non-arrestable offence, not just road traffic offences) would
be S.25 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984:

That's not road traffic legislation.

The other poster explicitly highlighted that the legislation is
nothing to do with road traffic legislation.

Except that (like S25 PACE) it applies to road traffic offences just as it
does to any others, you mean?

Exactly. It is not road traffic legislation.

Would you claim that supply of controlled drugs is under road traffic
legislation, because some people might do it while driving a car?

So, still waiting for your demonstration that your original
statement - that police observing a cyclist doing anything wrong can
demand their name and address under road traffic legislation.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

In et,
Clive George tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell
us:
"Mortimer" wrote in message
et...

Ah, you can get multi-LED lights that cast as much light on the road
as filiament lights now, can you?

You can get single-LED lights which cast more light on the road than
many filament lights. You can get multi-LED lights which cast even
more, though once again 'cost-effective' may be relevant.

See, for example,

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/grahamglen0/LightTesting#

Testing conducted last week in the SEEKRIT BUNKER. The E6 used to be the
gold standard for dynamo-driven halogen front lights, but is handily
outpointed by the newer B&M LEDs, the Supernova E3, the Schmidt Edelux, etc.
etc. In an ideal world, we'd all have Lupine Bettys, but apparently there's
a recession on.

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
(Kickin'! - The Pope).

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tim Hall wrote:

Mrs. Hall says half flour, half porridge. Mrs. Beeton is silent on
the matter.

The Glasgow Cookery Book says:
4oz flour
2oz butter
1 1/2oz sugar

And serve with custard sauce, and fie upon you if you do not.

Are we sure this is not a wormhole into the Shed?


If you pass crumble through one type of wormole then you're likely to either
be too far away to eat it, or possibly having to eat it before it's been
made. If the other type of wormhole then you'd need to pick the soil and
worm crap out of it before eating. Either way I suggest either eating in
the kitchen, or daintily carrying to some other room in the house.

Clive George wrote:
You don't get mixed steady/flashing in decent headlamps.

The Exposure range do just that - constant light at a certain level, with
flashes every ~0.6 seconds which are quite a bit brighter. Very visible
and can switch to constantly on when you get on to quiet/unlit roads.

--
I'm at CAMbridge, not SPAMbridge

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 23:13:36 -0000, "Mortimer" wrote:

"Conor" wrote in message
...
In article , Mortimer
says...

Actually a flashing LED light, whether at the front or the back, is
*much*
easier to see and to distinguish from all other lights, reflections of
lights off shiny objects etc.

Not when you're driving a lorry and overtaking them. You can't see them
at all once they've dropped 20ft back from the front of the cab.

Er why should the fact that the light is flashing rather than steady make
any difference to the visibility from certain vehicles and at certain
distances?


Why not suggest to the police that they are wasting their time with
flashing blue lights and headlamps

--
there is a 39% greater chance of being killed or seriously injured as
a cyclist compared to as a pedestrian

On 02 Dec 2008 19:32:28 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

snip

Do carry on digging.


I think that your real concern is that he is making you look rather
silly with his sensible and cohesive argument.
(I am not suggesting that that is his objective)

However, I think it may be nearly the time when you will have to say
"you are a troll and this discussion is terminated - you are now in my
killfile" as he is certainly getting the better of you.

--

"A helmet doesn't weigh much, doesn't interfere with your enjoyment of
your ride, and is not seen as a big deal by most younger riders
especially." Guy Chapman

In article , Dave Larrington wrote:
Clive George tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell
us:
"Mortimer" wrote in message
et...

Ah, you can get multi-LED lights that cast as much light on the road
as filiament lights now, can you?

You can get single-LED lights which cast more light on the road than
many filament lights. You can get multi-LED lights which cast even
more, though once again 'cost-effective' may be relevant.

See, for example,

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/grahamglen0/LightTesting#

Testing conducted last week in the SEEKRIT BUNKER. The E6 used to be the
gold standard for dynamo-driven halogen front lights, but is handily
outpointed by the newer B&M LEDs, the Supernova E3, the Schmidt Edelux, etc.
etc. In an ideal world, we'd all have Lupine Bettys, but apparently there's
a recession on.

In an ideal world the Lupine Betty would last forever on unstealable
batteries, or achieve the same output from a 3W dynamo, but it will
take more than the end of a recession to sort that. (And in an ideal
world the Betty would have an option for a dipped beam pattern like
a Busch & Muller Big Bang)

Doug wrote:
On 2 Dec, 18:30, JNugent wrote:
nightjar cpb@ wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
...
On 2 Dec, 09:00, "nightjar" cpb@insert my surname here.me.uk
wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
...
...
Anyway, he was arrested for refusing to giv to give e his name and
address
which is quite common.
Which are you saying is quite common? Failing to give a name and address
or
being arrested for failing to do so when legally required?
Arrested for failing to do so whether legally required or not.
I see the goalposts are moving again.

On reflection, the whole thread should have been x-posted to
alt-usage.english (and maybe uk.legal).

Why is it that the motorists who dominate these newsgroups are always
trying to dictate to others what should or should not be posted
there?

I think it's you who is doing that, Doug - read on.

I brought in the first post in this thread to uk.transport by transplanting
it from uk.rec.cycling, on the basis that I wanted to make a single point
about a single poster who is - or was - well-known here (ukt).

But I did not cross-post it. I trimmed ukrc out of the newsgroup line and
have not amended that since, though I note that someone (I wonder who?) has
added ukrc back to the NG line (I don't know why).

The reference to uk.legal and alt.usage.english was not made seriously and I
am not surprised that it flew past you several feet above your head.

Ian Smith wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Ian Smith wrote:

But you might reasonably argue that Ss. 28/29 don't cover riding during the
hours of darkness without (adequate) lights. And in that case, the principal
power (for any non-arrestable offence, not just road traffic offences) would
be S.25 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984:

That's not road traffic legislation.

That is correct.

But it provides for ways of dealing with road traffic offences committed
under Road Traffic and similar Acts, of particular relevance where names and
addresses cannot be traced via vehicle registration (so very useful for
cycling offences where the offencder decides not to co-operate).

On that narrow point of interpreation, you are the outright and undisputed
eventual winner.

Congratulations!

PS: The cyclist still "got done" and from the description of the incident,
deserved it handsomely.