"We introduced him to rugby": Police boast of tackling cyclist who jumped red light; Tour de France stage 13: Bastille Day summit finish; Reaction to e-bike ban on popular path; Got a TT bike Uganda can use at World Champs? + more on the live blog

Makes a change from barbed wire, 'beware of the dog', 'bull in field' and 'private keep out!' signs.

I do wish landowners could be fined more easily for failing to maintain the highways over their land.

Looks like Johnny 5 is trying to bluff his way into the golf club again!

Putting the traffic underground - while an extremely expensive option - at least makes it nicer for everyone else not driving.

As for "reduced journey times" / "less congestion", time will tell.

But but it will increase wellbeing make us all richer boost the economy:

Quote:

Wiltshire councillor Caroline Thomas, Cabinet Member for Transport]This huge infrastructure project represents a significant investment in Wiltshire that will boost the economy of both our county and the wider region, unlocking jobs and investment.

Of course it's clearly possible for more motoring to be a net cost to everyone* but still "unlock jobs and investment".  Bit like having a hole in the ground mine which is expensive to run but which - if we don't keep extending - we won't be able to to pay the bills to allow us to keep digging to cover the expenses...

* Apples and orangutans of course but various groups have done sums - a few figures here, Sustrans motoring vs. cycling here etc.

Police in some parts of the US use the PIT maneuvre.. 

Police PIT maneuver has killed at least 30 people since 2016.
23 Aug 2020 — So far this year, nine people have been killed nationwide in PIT maneuvers, including a 16-year-old who was driving a stolen car in Longmont.

 I hope they got a number plate to report?

wtjs wrote:

"We introduced him to rugby": Police boast of tackling cyclist who jumped red light

The actual tweet says "We introduced him to Rugby" - which is a bit out of the way for GMP.  Makes me wonder if they drove at him so hard, that the force of the impact propelled him to Warwickshire.

Stinger !

Oldfatgit wrote:

... how would *you* stop a cyclist that does not wish to be stopped?

Safely use their vehicle to bring them to a halt.

The tweet makes it look like they're rather proud of using physical force. What would their story be if they paralysed or killed the guy, would they say 'rugby tackle', or 'we grabbed him using the least amount of force possible and he lost his balance.'

Will the dashcam footage of his RLJ'ing be released? How would you feel if it showed the guy rolling through empty junctions at 1mph? Would a rugby tackle still be the police 'doing what they have to do'?

What if ... what if ... what if.
But ... the what if didn't happen and if it did, I'm sure that the tweet would have been phrased somewhat differently.

How would I feel about the guy rolling through the reds at 1mph?
Exactly the same.
Red light means stop ... it doesn't mean feel free to carry on your journey just because you are on a bicycle.

AFAIK, the guy was brought down for the failure to obey a legal and authorised command, and not for the RLJ.
The RLJ was the trigger to the Officer to request the rider to stop, not for the rugby tackle.

And, to complete the loop ... if the guy hadn't have gone through the multiple red lights - even at 1 mph - he wouldn't have been challenged to stop, and wouldn't have ended up on the floor.

Which part of this incident was triggered by the guy riding his bike in a legal manner and obeying a legally issued command?

What ever colour your spectacles are, the guy on the bike - based on the story as presented - is wholly at fault for the incident, and I feel not one ounce of pity or sympathy for them.

There's a guy in my town that dismounts at reds and runs alongside his bike while pushing it before hopping back on at the other side of the junction. It looks silly but presumably legal? I wonder if you straddle your bike's top tube and propel yourself by walking that would be illegal?

If the guy demounts, and crosses the road *as a pedestrian pushing a bike*, then they have not technically committed an offence.

If you were to sit on the crossbar and scoot across the red, then technically you would be committing an offence as you are riding the bike. The frame of the bike would be taking the weight of your body, so you would be riding.

And before you go on to the "using a bike as a mobility aid" and going through a red ... well, that doesn't work either as a bike isn't legally recognised as a mobility aid.

There is no way that you can go through a red light unless you have fully de-mounted and are pushing the bike.

Stop making excuses for people riding like arseholes.

Oldfatgit wrote:

If the guy demounts, and crosses the road *as a pedestrian pushing a bike*, then they have not technically committed an offence. 

And before you go on to the "using a bike as a mobility aid" and going through a red ... well, that doesn't work either as a bike isn't legally recognised as a mobility aid.

First point - not sure what "technically" is doing in there. They haven't committed an offence - unless as a pedestrian - full stop.

On your second point there is considerable ambiguity, though not (I agree) a precedent setting Court ruling of which I am aware.

I think basically that if someone using a bike as a mobility aid calls it a mobility aid, then it is one. I'm hoping for statute law to that effect as some point.

I've debated this with staff at disability organisations, and that seems to be the view.

Given that I am currently mobility impaired due to a condition which seriously slugs my energy levels being out of remission, I have wondered about taking my E-bike (which is a standard bike with an aftermarket E-assist) into Mansfield Town Centre to explore the issue; but I am not quite convinced enough.

There *are* actually some bikes that blur the lines between "Approved Mobility Aid", "EAPC" and "Wheelchair", especially afaics Mountain Trikes, which are quite remarkable bits of kit - and not especially cheap. For example this one is - I am told by someone who uses one - a registered mobility aid:
https://www.mountaintrike.com/products/etrike

Also note that - amongst the crud - the Hammersmith and Fulham Thames Path PSPO recognises the concept of "anyone with restricted mobility who uses any electric powered vehicle as a mobility aid", which is broader than "registered".

It's a very useful grey zone.

If you look through enough of my posts, you'll see that I am a mobility impaired ebike rider also.
A badly driven Mondeo put paid to my ability to walk unaided a little shy of 5 years ago [in fact August 10 is the 5th anniversary of being driven in to that ruined my walking ability for life]

I would hope that even calling an ebike a mobility aid if stopped for RLJ would not prevent a rider being penalised for the offense.
If a blue badge holder jumps the lights in their car, and are caught, they would be penalised, so it's only correct that a disabled road user of any mechanical transportation that is not classed as being a pedestrian, is also penalised.

As the miscreant in this report has not been identified as disabled, it's a reasonable assumption that they weren't, as such, disablement is a red herring in this case.

Agree apart from "gives us all a bad name ".
I'm not responsible for others cyclists actions any more than as a driver I am responsible for dangerous drivers.

We may not like it but it's foolish to believe that we aren't collectively put in the same category just because we ride bikes.

Hirsute wrote:

Agree apart from "gives us all a bad name ". I'm not responsible for others cyclists actions any more than as a driver I am responsible for dangerous drivers.