|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Police get tough with scofflaws
On 02/06/2013 12:02, thirty-six wrote:
On 2 June, 11:46, "Mrcheerful" wrote: thirty-six wrote: On 2 June, 09:03, "Mrcheerful" wrote: thirty-six wrote: On 1 June, 16:10, "Partac" wrote: "JNugent" wrote in ... On 31/05/2013 11:32, Partac wrote: http://www.windsorexpress.co.uk/News...ist-arrested-f... QUOTE: ...the woman told an employee at the estate agent she was in a rush to get a train to work when she cycled up the street and had not realised it was one-way. ENDQUOTE What, it's on her way to the station where she catches the train to work every day and she "had not realised it was one-way"? Yeah, right. For the avoidance of doubt, I've taken the liberty of posting the Google Earth street view of the road in question. I'll leave it up to the panel to decide whether she was genuinely mistaken, or if she was just lying through her teeth: http://www.flickr.com/photos/96800572@N02/8912745605/ Excellent. The signage is not legally binding, even to a person driving a licensed vehicle. Any "notice" or "order" which may or may not exist in the scrolls of office can not awfully be enforced or penalty made. The signage does not comply with the prescribed format as recorded in the legislaughter. As I said, thick as ... Signage looks good to me, what do you think is wrong with it? No entry signs apply to all vehicular traffic, and a bicycle is a vehicle. I obviously have greater awareness of UK-law than your deluded understanding. If you wish to engage your mind, please do it for the good and not be so willing to voice your misunderstanding. The signage does not comply with that prescribed under UK-law. It will be for the prosecution to find the legislation and present it to court. Examination of the legislation which was current at the time will show that signage not to be proper and any penalties unenforceable. When this is said to the arresting officer, great damages can later be brought due to the injury made by false arrest, loss of liberty, blah de blah. So what is wrong with it? apart from everything? Is it because it is not mentioned in the magna carta? So tell us what is wrong then. |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Police get tough with scofflaws
I really can't be arsed to look up the regs but I would guess that the right hand no entry sign might be too far back from the junction. In which case the correct procedure is to contest the FPN in court, not to try and run away from the policeman.
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Police get tough with scofflaws
On Jun 3, 11:09*pm, Piatkow wrote:
I really can't be arsed to look up the regs but I would guess that the right hand no entry sign might be too far back from the junction. and the rest. In which case the correct procedure which applies only to one who under-stands. is to contest the FPN in court, not to try and run away from the policeman. which is a waste of time. Running or riding away, when successful, is better for all, it IS good. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Police get tough with scofflaws
On 04/06/2013 09:02, thirty-six wrote:
On Jun 3, 11:09 pm, Piatkow wrote: I really can't be arsed to look up the regs but I would guess that the right hand no entry sign might be too far back from the junction. and the rest. In which case the correct procedure which applies only to one who under-stands. is to contest the FPN in court, not to try and run away from the policeman. which is a waste of time. Running or riding away, when successful, is better for all, it IS good. You still have not told us what is wrong with the signs. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Police get tough with scofflaws
Tony Dragon wrote:
On 04/06/2013 09:02, thirty-six wrote: On Jun 3, 11:09 pm, Piatkow wrote: I really can't be arsed to look up the regs but I would guess that the right hand no entry sign might be too far back from the junction. and the rest. In which case the correct procedure which applies only to one who under-stands. is to contest the FPN in court, not to try and run away from the policeman. which is a waste of time. Running or riding away, when successful, is better for all, it IS good. You still have not told us what is wrong with the signs. He has not signed a contract to accept their jurisdiction. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Police get tough with scofflaws
On Jun 4, 9:02*am, thirty-six wrote:
On Jun 3, 11:09*pm, Piatkow wrote: I really can't be arsed to look up the regs but I would guess that the right hand no entry sign might be too far back from the junction. and the rest. In which case the correct procedure which applies only to one who under-stands. is to contest the FPN in court, not to try and run away from the policeman. which is a waste of time. *Running or riding away, when successful, is better for all, it IS good. We are still waiting for you to tell us what is incorrect with the signage. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
it's tough out there | AMuzi | Techniques | 1 | January 27th 11 01:17 AM |
Here's a tough one | jimmymac | Techniques | 0 | November 14th 06 08:43 PM |
Think you've got it tough? | cfsmtb | Australia | 13 | November 10th 06 03:24 AM |
They think they are tough, | JD | Mountain Biking | 15 | December 19th 03 04:46 AM |
Tough day for cyclists | Fred | General | 17 | September 28th 03 01:41 AM |