Metropolitan Police officer does stop and search on Black Cyclists Network founder after ‘smelling’ marijuana

mattsccm wrote:

Is there something that has been cropped since the piece was first posted. Seems as if most people are spouting about something that isn't visible. Opinion maybe.

The rider made an error and was chastised for it. End. Quite possibly his attitude aggravated things. If he was in the wrong place he should do as asked by the police. Its the whole point of them.  You don't argue. To say that you do makes amockery of the system. I assume that all those who say that we can argue are suggesting that we can all decide what rules we like. I guess that they are Ok with me carrying a knife all the time. I do. Its bloody useful. Used almost every day.  However should I be asked to refrain in certain circumstances I do so as the law requires.

Two seperate incidents here with some one who has a chip on his shoulder making an ecuse for poor manners. 

The reason for the chip is totally irrelevant to a cycling forum.

Have to say, I guess,  that so is a good chunck of the what passes for news on the cycling equivelant of The Sun.

When you say an error you mean an error that plod wouldn't say a dickiebord to a motorist over despite that a motor would present far greater potential for harm and the occupent would not be threatened harm unlike the person on the bike. Rather be safe and not present any danger to the public than obeying a motor traffic rule that puts you at increase chance of harm as proven by the deaths and SI on the roads in those very circumstances, no way would I cede my safety particularly when the constable is acting against his sworn oath. The constable was wrong and discriminatory, the cyclist should not obey the discriminatory advice to lower his safety.END!

The system IS a mockery and those that swear an oath to uphold the law are a mockery and making a mockery of the monarch they are representing.

Rules/legislation is NOT law, there was no victim, statistics prove there would have been no victim in the circumstances, unlike carrying a knife which does have a massive increased chance of their being a victim and in any case it isn't against the law to carry a knife

To sit quietly and never question rules/law is wrong, it is your public duty as a citizen to question the law when laws are unjust and/or make a mockery of a fair and just society!

mattsccm wrote:

Is there something that has been cropped since the piece was first posted. Seems as if most people are spouting about something that isn't visible. Opinion maybe.

The rider made an error and was chastised for it. End. Quite possibly his attitude aggravated things. If he was in the wrong place he should do as asked by the police. Its the whole point of them.  You don't argue. To say that you do makes amockery of the system. I assume that all those who say that we can argue are suggesting that we can all decide what rules we like. I guess that they are Ok with me carrying a knife all the time. I do. Its bloody useful. Used almost every day.  However should I be asked to refrain in certain circumstances I do so as the law requires.

Two seperate incidents here with some one who has a chip on his shoulder making an ecuse for poor manners. 

The reason for the chip is totally irrelevant to a cycling forum.

Have to say, I guess,  that so is a good chunck of the what passes for news on the cycling equivelant of The Sun.

Things that you have made up without any evidence:

1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)

2. That the rider's attitude aggravated things (he seems remarkably courteous in the video)

3. That the rider showed poor manners

4. That the rider has a chip on his shoulder

"Seems as if most people are spouting about something that isn't visible. Opinion maybe." Indeed.

1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)

an illegal position  actually.

nicmason wrote:

1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)

 

an illegal position  actually.

It is permitted to disregard road signs and markings in exigent circumstances, e.g. one could pull through a red to allow an emergency services vehicle to pass, one could swerve over a double white "no overtaking" line to avoid colliding with a pedestrian who had fallen into the road.  If the officer had attempted to charge the cyclist with a breach of the law, I'd say there would be a good chance the cyclist would be exculpated in court (if the CPS agreed to bring the case, which they wouldn't) on the grounds that he only crossed the line in order to avoid the possibility of being crushed by a left-turning HGV.  The officer himself clearly realized that he couldn't charge on that or he would have done so; cross at being "cheeked" (as he would see it, aka spoken to logically and reasonably) by the cyclist he decided to pull a total BS "I can smell marijuana" justification (how come none of the three officers who could smell it couldn't a minute later? How come they could smell it at all when the cyclist wasn't carrying any?) for harassing the cyclist.

Your determination to blame the victim in this incident, alongside your other posts, speaks volumes about your racist character.

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)

 

an illegal position  actually.

 

It is permitted to disregard road signs and markings in exigent circumstances, e.g. one could pull through a red to allow an emergency services vehicle to pass, one could swerve over a double white "no overtaking" line to avoid colliding with a pedestrian who had fallen into the road.  If the officer had attempted to charge the cyclist with a breach of the law, I'd say there would be a good chance the cyclist would be exculpated in court (if the CPS agreed to bring the case, which they wouldn't) on the grounds that he only crossed the line in order to avoid the possibility of being crushed by a left-turning HGV.  The officer himself clearly realized that he couldn't charge on that or he would have done so; cross at being "cheeked" (as he would see it, aka spoken to logically and reasonably) by the cyclist he decided to pull a total BS "I can smell marijuana" justification (how come none of the three officers who could smell it couldn't a minute later? How come they could smell it at all when the cyclist wasn't carrying any?) for harassing the cyclist.

Your determination to blame the victim in this incident, alongside your other posts, speaks volumes about your racist character.

If you ever get it together to read back you'll see I wasn't refrerring to the original  incident but to a subsequent post.  But I'm glad for you it speaks volumes. If Mr and Mrs twat ever had a baby you'd be it.

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)

 

an illegal position  actually.

 

It is permitted to disregard road signs and markings in exigent circumstances, e.g. one could pull through a red to allow an emergency services vehicle to pass, one could swerve over a double white "no overtaking" line to avoid colliding with a pedestrian who had fallen into the road.  If the officer had attempted to charge the cyclist with a breach of the law, I'd say there would be a good chance the cyclist would be exculpated in court (if the CPS agreed to bring the case, which they wouldn't) on the grounds that he only crossed the line in order to avoid the possibility of being crushed by a left-turning HGV.  The officer himself clearly realized that he couldn't charge on that or he would have done so; cross at being "cheeked" (as he would see it, aka spoken to logically and reasonably) by the cyclist he decided to pull a total BS "I can smell marijuana" justification (how come none of the three officers who could smell it couldn't a minute later? How come they could smell it at all when the cyclist wasn't carrying any?) for harassing the cyclist.

Your determination to blame the victim in this incident, alongside your other posts, speaks volumes about your racist character.

 

If you ever get it together to read back you'll see I wasn't refrerring to the original  incident but to a subsequent post.  But I'm glad for you it speaks volumes. If Mr and Mrs twat ever had a baby you'd be it.

Oh dear me. You've made rather a chump of yourself there, my little racist chum. The comment that you quoted:

"1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)"

was written by me, and you directly responded to it:

"an illegal position  actually."

Nothing to do with any subsequent post, you were directly responding to my comment on the incident. Perhaps you should "get it together to read back" before exposing yourself as a complete fool.

Brilliant comment about Mr & Mrs Twat though, gosh I bet Oscar Wilde wishes he'd thought of that one!

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)

 

an illegal position  actually.

 

It is permitted to disregard road signs and markings in exigent circumstances, e.g. one could pull through a red to allow an emergency services vehicle to pass, one could swerve over a double white "no overtaking" line to avoid colliding with a pedestrian who had fallen into the road.  If the officer had attempted to charge the cyclist with a breach of the law, I'd say there would be a good chance the cyclist would be exculpated in court (if the CPS agreed to bring the case, which they wouldn't) on the grounds that he only crossed the line in order to avoid the possibility of being crushed by a left-turning HGV.  The officer himself clearly realized that he couldn't charge on that or he would have done so; cross at being "cheeked" (as he would see it, aka spoken to logically and reasonably) by the cyclist he decided to pull a total BS "I can smell marijuana" justification (how come none of the three officers who could smell it couldn't a minute later? How come they could smell it at all when the cyclist wasn't carrying any?) for harassing the cyclist.

Your determination to blame the victim in this incident, alongside your other posts, speaks volumes about your racist character.

 

If you ever get it together to read back you'll see I wasn't refrerring to the original  incident but to a subsequent post.  But I'm glad for you it speaks volumes. If Mr and Mrs twat ever had a baby you'd be it.

 

Oh dear me. You've made rather a chump of yourself their, my little racist chum. The comment that you quoted:

"1. That the rider made an error (rather than selectively placing himself in the safest road position)"

was written by me, and you directly responded to it:

"an illegal position  actually."

 

Nothing to do with any subsequent post, you were directly responding to my comment on the incident. Perhaps you should "get it together to read back" before exposing yourself as a complete fool.

Brilliant comment about Mr & Mrs Twat though, gosh I bet Oscar Wilde wishes he'd thought of that one!

Here are some exclamation marks for you subsequent posts   !!!!!!

Here are some exclamation marks for you subsequent posts   !!!!!!

[/quote]

You might want to learn to type and/or write properly before criticising the literary style of others. It makes you look rather stupid otherwise, and as you've already outed yourself as a bigotted racist your image could do without any further tarnishing, one feels.

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

 

Here are some exclamation marks for you subsequent posts   !!!!!!

You might want to learn to type and/or write properly before criticising the literary style of others. It makes you look rather stupid otherwise, and as you've already outed yourself as a bigotted racist your image could do without any further tarnishing, one feels.

[/quote]

Does one feel that ?

mattsccm wrote:

Is there something that has been cropped since the piece was first posted. Seems as if most people are spouting about something that isn't visible. Opinion maybe.

The rider made an error and was chastised for it. End. Quite possibly his attitude aggravated things. If he was in the wrong place he should do as asked by the police. Its the whole point of them.  You don't argue. To say that you do makes amockery of the system. I assume that all those who say that we can argue are suggesting that we can all decide what rules we like. I guess that they are Ok with me carrying a knife all the time. I do. Its bloody useful. Used almost every day.  However should I be asked to refrain in certain circumstances I do so as the law requires.

Two seperate incidents here with some one who has a chip on his shoulder making an ecuse for poor manners. 

The reason for the chip is totally irrelevant to a cycling forum.

Have to say, I guess,  that so is a good chunck of the what passes for news on the cycling equivelant of The Sun.

You seem to be if the view that police are infallible. Fortunately, many photographers did not take that view and managed to get changes made to the way they were treated over taking pictures in public spaces but over zealous officers.

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

But the point is, as I understand it, that the position to which the police were asking Mani to move, was a dangerous position that bikeability etc say "Don't go there!".

If the police told your kids to go play in the motorway, would you expect them to obey or to question a dangerous/harmful instruction?  

brooksby wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

But the point is, as I understand it, that the position to which the police were asking Mani to move, was a dangerous position that bikeability etc say "Don't go there!".

If the police told your kids to go play in the motorway, would you expect them to obey or to question a dangerous/harmful instruction?  

Mots people are very rarely told what to do by the police Ss some people to get quite chippy when that happens (lets leave aside the race issue for now thats a seperate thing). Try going to a football match between clubs where the fans have a history of attacking each other . The police will tell you in no uncertain terms where to go and what to do and won't make a special rule for you because you want to do something different because you think thats "best".

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

 

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

Ah, attacking racism seen as "virtue signalling" - classic racist trope.

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

 

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

 

Ah, attacking racism seen as "virtue signalling" - classic racist trope.

By any chance do you have a beard and eat avocado on toast ?

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

 

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

 

Ah, attacking racism seen as "virtue signalling" - classic racist trope.

 

By any chance do you have a beard and eat avocado on toast ?

Why, would that mitigate your racism in some way, do you think?

That the best you've got? Thanks for the demonstration of the fact that while not all thick people are racists, all racists are thick.

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

 

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

 

Ah, attacking racism seen as "virtue signalling" - classic racist trope.

 

By any chance do you have a beard and eat avocado on toast ?

Why, would that mitigate your racism in some way, do you think?

That the best you've got? Thanks for the demonstration of the fact that while not all thick people are racists, all racists are thick.

You're very angry aren't you .. I'm not a racist but I don't resent you saying that and tbh I don't care .

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

 

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

 

Ah, attacking racism seen as "virtue signalling" - classic racist trope.

 

By any chance do you have a beard and eat avocado on toast ?

Why, would that mitigate your racism in some way, do you think?

That the best you've got? Thanks for the demonstration of the fact that while not all thick people are racists, all racists are thick.

 

 

You're very angry aren't you .. I'm not a racist but I don't resent you saying that and tbh I don't care .

Yep, casual, petty, cowardly, anonymous racism such as you have quite clearly displayed on this thread does make me very angry indeed. Well done.

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

nicmason wrote:

Peowpeowpeowlasers wrote:

Did the officer witness him crossing the STOP line while the light was red?  If not then he has no right to insist that he move.

For all he knew, the guy might have crossed it while still green, saw the junction was blocked and decided to wait.

I would have stayed right where I was.  Fuck the law on this point, it's stupid.  No way would I sit in a HGV's blind spot.

 

Ok so if it was green but the junction was blocked he shouldnt have gone and the policeman does have right to ask him to move . Or stop being part of the traffic get off the bike and get on the pavement.

Does the policeman also have the right to then make a clearly false allegation that the cyclist smells of marijuana and subject him to a humiliating public body search? Think you're kind of missing the main point here...

 

I'm not commenting on the main point.

Several people have commented that if the police told them to move they wouldn't do it. Maybe they'd close their eyes so they where invisible as well.

Why aren't you commenting on the main point?  Why when the article and video show an egregious example of police racism and exceeding their reasonable powers are you focussing on whether someone's wheel was two feet over the stop line? What's more important here, and why are you insisting on distracting from the obvious and worrying abuse of power against a black man by police by nitpicking about minor traffic regs? What's your motivation?

Because this is a cycling magazinr not a civil rights magazine. 

 

 

Wow.  So a cycling magazine should ignore the police making a racist stop on the cyclist founder of a black cycling campaign when he's out cycling, or if the  magazine does misguidedly report it we should completely ignore the racism and argue about whether the initial contact of the officer telling a cyclist to pull his wheel back a couple of feet was justified?  I've got a feeling you might just be a bit of an old racist yourself there, nic, and by "a feeling" I mean "it's blindingly obvious".

 

Thanks for that man who knows nothing about me .

I do know about you from your comments on here, in which you have repeatedly tried to divert attention away from a prima facie case of police racism into a pointless discussion of traffic laws in a transparent attempt to shift the blame onto the victim of said police racism.  That quite clearly makes you a defender of/apologist for police racism, and that makes you a racist.  

 

Youre quite the one for virtue signalling aren't you .

Virtue signalling is a bullshit term used by people to shut down arguments with people who may actually be more virtuous than them.