Drunk' cyclists investigated by Mersey tunnels police

[Hip Priest]

Maybe so but they were still drunk.

The fact that they can control their bikes is immaterial. I arrested a guy for driving a car. He controlled the car OK, he looked and talked OK and was three times over the legal limit. Does that mean I should have had a quiet chat about drink driving and let him go? Of course not.

As always, you dont get the full story in the newspapers.

The laws for drunk driving and drunk cycling are very different, which renders this analogy pointless.

 

[mjr]

Not nowadays, the safe limit for driving in Scotland would make it inadvisable to take alcohol the evening before driving in the morning.

You fall foul the same way in England, too, although it's harder. But I didn't say how long they'd have to sleep and the travel ban wasn't limited to driving: under the Sidevalve Law, you can't cycle, walk, be a passenger (hey, they may grab the handbrake or wheel) or anything. Did some publican bar him?

 

[Andy Roadie]

It is illegal to be drunk on any highway or other public place even as a pedestrian but the Police never enforce this law. Drunk pedestrians do cause road traffic accidents.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/35-36/94/section/12


The blood alcohol limit clearly applies to drivers of motor vehicles and section 30 of the RTA is clear that a cyclist in proper control is cycling legally. The Police can ask for a breath sample but the cyclist (or pedestrian) is under no legal obligation to provide one.

 

[Drago]

Unfortunately, the video on display here is one shot by a passing motorist, and not the one the officers shot with their BWV, so any judgement based upon it is flawed.

They have their own multiple videos, multiple statements from officers, they're screwed. Going not guilty will only get the punishment shoved even further up their arses.

 

[glenn forger]

The Famous Five drank ginger beer, dunno what version you read but they never got drunk in the books.

 

[Dogtrousers]

But Councillor Les Rowlands, Wirral mayor and a Merseytravel committee member said ... “You can cycle at certain times, but people are probably going to think automatically they can cycle through at any time on the bikes. We need to review the rules, and maybe make them more explicit.”

This is pretty explicit. How much more explicit can it be?

14.Can I ride my bicycle through the tunnel?

Bicycles are not permitted through the Kingsway Tunnel. Through the Queensway Tunnel, they are not allowed between the hours of 6:00am to 8:00pm, Monday to Friday, 7:00am to 8:00pm on Saturday and 8:00am to 9:00pm on Sunday. Please note, the time limits during a Sunday are only operational between 1st April and 30th September inclusive.

 

[oldroadman]

Yes, but you get the full story from the relevant Act of Parliament which tells us the fact they can control the bikes, far from being immaterial, is all that matters.

This is not a motor car, it's a bicycle, the law says: 'is unfit to ride through drink or drugs (that is to say, is under the influence of drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the cycle)'.

Thus the prosecution has to prove the the cyclist was cycling, and was incapable of proper control of the bike.

Clearly the bikes were being ridden, but I don't believe the video even suggests, let alone proves, the riders were not in proper control.

I'm fairly sure there is some case law which refers to what being in control amounts to, and the view in the case was that if they didn't reel about and fall off, it could be reasonably judged that they had control of the bicycles. A smart brief who knows the RTA will see this never gets past a magistrates hearing, if the only evidence is the in car video.

 

[steveindenmark]

It's a different law isn't it? That's why blood alcohol levels apply to cars not bikes.

And in reality it's different - pissed with a ton of metal and a hundred horsepower or so, as opposed to 0.1 horsepower and a hire bike.

I think its a case of size doesnt matter. Especially if the car is swerving to miss the pixxed cyclist. You can be a hazard on the road if you are a truck or a bike.

 

[mjr]

I think its a case of size doesnt matter. Especially if the car is swerving to miss the pixxed cyclist. You can be a hazard on the road if you are a truck or a bike.

OK, but is a bike simpler to control and less likely to do damage than a truck? (Hint: which requires passing multiple tests and being licensed?) Which would you prefer a mildly intoxicated human to be in charge of?

 

[DaveReading]

Most drunk driving arrests (IIRC around 60%) take place the morning after. It seems that many drivers just don't understand how alcohol and their bodies work.

This response to an FOIA request

http://www.autoglassnews.co.uk/inde...id=180&cHash=a897c30ee876f274e867a1934427b408

would suggest that the proportion of "morning after" arrests is much lower than that (it quotes 13%, which sounds more realistic).

 

[Dogtrousers]

In Finland they do morning spot checks. The police put a checkpoint on the road and breathalise everyone coming through. I didn't see any cyclists when I went through one

 

[mjr]

I have a breathalyser and use it if I've had more than about 6 units the night before.

Oh - and it isn't a 'safe limit for driving' - it's the legal limit

The safe limit for driving is zero.

So after you show a legal breathalyser reading, you wait another five hours before driving? That's the time it takes to go from legal limit to zero.

I feel that's excessively cautious but I'd rather people did that than be excessively optimistic.

 

[subaqua]

I set the breathalyser to zero.

I'd support an absolute ban. It's perfectly possible.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150305-the-man-who-gets-drunk-on-chips
how do you legislate for that then .

FWIW if I am driving the next morning, then I am not drinking the previous evening . Not because the Law says , but because I don't want to have the "what if" if there ever is an incident.

I would support a reduction to network rail limits, which is what the company I work for has set the limit at for people in work, even head office .

 

[CopperCyclist]

Most drunk driving arrests (IIRC around 60%) take place the morning after.

I'm not sure about this ... I've arrested a lot of drink drivers in the last 12 years, and only recall one ever saying he had only drunk the night before, so the 60 percent would surprise me if true.

Doesn't negate your point at all though.

I'm also for a zero limit - if I'm driving I just don't drink anything. That said, ironically I would put the "zero" limit as around 5mg of alcohol in breath, as I think there needs to be some leeway. 5mg would be low enough to get across the message "if you are driving tonight, don't drink at all" while allowing a reasonable room for honest error from the day before.

 

[Pale Rider]

A tiny limit also gets rid of what we might call the Iron Jelloid defence.