Speeding cyclist and Highway Code Rule 69

[StuAff]

I'd love to have a chat with these cyclists who somehow manage to go way over the speed limit. Whatever 'supplements' they're taking must be really good!

In my case, the supplements are called 'gravity' and 'gradient'......

 

[DaveReading]

Though the word "must" in the Highway Code indicates that disobeying the instruction is a criminal offence.

No. It indicates it is giving advice on a point of law

You might want to take that up with the editors of the HC, from which I was quoting directly:

Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence.

 

[Tim Hall]

It's a Royal Park which does have cycle speed limits.

Not according to Cycling in the Royal Parks Policy Statement 2016

Speed limits do not apply to cyclists within the parks but it is recommended that cyclists keep to appropriate speeds for the environment

.

Linky: https://www.royalparks.org.uk/__dat...812_CPB_cycle-policy-TRP-2016-approved_es.pdf

 

[lazyfatgit]

The Forth Road Bridge has a 20mph bylaw too but thats partly because the barriers are too low. This is the only pic I could find to give you sense, high enough at a reasonable speed but too fast Its only a 48m fall

Didn't know that - I've been across there quicker than that (on the downhill bits. lol) The barrier is not much higher than my saddle - you can see in my avatar.

 

[mjr]

Royal parks police can enforce speed limits in the parks. I have seen them in Greenwich Park with a speed gun.

Not recently. Unless it was a different sort of speed gun, which would entirely fit in with my view of the parks police.

The Forth Road Bridge has a 20mph bylaw too but thats partly because the barriers are too low.

A bylaw set by someone who thinks cyclists wobble less if they go slower

 

[johnnyb47]

Where does the law stand on time trial events held on the public highway. The local club by me holds them every Friday on a road that's still used by traffic and at one point the tt riders will easily exceed the 30mph through the village. There's never been any problems or concerns about it with the public but it could certainly be classed as furious riding.

 

[mjr]

Where does the law stand on time trial events held on the public highway.

Off to one side unless it likes being hit by cyclists?

More seriously, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1960/250/contents/made - there are various amendments but I don't think any have changed the time trials parts.

 

[growingvegetables]

In my case, the supplements are called 'gravity' and 'gradient'......

... add a following wind, and I could break the 40mph limits on York Road, dropping down towards Leeds city centre. With a helpful digital display by the roadside, to confirm!

 

[KnackeredBike]

One of the perks of cycling is being the only road users allowed to overtake a police car at speed without consequences*.

* To date.

 

[classic33]

... add a following wind, and I could break the 40mph limits on York Road, dropping down towards Leeds city centre. With a helpful digital display by the roadside, to confirm!

You must have done it, traffic permitting

 

[classic33]

One of the perks of cycling is being the only road users allowed to overtake a police car at speed without consequences*.

* To date.

Oddly one of the few I'd not overtake, along with the other Emergency service vehicles.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I use Vitamin G, at a rate of 9.8m/s/s.

Marketed as Ditchling Road, or somesuch, I believe.

 

[DaveReading]

That's disobeying the legal requirements which the Highway Code refers to - not the Code itself. It has no legal force.

I don't recall claiming that it had The preamble to the HC from which I quoted makes that perfectly clear.

 

[Tail End Charlie]

I think if you're trying to counter the point that "cyclists go way over the speed limit" with the argument that "limits don't apply to cyclists", then you've lost the argument. It's like countering "cyclists don't pay road tax" with "there's no such thing as road tax". It might be accurate, but it saddens me whenever I see it as there are so many better counters.

 

[DaveReading]

I'm getting confused. What exactly are you trying to say?

Simply that

a) the Highway Code makes it perfectly clear which bits have the backing of law (the must/mustn't items) and which don't (the should/shouldn'ts)

and

b) it makes it not quite so clear (because you have to look up the legislation that the HC cites) that speed limits aren't applicable to cyclists