little rant

[santaman2000]

Just seems to me to be another wooly written statute that means anything and nothing at the same time and that will only benefit lawyers.

Exactly....

 

[Graveworm]

Just seems to me to be another wooly written statute that means anything and nothing at the same time and that will only benefit lawyers.

As is always the case, Draughtsmen are all lawyers so asking them to write clearly and unambiguously would be asking Turkeys to vote for Christmas.

 

[boatman]

In the meantime continue wearing whatever legal design of hi-viz jacket you want to. Incidentally a member of the public may lawfully direct traffic if necessary and wearing a hi-viz would seem sensible while doing so.

 

[Graveworm]

In the meantime continue wearing whatever legal design of hi-viz jacket you want to. Incidentally a member of the public may lawfully direct traffic if necessary and wearing a hi-viz would seem sensible while doing so.

A member of the public may lawfully wave their arms about, they may not "Direct" traffic as no one has to take any notice and if they are found to be obstructing the highway then they have been held to commit an offence.

 

[Paul_B]

<snip>

" or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable, shall be guilty of an offence,"

Is wearing a hi-viz vest with similar patterns, designs or words that from a distance people mistake for an element of a police uniform constitute an act chosen by that individual? If you are aware of this mistaken identification and continue to wear it does that mean this act is an of fence due to the user perpetuating the circumstances of this false identification?
No conviction for this but I'm sure it is not the only "offence" that has yet to reach a conviction. That still doesn't remove a calculation that wearing these items will produce a change in behavior in others due to an identification with the uniform of the boys in blue whether that is mistaken or not.
However I don't think it's worth the resources to even consider looking into whether it's by police or cps. I would like the makers to change these products though. Also wish drivers pay horse and cycle riders more attention. I'd also like motor bikers to pay everyone else more attention. Just because your bike can accelerate ridiculously fast or reach 170mph or can take corners at speed by using both lanes doesn't mean you should. Nevermind think bike, think car that you have nearly ridden into on the wrong side of the road on a blind bend!! That's my little rant living not far from devils bridge at Kirby Lonsdale.

 

[Lister]

Is wearing a hi-viz vest with similar patterns, designs or words that from a distance people mistake for an element of a police uniform constitute an act chosen by that individual? If you are aware of this mistaken identification and continue to wear it does that mean this act is an of fence due to the user perpetuating the circumstances of this false identification?

Of course, Why else would an individual wear one of these over, say, a plain high vis jacket?

 

[blacktimberwolf]

"You're nicked !!!"..................this poor little mutt is now serving a 2 year prison sentence for impersonating a police dog

 

[alpha_centaur]

Horse manure is not a health hazard. Dog and human crap is.

Try hitting a pile of horse manure with the front wheel of your motorbike in the middle of a bend then tell me its not a health hazard.........

 

[alpha_centaur]

If you road tax horses can you please do the same for cyclists

Why, my emissions are much lower than a horse.

 

[Bushwhacker]

Try hitting a pile of horse manure with the front wheel of your motorbike in the middle of a bend then tell me its not a health hazard.........

Or a drain cover, or some ice, or a pile of wet leaves, or some gravel, or a dead badger.
Let's face it, motorbikes are the real health hazard.

 

[Goatboy]

As is always the case, Draughtsmen are all lawyers so asking them to write clearly and unambiguously would be asking Turkeys to vote for Christmas.

But the law has to encompass such weird and diverse occurences that to make it absolutly definative would be impossible and counterproductive. Just think of statements made in this thread alone and their interpretation by others. That's why the UK mainly works under the law of precedent and we don't have a written constitution.

Now whatch how this gets wrangled

 

[alpha_centaur]

Or a drain cover, or some ice, or a pile of wet leaves, or some gravel, or a dead badger.
Let's face it, motorbikes are the real health hazard.

They should still me forced to clean up their mess. Motorcycles are not a health hazard. Gravel, ice, wet leaves can be anticipated, and usually avoided. The drain cover should be not placed in the middle of a bend and is poor planning on the part of the roads dept. The dead badger (stuff like that happens). The biggest hazard to bikes is "sorry mate I didn't see you" incidents. Therefore motorcycles are not a health hazard, idiots who don't look are... (My enter key isn't working on this forum, hence the lack of paragraphs)

 

[boatman]

A member of the public may lawfully wave their arms about, they may not "Direct" traffic as no one has to take any notice and if they are found to be obstructing the highway then they have been held to commit an offence.

People need not take any notice and may drive into the back of a broken down lorry round the next bend if they wish just as they might want to drive along into the flooded road they were being warned about if they choose not to follow the directions of the member of the public but they might well be guilty of driving without due care and attention.

Stewards in certain circumstances definitely direct traffic.

When we did direct traffic into a diversion in our village we were doing what a very nice police lady asked us to while she dealt with an accident further up the road and waited for support. In this case, I suppose we were "directing" traffic as any member of the public may be called upon by the police for assistance. In fact our end of the blockage never did get any police person directing traffic up to the blockage being removed.

 

[Goatboy]

They should still me forced to clean up their mess. Motorcycles are not a health hazard. Gravel, ice, wet leaves can be anticipated, and usually avoided. The drain cover should be not placed in the middle of a bend and is poor planning on the part of the roads dept. The dead badger (stuff like that happens). The biggest hazard to bikes is "sorry mate I didn't see you" incidents. Therefore motorcycles are not a health hazard, idiots who don't look are... (My enter key isn't working on this forum, hence the lack of paragraphs)

Which is why my last car was written off on my side of the road by a ...............motorbike.

Sorry mate ex biker myself but bikes deal with road conditions differently from cars. Not saying "Two wheels bad, four wheels good" just different. And there's good and bad operators in both camps.

 

[Tadpole]

So back to my question, why should cyclists be able to use the highways of this country without insurance whether they be the sensible rider or the common place idiot? Car drivers whether good or bad have to so why not cyclists?

There is also a massive difference between the often narrow town roads in the UK and the Cycle paths found in the wider avenues of places like Holland and Germany.

http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/

 

[rik_uk3]

[video=youtube;mvi0NN4ED_s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&amp; v=mvi0NN4ED_s[/video]

And he's a pro lol

 

[Tadpole]

snip

And he's a pro lol

[video=youtube;kkE4fQtUAGs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkE4fQtUAGs[/video]So are they

 

[blacktimberwolf]

[video=youtube_share;qkFW9zPVpDA]http://youtu.be/qkFW9zPVpDA[/video]

 

[Goatboy]

And these are all pros, though you could here them all saying "I didn't see him he came out of no-where!"

[video=youtube;t5Izh5JJmdI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Izh5JJmdI[/video]