Riding on the pavement

the.Mark said:

On my way home this afternoon I found the road much busier than
normal so of course the bus lane was full of cars so I filtered
up between the cars. As I approached the traffic lights at the
end of the bus lane I saw a policeman and woman riding on the
pavement. Not bikes but horses. The pavement there is quite
narrow and has a bus stop which had a few people waiting, it
must have been fun for them having 2 horses squeeze past.

They are a law unto them selves our police.
I would be as wrong to ride my horse on the pavement as my bike!
Oh well we should know its them and us.
ttfn
Jane

Jane said:

the.Mark said:

On my way home this afternoon I found the road much busier than normal
so of course the bus lane was full of cars so I filtered up between
the cars. As I approached the traffic lights at the end of the bus
lane I saw a policeman and woman riding on the pavement. Not bikes but
horses. The pavement there is quite narrow and has a bus stop which
had a few people waiting, it must have been fun for them having 2
horses squeeze past.

They are a law unto them selves our police.
I would be as wrong to ride my horse on the pavement as my bike!
Oh well we should know its them and us.

Indeed you would:

40: You MUST NOT take a horse on to a footpath, pavement or cycle track.
Use a bridleway where possible.
Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A sect 129(5)

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Invalid thought detected. Close all mental processes and restart
body.

Indeed they are as I noticed when a police car was parked outside the
local chippie on double yellow with crossing zigzags but an inch away.
Good evening constables do you realise that the law applies to you
also - now then Sir I arrest you well for something I can think of you
Bolshie [censored].

"Jane" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

the.Mark said:

On my way home this afternoon I found the road much busier than
normal so of course the bus lane was full of cars so I filtered
up between the cars. As I approached the traffic lights at the
end of the bus lane I saw a policeman and woman riding on the
pavement. Not bikes but horses. The pavement there is quite
narrow and has a bus stop which had a few people waiting, it
must have been fun for them having 2 horses squeeze past.

They are a law unto them selves our police.
I would be as wrong to ride my horse on the pavement as my bike!
Oh well we should know its them and us.
ttfn
Jane

Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit -ie
doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley because
he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on - they
intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to protect us
and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to the police
we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we are far too
frightened to do so.

"the.Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
On my way home this afternoon I found the road much busier than
normal so of course the bus lane was full of cars so I filtered
up between the cars. As I approached the traffic lights at the
end of the bus lane I saw a policeman and woman riding on the
pavement. Not bikes but horses. The pavement there is quite
narrow and has a bus stop which had a few people waiting, it
must have been fun for them having 2 horses squeeze past.

--
Cheers
the.Mark

In article <[email hidden]>,

(archierob) said:

Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit
-ie doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley
because he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on
- they intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to
protect us and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to
the police we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we
are far too frightened to do so.

I don't know whether you challenge pavement cyclists but I'm guessing
you wouldn't turn to them for assistance if your home was robbed.

Basically, tossers are tossers regardless of their mode of transport.

Terry said:

I don't know whether you challenge pavement cyclists but I'm guessing
you wouldn't turn to them for assistance if your home was robbed.

I think you will find the only "assistance" one gets is a crime number
in order to fill out one's insurance claim. A few days later you will
get a fabulous leaflet offering advice on dealing with your trauma.

I hope they don't use highly trained officers for that part of police
work...

Tony B

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Tony B) said:

Terry said:

I don't know whether you challenge pavement cyclists but I'm
guessing you wouldn't turn to them for assistance if your home was
robbed.

I think you will find the only "assistance" one gets is a crime
number in order to fill out one's insurance claim. A few days later
you will get a fabulous leaflet offering advice on dealing with your
trauma.

What a choice. Obtain a crime number, without which insurance purchased
is worthless, or ask a pavement cyclist to sympathise with one's loss.

A bit OT but on the assitance thing.

While I was at work one or more scrote(s) busted down the door to my "secure" storage, broke my gold marked lock and had away with one of my bikes.

Two 15 year old SOCO's arrived at my door several hours after my discovery of this and told me that "one or more scrote(s) busted down the door to your secure storage broke your gold marked lock and had away with one of your bikes" but there are no prints 'cos they must have worn gloves. Here's a crime number for your insurance and we doubt if you'd get your bike back.

More weeks pass and the insurance pays for my shiny new Bianchi.

I get then fined for speeding at 35mph(ish) in Richmond Park just as it opened one Sunday morning.

Same Sunday my brother phones me to tell me he's just bought my stolen bike for £50 at a car boot sale.

(my postcode and initials are stamped on the underside of the frame next to the serial number)

Police here in SW london seem to be very ineffective.

quote='Tony B'Terry said:

I don't know whether you challenge pavement cyclists but I'm guessing
you wouldn't turn to them for assistance if your home was robbed.

I think you will find the only "assistance" one gets is a crime number
in order to fill out one's insurance claim. A few days later you will
get a fabulous leaflet offering advice on dealing with your trauma.

I hope they don't use highly trained officers for that part of police
work...

Tony B[/QUOTE]

archierob said:

Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit -ie
doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley because
he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on - they
intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to protect us
and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to the police
we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we are far too
frightened to do so.

Blimey.

Lancashire Police may well be slow to respond but I'd never claim that
I'm frightened of them.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

In article <[email hidden]>,

(permajeo) said:

A bit OT but on the assitance thing.

Yes, it is. To change the police, join the force or campaign for
improved education and attitudes in more relevant places. In a cycling
croup it is more appropriate to contrast a rare sighting of mounted
police on the pavement with the rather larger number cyclists doing same.

Why, for example, are so many pavement cyclists dressed like canaries
and wearing helmets? Are they ignorant or arrogant? Either way, they
only make life harder for the vast majority of cyclists.

"Terry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(archierob) said:

Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit
-ie doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley
because he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on
- they intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to
protect us and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to
the police we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we
are far too frightened to do so.

I don't know whether you challenge pavement cyclists but I'm guessing
you wouldn't turn to them for assistance if your home was robbed.

And, if you are robbed, they come about two days after the event just to
give you a crime number, I'd rather turn to the local cyclist.

Quoted message said:

Basically, tossers are tossers regardless of their mode of transport.

"permajeo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A bit OT but on the assitance thing.

While I was at work one or more scrote(s) busted down the door to my
"secure" storage, broke my gold marked lock and had away with one of my
bikes.

Two 15 year old SOCO's arrived at my door several hours after my
discovery of this and told me that "one or more scrote(s) busted down
the door to your secure storage broke your gold marked lock and had
away with one of your bikes" but there are no prints 'cos they must
have worn gloves. Here's a crime number for your insurance and we doubt
if you'd get your bike back.

More weeks pass and the insurance pays for my shiny new Bianchi.

I get then fined for speeding at 35mph(ish) in Richmond Park just as it
opened one Sunday morning.

Did you ask to see the 'evidence', do not, under any circumstances trust
speed cameras, or policemen!

Quoted message said:

Same Sunday my brother phones me to tell me he's just bought my stolen
bike for £50 at a car boot sale.

(my postcode and initials are stamped on the underside of the frame
next to the serial number)

Which the police ignored!

Quoted message said:

Police here in SW london seem to be very ineffective.

Not only in SW London!

Alan

Quoted message said:

Tony B said:

Terry said:

I don't know whether you challenge pavement cyclists but I'm guessing
you wouldn't turn to them for assistance if your home was robbed.

I think you will find the only "assistance" one gets is a crime number
in order to fill out one's insurance claim. A few days later you will
get a fabulous leaflet offering advice on dealing with your trauma.

I hope they don't use highly trained officers for that part of police
work...

Tony B

--
permajeo

Quoted message said:

archierob said:

Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit -ie
doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley because
he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on - they
intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to protect us
and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to the police
we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we are far too
frightened to do so.

I'm not frightened of them, I ALWAYS challenge accusations of exceeding the
speed limit when it is by the use of a speed camera, and, so far, each
accusaton has been forgotten.

I was stupid enough to pay one, but never again.

Alan

Alan Holmes said:

Quoted message said:

archierob said:

Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit -ie
doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley because
he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on - they
intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to protect us
and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to the police
we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we are far too
frightened to do so.

I'm not frightened of them, I ALWAYS challenge accusations of exceeding the
speed limit when it is by the use of a speed camera, and, so far, each
accusaton has been forgotten.

I was stupid enough to pay one, but never again.

I, however, have never been stupid enough to even get sent a bill for
such fines.

--
A

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

Quoted message said:

archierob <[email hidden]> wrote:

> Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
> 'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit -ie
> doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley because
> he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on - they
> intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to protect us
> and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to the police
> we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we are far too
> frightened to do so.

I'm not frightened of them, I ALWAYS challenge accusations of exceeding
the speed limit when it is by the use of a speed camera, and, so far,
each accusaton has been forgotten.

I was stupid enough to pay one, but never again.

I, however, have never been stupid enough to even get sent a bill for such
fines.

It is not neccessarily stupid to get caught by an incorrectly set up piece
of equipment!

Quoted message said:

--
A

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

Quoted message said:

archierob <[email hidden]> wrote:

> Whatever the circumstances they will find an excuse to circumvent the
> 'law'. In pursuit of a crime etc. Testing the vehicle to its limit -ie
> doing 160 mph on a public highway. Shooting dead Harry Stanley because
> he was in possession of a coffee table leg. It goes on and on - they
> intimidate us into believing that they can break the law to protect us
> and we are far to frightened to protest. When it comes to the police
> we are all cowards - we dare not challenge them because we are far too
> frightened to do so.

I'm not frightened of them, I ALWAYS challenge accusations of exceeding
the speed limit when it is by the use of a speed camera, and, so far,
each accusaton has been forgotten.

I was stupid enough to pay one, but never again.

I, however, have never been stupid enough to even get sent a bill for such
fines.

Moi aussi.

Terry <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Why, for example, are so many pavement cyclists dressed like canaries
and wearing helmets? Are they ignorant or arrogant? Either way, they
only make life harder for the vast majority of cyclists.

Because riding on the pavement (or cycle path) is 6 to 7 times MORE
dangerous than riding on the road. We had a detailed discussion with
loads of high-quality evidence a couple of years ago. The main dangers
are:
1) Crossing or re-joining the road, since you're coming from the
pavement where motor drivers aren't looking; the bright clothing might
help, but probably not.
2) Pavements are cluttered with street furniture and other hazards - a
moment's distraction and you hit a lamp post. Pavement cyclists are
right to wear helmets as they're very prone to the kind of accident
where a helmet reduces your chances of injury.
3) Pedestrians. There's nothing you can do about them, even on
cycleways that aren't supposed to be shared use.

--
Sue ]🙁🙂

Why aren't we advocating regular retests for motorists?
It's obvious a lot of them would fail and that'd solve the road congestion problem too.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

(Sue White) said:

Terry <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Why, for example, are so many pavement cyclists dressed like canaries
and wearing helmets? Are they ignorant or arrogant? Either way, they
only make life harder for the vast majority of cyclists.

Because riding on the pavement (or cycle path) is 6 to 7 times MORE
dangerous than riding on the road. We had a detailed discussion with
loads of high-quality evidence a couple of years ago. The main
dangers are:
1) Crossing or re-joining the road, since you're coming from the
pavement where motor drivers aren't looking; the bright clothing
might help, but probably not.
2) Pavements are cluttered with street furniture and other hazards -
a moment's distraction and you hit a lamp post. Pavement cyclists
are right to wear helmets as they're very prone to the kind of
accident where a helmet reduces your chances of injury.

That makes a lot of sense. And if it were possible to fool pavement
cyclists into disguising their bikes as police horses ("pedestrians will
clear a path for you!"😉 we'd solve the negative publicity problem too.

Don Whybrow said:

40: You MUST NOT take a horse on to a footpath, pavement or cycle track.
Use a bridleway where possible.
Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A sect 129(5)

Except in Newham where you MUST use the cyclepaths when riding a horse,
and the local branch of the LCC actively encourages this.

R