Take a look at this news story:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_home/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=384400
Now, you see Plod out there not infrequently, on many of those locations listed, targetting cyclists breaking the law. I won't refer to how few injuries this has caused or how infrequent accidents are, thats a given. Nor will I point out that all of them are extremely well lit and visibility is limited entirely by the curvature of the road, buildings, and traffic. None of that is relevant.
What I WILL point out is that the busiest street for Plod has yielded 123 fixed penalty notices in three years. And thats nothing. 40 per year or, as it really is, about 40 per crackdown. And thats a street which is slow (because it is invariably busy), well lit and, essentially, safe. The cyclists they're stopping will for the most part be going from one well lit city location (somewhere at the University) to another well lit city location (a college or student digs) via other well lit streets; this is akin to staking out a straight and quiet section of motorway and pouncing on the people doing 80mph. Technically reasonable, but generally a waste of Police resources.
Now, it also transpires that the biggest volume reported crime in the county is bike theft:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_cambridge/displayarticle.asp?id=383503
Whats that? No, of course they're not prioritising that. Making cyclists behave is a priority, dealing with the largest volume reported crime here, bike theft, isn't.
I can only assume that we misbehaving cyclists deserve it.
Cambridgeshire Constabulary, you are wrong. Very simply, your annual crackdowns on cycling do not work, they do not improve safety or behavioural standards on the roads. You do not prioritise reported dangerous driving (even when handed footage showing it) when cyclists are endangered. You do not prioritise cycle theft.
What the smeg is wrong with you, Cambridgeshire plod? Are you thick or something?
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_home/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=384400
Now, you see Plod out there not infrequently, on many of those locations listed, targetting cyclists breaking the law. I won't refer to how few injuries this has caused or how infrequent accidents are, thats a given. Nor will I point out that all of them are extremely well lit and visibility is limited entirely by the curvature of the road, buildings, and traffic. None of that is relevant.
What I WILL point out is that the busiest street for Plod has yielded 123 fixed penalty notices in three years. And thats nothing. 40 per year or, as it really is, about 40 per crackdown. And thats a street which is slow (because it is invariably busy), well lit and, essentially, safe. The cyclists they're stopping will for the most part be going from one well lit city location (somewhere at the University) to another well lit city location (a college or student digs) via other well lit streets; this is akin to staking out a straight and quiet section of motorway and pouncing on the people doing 80mph. Technically reasonable, but generally a waste of Police resources.
Now, it also transpires that the biggest volume reported crime in the county is bike theft:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_cambridge/displayarticle.asp?id=383503
Whats that? No, of course they're not prioritising that. Making cyclists behave is a priority, dealing with the largest volume reported crime here, bike theft, isn't.
I can only assume that we misbehaving cyclists deserve it.
Cambridgeshire Constabulary, you are wrong. Very simply, your annual crackdowns on cycling do not work, they do not improve safety or behavioural standards on the roads. You do not prioritise reported dangerous driving (even when handed footage showing it) when cyclists are endangered. You do not prioritise cycle theft.
What the smeg is wrong with you, Cambridgeshire plod? Are you thick or something?
??
