# Police



## andrew waite (20 May 2012)

Got to share this with you all, on a ride out to day I was pulled over by the police for eating a protein bar while riding according to pc plod I am not in control of the bike if I don't have 2 hands on the bar, I was going to ask him what am I supposed to do shoot down and have a picnic but don't think he had a sense of humor any one else been pulled over by the police or was I just un-lucky and came across a grumpy git.


----------



## smokeysmoo (20 May 2012)

andrew waite said:


> I was going to ask him what am I supposed to do *shoot* down and have a picnic.


Good job you didn't, or you might still be in a cell


----------



## DCLane (20 May 2012)

I got pulled on Friday for speeding; 42 in a 30 coming down into Leeds from Headingley, including overtaking 2 cars (one of them the police car that pulled me  ). 

Tried to explain that they can't do me for speeding. I ended up with a telling off.


----------



## HovR (20 May 2012)

If I remember rightly, I think I cycled past some police no-handed before. It was on a quiet road, and I guess they either didn't care or had something better to do.


----------



## smokeysmoo (20 May 2012)

Did you do it twice? 

[EDIT] this post looks silly now HovR has deleted his duplicate post^


----------



## ufkacbln (20 May 2012)

This is a "grey area"

The point is adequate control, and a number of drivers have been done for eating, drinking, and other activities whilst driving.

However the definition is usally (IIRC) that an essential movement such as to take one hand from the steering (handlebar/ wheel0 to change the gears or signal is reasonable and required.

Eating, drinking, changing cassettes etc isn't and therefore can be penalised


----------



## CopperCyclist (20 May 2012)

You came across a grumpy one. And a bored one to stop you for it.

Technically he could consider careless cycling, however I doubt very very much CPS would ever run it. Additionally, the officer who bothered to submit it would probably get a 'You want to report what?' from his sarge.

That's presuming you weren't wobbling all over the shop, which I doubt.

Either way, my advice would be to nod politely and ignore tbh. It's what I'd do!


----------



## ufkacbln (20 May 2012)

Can be fun though...


Cycling through Fareham and there is one of the ubiquitous "Cyclists Dismount" signs It is actually on a road, so no break or cycle track.

PCSO stops me and points to sign.Then asks me what it is.

Me " I believe that is a Sign 966"

PCSO Bemused look... "It says Cyclists Dismount and you didn't"

Me "No it advises Cyclists to dismount. Blue background is advisory. There is no traffic, pedestrians or obstruction therefore there is no need to dismount"

PCSO "It means you have to get off and walk"

Me " No it doesn't, however if you are in your official role asking me to do so then that is different"

PCSO " You need to walk through here, or you will get a ticket"

Me "Where can I remount then?"

PCSO "What do you mean"

Me "Well you have told me to dismount, or you will give me a ticket, I will need you to tell me when you will allow me to remount"

PCSO "Are you being funny?"

Me "No just asking you to clarify your instructions"

At which point he was joined by a real Police Officer who took my side and I disappeared happily.

Occasionally see the PCSO around and he still gives me funny looks.


----------



## gaz (20 May 2012)

How are you meant to indicate? Or is he suggest that we don't need too


----------



## Red Light (20 May 2012)

So which of the delegated powers of PCSO's was he claiming to be operating under? Unless you were cycling on a footpath at the time he doesn't have too many.


----------



## caimg (20 May 2012)

Is this the same for drivers? Do police tend to pull over drivers who don't have two hands on the wheel?


----------



## Red Light (20 May 2012)

And the police are claiming they are under-resourced! If they've still got time to spend on nonsense like this, Government cuts haven't gone far enough!


----------



## dellzeqq (20 May 2012)

andrew waite said:


> Got to share this with you all, on a ride out to day I was pulled over by the police for eating a protein bar while riding according to pc plod I am not in control of the bike if I don't have 2 hands on the bar, I was going to ask him what am I supposed to do shoot down and have a picnic but don't think he had a sense of humor any one else been pulled over by the police or was I just un-lucky and came across a grumpy git.


how about signalling?

the police officer might have been officious, but, actually, eating a protein bar while on the move is pretty silly. You see it on audaxes all the time, but, then again, nobody has to pass an IQ test to do an audax


----------



## potsy (20 May 2012)

So all the chavs I see round here cycling with no hands at all, most of them on the pavement, will be getting pulled soon then?
GMP are going to be busy


----------



## gaz (20 May 2012)

dellzeqq said:


> how about signalling?
> 
> the police officer might have been officious, but, actually, eating a protein bar while on the move is pretty silly. You see it on audaxes all the time, but, then again, nobody has to pass an IQ test to do an audax


nom nom nom nom nom...


----------



## dellzeqq (20 May 2012)

Gax - they're paid to do what they do - and most of them are pretty good at it. But, then again, they don't have to deal with traffic, pedestrians, parked cars and all kinds of interesting road junctions.......

I'm not trying to make it a capital offence - but it is silly.


----------



## Doseone (20 May 2012)

DCLane said:


> ....Tried to explain that they can't do me for speeding....


 
Is that really right? I didn't know that. I always assumed the speed limit applied to bikes as well.


----------



## DCLane (20 May 2012)

Doseone said:


> Is that really right? I didn't know that. I always assumed the speed limit applied to bikes as well.


 
Nope - as far as I'm aware there isn't an offence for this. However, there is one for Dangerous Cycling.


----------



## Dan B (20 May 2012)

Doseone said:


> I always assumed the speed limit applied to bikes as well.


Only of the motorized variety

(Except in Royal Parks, which have their own rules and in which you _can_ be done for exceeding the limit)


----------



## Red Light (20 May 2012)

Doseone said:


> Is that really right? I didn't know that. I always assumed the speed limit applied to bikes as well.


 
Only in Royal Parks. Elsewhere the speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.


----------



## Doseone (20 May 2012)

DCLane said:


> Nope - as far as I'm aware there isn't an offence for this. However, there is one for Dangerous Cycling.





Dan B said:


> Only of the motorized variety
> 
> (Except in Royal Parks, which have their own rules and in which you _can_ be done for exceeding the limit)





Red Light said:


> Only in Royal Parks. Elsewhere the speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.


 
Thanks.


----------



## jay clock (20 May 2012)

Cunobelin said:


> This is a "grey area"
> 
> The point is adequate control, and a number of drivers have been done for eating, drinking, and other activities whilst driving.
> 
> ...


 
Changing cassettes? I find changing a cassette means I need the wheel off first.....


----------



## ufkacbln (20 May 2012)

jay clock said:


> Changing cassettes? I find changing a cassette means I need the wheel off first.....


 
Some people just lack the skills of Tantric Mechanics!

(....or I could have been making a deliberately general post to include common driving offences)


----------



## The Central Scrutinizer (21 May 2012)

DCLane said:


> I got pulled on Friday for speeding; 42 in a 30 coming down into Leeds from Headingley, including overtaking 2 cars (one of them the police car that pulled me  ).
> 
> Tried to explain that they can't do me for speeding. I ended up with a telling off.


 

42 mph downhill would be too dangerous for me......one little pothole


----------



## marafi (21 May 2012)

Police, even if you try to give them something new to learn they will still act as grumpy gits the lot of them.


----------



## siadwell (21 May 2012)

I saw a cyclist pulled over yesterday. Waiting in the car at a red light, an unmarked police car pulled up alongside. Chap on a Trek road bike went past us, then zigzagged about in front of us, trying to avoid the crossing traffic. Cue police car turning on blues and pulling alongside him to have a word.

One of the following drivers felt the need to have a word as well. However, that driver and the two behind him had failed to notice that the lights hadn't changed for us yet, so they'd just run a red light. Pity the copper didn't notice.


----------



## Sara_H (21 May 2012)

I really wish someone would publish a concise guide to what powers the police have when they stop or detain you.
A friend of a friend was accused (falsley) of theft recently, hung around for the police to come so the situation could be quickly cleared up and was dealt with abysmally by the police.
Seeing videos on youtube of police and PCSO's abusing their position makes me furious and worried about the future.


----------



## Scruffmonster (21 May 2012)

I got stopped by a copper near Victoria station this morning. I'd just got off the train and was cycling slowly across an empty path to take a 20 yard shortcut to avoid the clusterfcuk of a junction at the top of the station so I could get to Evans Cycles. (The road is one way)

He stepped in front of me and shouted 'Stop'. I stopped. He shouted 'Stop' again. I'd already stopped and told him so. I then got told he was issuing me with a £30 fine for riding on the pavement. My response was to laugh. He didnt smile. I then got told that it was an offence. I still thought he was joking so unclipped and tried to walk off. He grabbed my handlebars and told me I wasn't going anywhere.

I got really angry then, told him if he wanted to issue a ticket he'd have to follow me to my office, and that while he follows me there he really needed to consider if giving a £30 ticket to a polite and compliant person for a complete non event was what he joined the force for.

I walked off, he didnt follow.

I know I shouldnt have been on the pavement, I know it carries a fine, but what goes through these peoples heads. If he'd have said 'Jump off your bike mate' I'd have done so. Why the drama...


----------



## dawesome (21 May 2012)

It's rank discrimination against one-armed cyclists.


----------



## ufkacbln (21 May 2012)

dawesome said:


> It's rank discrimination against one-armed cyclists.


 

No it isn't PCSO isn't a "Rank"


----------



## Rumeigg (21 May 2012)

Sara_H said:


> I really wish someone would publish a concise guide to what powers the police have when they stop or detain you.
> A friend of a friend was accused (falsley) of theft recently, hung around for the police to come so the situation could be quickly cleared up and was dealt with abysmally by the police.
> Seeing videos on youtube of police and PCSO's abusing their position makes me furious and worried about the future.


Have a search on Google or the Home Office website and I'm sure your query will be answered about police powers.
On the flip side of the coin, a friend of a friend of mine had nothing but high praise for the police officer who came to tell her that her son had been killed in an accident and the compassion and help she was shown by that officer. Good cop / Bad cop syndrome , I suppose ?


----------



## Rumeigg (21 May 2012)

Scruffmonster said:


> I got stopped by a copper near Victoria station this morning. I'd just got off the train and was cycling slowly across an empty path to take a 20 yard shortcut to avoid the clusterfcuk of a junction at the top of the station so I could get to Evans Cycles. (The road is one way)
> 
> He stepped in front of me and shouted 'Stop'. I stopped. He shouted 'Stop' again. I'd already stopped and told him so. I then got told he was issuing me with a £30 fine for riding on the pavement. My response was to laugh. He didnt smile. I then got told that it was an offence. I still thought he was joking so unclipped and tried to walk off. He grabbed my handlebars and told me I wasn't going anywhere.
> 
> ...


If you know you shouldn't have been riding on the pavement then don't do it, just walk and save getting grief from the boys in blue....Simples ??


----------



## Scruffmonster (22 May 2012)

Rumeigg said:


> If you know you shouldn't have been riding on the pavement then don't do it, just walk and save getting grief from the boys in blue....Simples ??


 
Yes, 'The law is the law'.... but I think you can still use a bit of common.

If from the dawn of time, all cyclists had ridden at 3mph on footpaths, there never would have been a law to prevent them being there. A bike can be a dangerous thing on a pavement, or no more harmful than a person. 20 yards of empty pavement... I dont want my police force enforcing that.


----------



## Sara_H (22 May 2012)

Scruffmonster said:


> I got stopped by a copper near Victoria station this morning. I'd just got off the train and was cycling slowly across an empty path to take a 20 yard shortcut to avoid the clusterfcuk of a junction at the top of the station so I could get to Evans Cycles. (The road is one way)
> 
> He stepped in front of me and shouted 'Stop'. I stopped. He shouted 'Stop' again. I'd already stopped and told him so. I then got told he was issuing me with a £30 fine for riding on the pavement. My response was to laugh. He didnt smile. I then got told that it was an offence. I still thought he was joking so unclipped and tried to walk off. He grabbed my handlebars and told me I wasn't going anywhere.
> 
> ...


 I read somewhere (probably a link I'd followed from here) that when on the spot fines for pavement cyclin were introduced, the home secretary issued guidance that stated that these powers were not to be used against careful, considerate cyclists avoided unsafe sections of road/junctions but were were intended for use against inconsiderate cyclists causing a nuisance/danger to pedestrians.

I meant to make a copy to keep in panniers for the exact reason that sometimes when I'm out with my 9 year old son there are some sections I just dont feel its safe to use the road.


----------



## subaqua (22 May 2012)

Sara_H said:


> I read somewhere (probably a link I'd followed from here) that when on the spot fines for pavement cyclin were introduced, the home secretary issued guidance that stated that these powers were not to be used against careful, considerate cyclists avoided unsafe sections of road/junctions but were were intended for use against inconsiderate cyclists causing a nuisance/danger to pedestrians.
> 
> I meant to make a copy to keep in panniers for the exact reason that sometimes when I'm out with my 9 year old son there are some sections I just dont feel its safe to use the road.


 

Paul Boateng issued it i think http://www.bikeforall.net/content/cycling_and_the_law.php


----------



## dellzeqq (22 May 2012)

that's be the one - and it's good advice. But using the footpath (the clue is in the name) as a contraflow for a one-way street is crass. Get off and walk.


----------



## CopperBrompton (28 May 2012)

Red Light said:


> Only in Royal Parks. Elsewhere the speed limit only applies to motor vehicles.


I was the victim of police negligence in Richmond Park: I was doing 40mph in a 20 limit and the bastards weren't there to ticket me for it.

(No points, £30 fine for cyclists, which would be a bargain for the framed ticket on my bathroom wall.)


----------



## Vikeonabike (29 May 2012)

From an officers perspective. Most cops will use both common sense and powers of discretion where they can. Quite straight forward really, saves on paperwork and often a word of advice works better than a ticket.
However a couple of l factors come into play. (Not in any particular order of importance)
Firstly (thinking about minor offences like cycling on a pavement) There may be direction from management for a zero tolerance approach to certain offfences if it is deemed to be priority because of public interest! Which means you may be able to ride down a pavement one day unmolested by Officer Dibble, that night there has been a neighbourhood meeting where the great and the good of the community have decided that cycling on a pavement is the most horrendous of crimes in thier neighbourhood. The following day Officer Dibble gives you a ticket! Discretion not applied because of orders from above.
Secondly "Attitude test". Simple rule of engagement PASS IT! Laughing at, ignoring or verbally abusing an officer or PCSO who has asked you to do something "LAWFULL" genereally ends up in you losing! it may be a fine, it could end up with you sitting in a cell for a few hours before getting a fine or court appearance!
Attitude test is pretty important.. you don't know what the officer in front of you has had to deal with that day. They may just have had to inform someones mum their little girl has been killed in an RTC. They may have just been to a violent domestic and had to deal with the aftermath. Maybe they had just been vebally abused for the last hour by some drunken idiot and was trying not to take it personally!
Believe me, being polite will get you a lot further than being aggressive and obstructive!

So for the OP Yes the Law is the Law, yes you can still use a bit of common. But, as you stated you got really angry!.. The Copper who let you walk away was really a bit weak in that situation. You were lucky!


----------



## Vikeonabike (29 May 2012)

marafi said:


> Police, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU give them something new to learn they will still act as grumpy gits the lot of them.


Corrected that for you


----------



## totallyfixed (29 May 2012)

dellzeqq said:


> how about signalling?
> 
> the police officer might have been officious, but, actually, *eating a protein bar while on the move is pretty silly.* You see it on audaxes all the time, but, then again, nobody has to pass an IQ test to do an audax


A sweeping statement which initially I was going to argue the toss about as I eat on the move frequently, however having observed many "Sportive" riders I tend to agree there may be a case to answer there. Seriously though it's nonsense,or is it also silly to take a drink from your bottle too.


----------



## Vikeonabike (29 May 2012)

Sara_H said:


> I really wish someone would publish a concise guide to what powers the police have when they stop or detain you.
> A friend of a friend was accused (falsley) of theft recently, hung around for the police to come so the situation could be quickly cleared up and was dealt with abysmally by the police.
> Seeing videos on youtube of police and PCSO's abusing their position makes me furious and worried about the future.


 
Sarah. A PCSO may only detain you if and only if you refuse to give your details (or he suspects the details are incorrect) for a period of 30 minutes or until a Police Officer arrives! They can also issue tickets for certain offences (which confusing vary from force to force).
A police officer can stop and question you in any outside place ( or place the public has access too if you are suspected of committing an offence or the officer believes that you have witnessed a possible offence.
You will be asked to give your name and address to the officer. If you refuse or give a false name and address you are committing an offence.
All powers are explained in SOCAP (Serious Organised Crime And Police Act 2005) Section 110 , which replaes PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act (S24 & 25))


All I can say about the videos you see is that they are a drop in the ocean compared to the number of encounters with police officers where upon a member of the public is treated fairly, politely and with dignity (even in the face of intense provocation)


----------



## musa (29 May 2012)

Is it against the law to provide your name? 

So when you if you refuse do you mean in relation to something or in general?

I have a right not to give my name and details so can you clear this up?


----------



## Vikeonabike (29 May 2012)

totallyfixed said:


> A sweeping statement which initially I was going to argue the toss about as I eat on the move frequently, however having observed many "Sportive" riders I tend to agree there may be a case to answer there. Seriously though it's nonsense,or is it also silly to take a drink from your bottle too.


It's all about common sense TF. Nothing wrong with eating or drinking whilst cycling. However. Common sense dictates if your, say in busy traffic and you have a hand off the bar to eat or drink, your ability to brake or react too an emergency situation is diminished. Worse case scenario is that you could badly hurt yourself, somebody else... or even your BIKE.....
In most cases.. Words of advice would usually suffice.. sometimes. like numpty boll*cks texting whilst riding in heavy traffic.. a report for summons would be appropriate. In all cases please refer to my post above on Attitude test


----------



## machew (29 May 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> A PCSO may only detain you if and only if you refuse to give your details (or he suspects the details are incorrect) for a period of 30 minutes or until a Police Officer arrives!)


 
A PCSO who has NOT been designated the power to detain can arrest someone in the following circumstances.
They witness an indictable offence occur and know who did it
They KNOW an indictable offence has occurred and have reasonable grounds to suspect who did it.
To prevent a breach of the peace.

A PCSO with the power to detain can also detain if
They suspect an indictable offence has occured AND the person they are with refuses/provides false details
A person they are with commits an offence that causes harassment, alarm, distress, loss or injury and refuses details
A person they are with is acting in an antisocial manner and refuses details
A person they are with is begging
A person they are with commits an offence for which that PCSO can issued a fixed penalty ticket and refuses details


----------



## Sara_H (29 May 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> All I can say about the videos you see is that they are a drop in the ocean compared to the number of encounters with police officers where upon a member of the public is treated fairly, politely and with dignity (even in the face of intense provocation)


 
I appreciate that, but I would say that, even in our own small (very law abiding family) family, we've had a couple of episodes of police officers abusing their powers, that coupled with stories you read about and see in the media make me very cynical about the police I'm afraid


----------



## benb (29 May 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> All I can say about the videos you see is that they are a drop in the ocean compared to the number of encounters with police officers where upon a member of the public is treated fairly, politely and with dignity (even in the face of intense provocation)


 
This. I think in the vast majority of cases the police do a very difficult job very well. We really only hear about the "bad" cases, and I'm sure most of the police join us in condemning them. I'm pretty sure the culture of silence hardly exists any more.

Having said that, I think we need to remain vigilant that the police do not get extra powers (S44, thankfully now repealed) just because they or politicians ask for them.


----------



## siadwell (29 May 2012)

machew said:


> A PCSO who has NOT been designated the power to detain can arrest someone in the following circumstances.
> They witness an indictable offence occur and know who did it
> They KNOW an indictable offence has occurred and have reasonable grounds to suspect who did it.
> To prevent a breach of the peace.


 Which I believe is a power we all have: "citizen's arrest".


----------



## Vikeonabike (29 May 2012)

Sara_H said:


> I appreciate that, but I would say that, even in our own small (very law abiding family) family, we've had a couple of episodes of police officers abusing their powers, that coupled with stories you read about and see in the media make me very cynical about the police I'm afraid


 
Thats because you haven't met me yet..


----------



## machew (29 May 2012)

siadwell said:


> Which I believe is a power we all have: "citizen's arrest".


Yup, the only difference between me, you and a PCSO is that the PCSO is wearing a hi-vis anti-stab vest


----------



## totallyfixed (29 May 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> Thats because you haven't met me yet..


 
That's because you doesn't exist.


----------



## ColinJ (29 May 2012)

totallyfixed said:


> That's because you doesn't exist.


Ha ha - I was going to post that but you beat me to it!


----------



## rusky (29 May 2012)

machew said:


> Yup, the only difference between me, you and a PCSO is that the PCSO is wearing a hi-vis anti-stab vest


PCSO - Police Constable Shaped Object


----------



## Cubist (29 May 2012)

musa said:


> Is it against the law to provide your name?
> 
> So when you if you refuse do you mean in relation to something or in general?
> 
> I have a right not to give my name and details so can you clear this up?


Where you are suspected of committing an offence an officer can ask you to provide your name and address for the service of a summons, or to facilitate the issuing of a Fixed Penalty Notice. Certain bits of legislation are then worded to make it a further offence to fail to provide those details, and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act provides a power of arrest in order to establish your identity.

However, and this needs spelling out, there is no power of a constable to demand your details unless you have committed or are suspected of an offence. 

A constable can stop you and ask you to account for your presence in certain circumstances (for example in an area where a crime or series of crimes has been committed) and must record that stop. However, you are not obliged to provide your details under these circumstances and the constable will merely note your description and submit the stop report.


----------



## Cubist (29 May 2012)

Scruffmonster said:


> I got stopped by a copper near Victoria station this morning. I'd just got off the train and was cycling slowly across an empty path to take a 20 yard shortcut to avoid the clusterfcuk of a junction at the top of the station so I could get to Evans Cycles. (The road is one way)
> 
> He stepped in front of me and shouted 'Stop'. I stopped. He shouted 'Stop' again. I'd already stopped and told him so. I then got told he was issuing me with a £30 fine for riding on the pavement. My response was to laugh. He didnt smile. I then got told that it was an offence. I still thought he was joking so unclipped and tried to walk off. He grabbed my handlebars and told me I wasn't going anywhere.
> 
> ...


Would you kindly write a list of offences where you would agree with enforcement? Perhaps you fancy indulging in a wee bit of shoplifting, or a light smattering of wife-beating?

Would you stand by and criticise an officer for stopping and reporting a motorist for speeding, or using a mobile phone perhaps? Or is it only you that deserves to be let off for choosing to break the laws that you consider to be inconsequential?


----------



## subaqua (30 May 2012)

th


rusky said:


> PCSO - Police Constable Shaped Object


 there is a far more descriptive term , used by a significant amount of police. I have been slated for using it here before .

I enjoyed my time as a Special , and am glad i left when i did . again I have been slated on here because i used my time as a special to help in my full time career.


----------



## rusky (30 May 2012)

I have a friend who is a special, I admire people who volunteer to ease the burden on the paid officers but it seems there's sometimes a lack of training/awareness from pcso's.


----------



## benb (30 May 2012)

There's a huge difference between Specials and PCSOs.


----------



## siadwell (30 May 2012)

rusky said:


> PCSO - Police Constable Shaped Object


 
Yours for just £29: http://www.amazon.co.uk/STAR-CUTOUTS-SC76-POLICEMAN-CARDBOARD/dp/B002ZXWI64

Apparently the police have used similar (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...Police-spend-20000-on-cardboard-officers.html) but a subsequent article suggests the idea was a failure.....because the cutouts got nicked.


----------



## Scruffmonster (30 May 2012)

Cubist said:


> Would you kindly write a list of offences where you would agree with enforcement? Perhaps you fancy indulging in a wee bit of shoplifting, or a light smattering of wife-beating?
> 
> Would you stand by and criticise an officer for stopping and reporting a motorist for speeding, or using a mobile phone perhaps? Or is it only you that deserves to be let off for choosing to break the laws that you consider to be inconsequential?


 
Wife beating? In this same debate? Really? We ALL break laws, we break the speed limit, we stop in box junctions, attempt to buy alcohol or cigarettes underage, give someone a copy of a music album, any number of things.

Admittedly the original post was written in a fit of frustration, but my main bugbear was not the fact I got asked to adhere to the law, but the fact that the officer was overly officious. You may want them to, but I do not want my Police officers spending 30 minutes punishing 10 feet of 5mph pavement riding. A shake of the head and 'Not on the pavement mate, you should know better than that'. Informative, and enough to make someone feel a bit of a berk.


----------



## subaqua (30 May 2012)

benb said:


> There's a huge difference between Specials and PCSOs.


 

Yeah i know. sadly too many others don't.

CHIMPS


----------



## machew (30 May 2012)

benb said:


> There's a huge difference between Specials and PCSOs.


Ones a two tone group, the other goes around in groups


----------



## Cubist (30 May 2012)

Tje


Scruffmonster said:


> Wife beating? In this same debate? Really? We ALL break laws, we break the speed limit, we stop in box junctions, attempt to buy alcohol or cigarettes underage, give someone a copy of a music album, any number of things.
> 
> Admittedly the original post was written in a fit of frustration, but my main bugbear was not the fact I got asked to adhere to the law, but the fact that the officer was overly officious. You may want them to, but I do not want my Police officers spending 30 minutes punishing 10 feet of 5mph pavement riding. A shake of the head and 'Not on the pavement mate, you should know better than that'. Informative, and enough to make someone feel a bit of a berk.


The officer had decided to fine you for breaking the law. That was his choice, not yours. 
your choice was to break the law and hope not to have to face the consequences. As for a matter of degree, I meet an enormous number of people who choose to ignore the law, many offences far more serious than pavement cycling or theft and assault. Should we again differentiate between what you consider to be worthy of enforcement and not others?
Can we have that list now please


----------



## subaqua (30 May 2012)

Cubist said:


> Tje
> The officer had decided to fine you for breaking the law. That was his choice, not yours.
> your choice was to break the law and hope not to have to face the consequences. As for a matter of degree, I meet an enormous number of people who choose to ignore the law, many offences far more serious than pavement cycling or theft and assault. Should we again differentiate between what you consider to be worthy of enforcement and not others?
> Can we have that list now please


 

heres my list of laws i think i should be allowed to break with no penalty while others should be punished for

1) ........


----------



## pubrunner (30 May 2012)

benb said:


> I think in the vast majority of cases the police do a very difficult job very well. *We really only hear about the "bad" cases*, and I'm sure most of the police join us in condemning them.


 
I think that the above comment is correct.

There are been a few threads on this forum, where outraged members have described how 'unreasonable' the police have been; I've yet to see one on how good a job they do - frequently, in very trying circumstances.

The police are members of the community, just as we all are. Within the community (and even within CC ) , you'll find the good, the bad and the indifferent; you'll therefore find the same 'mix' within the police. Too many people have unrealistically high expectations about the police; they aren't supermen.

A neighbour had a few tools stolen from his garden; he was aggrieved that the police 'didn't do more' to help . . . . . . . but what could they (realistically) do ? He was expecting fingerprints to be taken (from what ?) etc., etc. - all for tools worth just a few quid.

Some may be cynical about the police; but in my (limited) travelling abroad, I've yet to see a country where I've thought that the police are 'better' than ours.


----------



## Scruffmonster (30 May 2012)

Cubist said:


> As for a matter of degree, I meet an enormous number of people who choose to ignore the law, many offences far more serious than pavement cycling or theft and assault. Should we again differentiate between what you consider to be worthy of enforcement and not others?
> Can we have that list now please


 
Again, no problem with the enforcement of the law. Big problem with going to Defcon 1 immediately. It's unnecessary.

Stop throwing around wife beating, theft and assault around in the same sentence as pavement cycling. It's not a gateway drug. You must know that they are not linked simply because you can use the word crime for both of them.


----------



## subaqua (30 May 2012)

pubrunner said:


> I think that the above comment is correct.
> 
> There are been a few threads on this forum, where outraged members have described how 'unreasonable' the police have been; I've yet to see one on how good a job they do - frequently, in very trying circumstances.
> 
> ...


 
there was a biker cops emergency programme on a few nights ago where an essex officer pulled a guy for not wearing a seatbelt. the guy got out of his car and was lairy from the off. never a good first move. i suspect that had he been a "sorry i just forgot", the officer may have been a little more amenable to him .then the guy started wittering on about his shed was burgled and you lot ahvent done anything . the officer asked if he had reported it and the guy said NO .

i did long enough as a special. i couldn't do it for a job, and wouldn't want want to seeing the crap that gets chucked at police daily. damned if they do damned if they don't. but the country would be a whole lot worse without the police. 
pubrunner hits it on the head really with my bold highlights


----------



## Silver Fox (30 May 2012)

Bloody coppers, no sense of humour.

I mean, only the other day I said to this female officer from the mounted department, " Your horse looks knackered love".

She replied " You'd be knackered if you'd been between my legs for three hours". 

Well, I never


----------



## Cubist (30 May 2012)

Scruffmonster said:


> Again, no problem with the enforcement of the law. Big problem with going to Defcon 1 immediately. It's unnecessary.
> 
> Stop throwing around wife beating, theft and assault around in the same sentence as pavement cycling. It's not a gateway drug. You must know that they are not linked simply because you can use the word crime for both of them.


Quite the opposite. pavement cycling is not a crime. It is however an offence. I was drawing the parallel and you have consistently failed to grasp the concept that to some people, lawbreaking is lawbreaking. My point in my last post is this : while I hear what you are saying about what you consider to be inconsequential offences, nevertheless some people are so lawless that they choose to ignore other, more serious offences. That you appear to believe, wholeheartedly that you shouldn't have been stopped and dealt with for the offence you committed, makes you no better than the people who believe, wholeheartedly, that it's OK to knock the missus about a bit, or to relieve M&S of the odd tin of salmon.


----------



## CopperCyclist (1 Jun 2012)

Scruffmonster said:


> Again, no problem with the enforcement of the law. Big problem with going to Defcon 1 immediately. It's unnecessary.



You and Cubist may actually be arguing towards the same point from opposite sides... The question is this:

If the officer had acted politely, calmly, with respect, given you a gentle talk and THEN issued a ticket, still while maintaining the politeness, would you have taken issue with that?

If yes, then Cubist is trying to make the point that we as individual members of the public cannot chose what laws are enforced, save by lobbying your MP.

If no, then I think you'll probably find most police would agree with you, as in this case you seem to be saying that you'd prefer to be spoken to, rather than spoken down to. All police know of a colleague that makes you squirm when they open their mouth to speak to someone!


----------



## Dan B (1 Jun 2012)

Cubist said:


> That you appear to believe, wholeheartedly that you shouldn't have been stopped and dealt with for the offence you committed, makes you no better than the people who believe, wholeheartedly, that it's OK to knock the missus about a bit, or to relieve M&S of the odd tin of salmon.


Sorry, but this is bogus.

One of those acts is illegal but (let's suppose in this case) victimless; the other two clearly do involve someone losing out and would still be wrong even if there weren't laws against them. Compare backing up your computer programs vs backing up your music collection


----------



## benb (2 Jun 2012)

Dan B said:


> Sorry, but this is bogus.
> 
> One of those acts is illegal but (let's suppose in this case) victimless; the other two clearly do involve someone losing out and would still be wrong even if there weren't laws against them. Compare backing up your computer programs vs backing up your music collection



I see what you're saying here, and agree to an extent. That is, there are things that some of us do that, while technically illegal, don't hurt or inconvenience anyone. I'm thinking of things like entering a ASZ without using the filter lane.

But you still have to take responsibility for your actions, so if plod decides to feel your collar about it, you have no grounds to complain and should just take it on the chin.


----------



## KateK (4 Jun 2012)

pubrunner said:


> There are been a few threads on this forum, where outraged members have described how 'unreasonable' the police have been; I've yet to see one on how good a job they do - frequently, in very trying circumstances.
> 
> Bleah can't deal with the boxes.. this bit isn't pubrunner obviously even though it's in the blue box...I just can't get it out.
> 
> ...


----------



## Peteaud (4 Jun 2012)

This always makes me laugh

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7BQvt3XeAY&feature=related


----------

