Speed limit

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

Quoted message said:

Gawnsoft said:

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:55:05 +0100, "Tony Raven"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Zog The Undeniable wrote:
>
> As bikes don't have to have speedometers, any limit would be
> unenforceable.
>

Not true

Not true that bikes do not need to be fitted with speedometers?

Or not true that that means one cannot therefore expect bike riders to
conform to speed limits?

Not true that the limit is unenforceable because bikes don't have
speedometers. Same way that drink driving laws are enforceable despite

cars

Quoted message said:

not being fitted with blood alcohol monitoring equipment. There are

parts

Quoted message said:

of the world including Richmond Park YouK and Marin County YouessAy where
speed limits on bicycles are enforced speedometer or not.

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading somewhere that there
is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

On a similar line, there was a discussion on Usenet somewhere (I forget)
about whether cars with speedos in Km/h only were road legal. The consensus
was that they were.

Tony Raven said:

The copper is right.

The roads in the Royal Parks are not public highways but Park Roads. The use
of the Park is covered by the Royal Park and Other Open Spaces Regulations
1997. Section 4(28) says written permission is required to:

(28) drive or ride any vehicle on a Park road in excess of the speed specified
in relation to that road in Part II of Schedule 2 to these Regulations;

Schedule 2 says:

Speeds at which vehicles may be driven or ridden on a Park road

1. On the Park roads in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park, Hyde Park (except for
the Serpentine Road), The Regent's Park, Richmond Park and St. James's and The
Green Parks, at a speed not exceeding 30 m.p.h.

2. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from
Kingston Gate leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a
speed not exceeding 15 m.p.h.

3. On any Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1 or 2 above)
at a speed not exceeding 10 m.p.h.

For Richmond Park the speed limit was reduced from 30mph to 20mph from 10 May
2004 by the Royal Park and Open Spaces (Amendment) Regulations 2004

It is legally enforcable by the Royal Parks Constabulary (who are separate
from the Metropolitan Police and report to the Royal Parks Agency, not the
Home Office)

So if you don't fit a computer, how are you expected to know the
difference between 19mph and 22mph (OK, experienced cyclists will know
from their gear and cadence, but it would be an interesting court case)?

Nathaniel Porter said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading somewhere that there
is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

I believe a rev counter has been proved good enough, because it (sort
of) indicates speed.

Zog The Undeniable said:

So if you don't fit a computer, how are you expected to know the
difference between 19mph and 22mph (OK, experienced cyclists will know
from their gear and cadence, but it would be an interesting court case)?

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed no more exempts you
if you break the speed limit than your inability to measure you blood alcohol
exempts you if you exceed the drink driving limit.

Tony

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:40d9be6f.0@entanet...

Quoted message said:

Nathaniel Porter said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading somewhere that

there

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

I believe a rev counter has been proved good enough, because it (sort
of) indicates speed.

Yebbut, there is certainly no requirement for a tachometer on cars :-)

In article <40d9be27.0@entanet>,

Zog The Undeniable said:

So if you don't fit a computer, how are you expected to know the
difference between 19mph and 22mph (OK, experienced cyclists will know
from their gear and cadence, but it would be an interesting court case)?

It wouldn't be interesting in the slightest, and wouldn't last very
long. Do you believe that cars which do not have, and are not obliged
to fit, a speedometer are exempt from speed limits? Imagine it lasted
more than ten minutes:

Prosecution: Were you aware that the speed limit in the park was 20mph?
You: Yes.
Prosecution: I put it to you that a cycle computer, correctly installed,
or some experience with your gear and cadence would tell you your speed.
You: That's true.
Prosecution: And yet, although you knew the law, you took no measures to
ensure you obeyed it, and now are using that failure as your defence.
You: Er, yes.
Magistrate: OK, that's a wrap. Fifty quid fine, and [censored] off out of my
court.

ian

in message <[email hidden]>, Gawnsoft

(') said:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:31:34 +0100, Jeremy Collins
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers said:

Does it state anywhere that a pedal cycle is a *vehicle*???

I couldn't find a UK legal definition of "vehicle",

That's becuase it varies from part to part of the UK.

Legally, IIRC, under Scottish law bicycles can be viewed as a
pedestrian with additional equipment, although I've no idea what the
specific phrasing is.

'an aid to pedestrianism analogous to a walking stick' was the phrase
the judge used, as I recall.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
"The result is a language that... not even its mother could
love. Like the camel, Common Lisp is a horse designed by
committee. Camels do have their uses."
;; Scott Fahlman, 7 March 1995

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven

(') said:

Gawnsoft said:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:31:34 +0100, Jeremy Collins
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:

> Does it state anywhere that a pedal cycle is a *vehicle*???

I couldn't find a UK legal definition of "vehicle",

That's becuase it varies from part to part of the UK.

Legally, IIRC, under Scottish law bicycles can be viewed as a
pedestrian with additional equipment, although I've no idea what the
specific phrasing is.

Hansford vs London Express Newspapers (1928):

"I cannot see any reason for putting a limitation on the meaning of
the word "vehicle" and I hold that the word included a bicycle."

In what jurisdiction was that decision made and what relevance has it to
Scotland?

Quoted message said:

I think the Scottish situation you are thinking about relates to it
being legal in Scotland to cycle on footpaths.

It's legal to cycle on footpaths in Scotland *because* a bicycle is
legally '...an aid to pedestrianism...'. After all, we invented the
damn things, we should _know_.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

IMHO, there aren't enough committed Christians, but that's care
in the community for you. -- Ben Evans

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:20:23 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):
....

Quoted message said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading somewhere that there
is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

Motor Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations require a functional
speedometer to be fitted for a car to get certified as roadworthy.

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

Nathaniel Porter wrote:
[snip]

Quoted message said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading somewhere that there
is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

I have driven a completely road legal car* that lacked a speedometer.
Another driver in the same car received a speeding ticket for doing
36mph in a 30 limit, an event commemorated on a Punch front cover.

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

[snip]

Peter

Zog The Undeniable said:

I believe a rev counter has been proved good enough, because it (sort
of) indicates speed.

I've seen a photo of the interior of Nick Mason's Ferrari 250 GTO, which has
a second tachometer fitted, with Dymo numbers to indicate approximate speeds
in 4th and 5th. Which apparently pleaseth Plod.

Not sure about the km speedo business, though. AIUI legalising grey imports
includes changing the speedo to one which reads in miles as well.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

Peter Amey said:

I have driven a completely road legal car* that lacked a speedometer.
Another driver in the same car received a speeding ticket for doing
36mph in a 30 limit, an event commemorated on a Punch front cover.

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

Bo?

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

Tony Raven said:

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed no more
exempts you if you break the speed limit than your inability to measure
you blood alcohol exempts you if you exceed the drink driving limit.

Surely if you know how much you drank then there is a reasonable
expectation that you'd know if you were over the limit or not? If you
have half a pint you can reasonably assume you're below the limit. If you
have four then it would be difficult for you to argue that you would be
under the limit. I don't see how one can be expected to know ones speed
with any sort of accuracy.

--
Jose Marques

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

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 18:20:23 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):
...

Quoted message said:

I am far from certain about this, but I recall reading somewhere that

there

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is no obligation for cars to have speedometers.

Motor Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations require a functional
speedometer to be fitted for a car to get certified as roadworthy.

OK, its probably just that cars which predate this requirement are aren't
required to be modified to meet the requirement.

Dave Larrington said:

Peter Amey wrote:

[snip]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

Bo?

None other!

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jose Marques said:

have four then it would be difficult for you to argue that you would be
under the limit. I don't see how one can be expected to know ones speed
with any sort of accuracy.

I can't believe that anyone who rides a bike cannot ride in such a
manner as to be certain they are riding at under 20mph. They may do
that by riding at 10mph, of course.

ian

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:32:22 +0100, Jose Marques
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed no more
exempts you if you break the speed limit than your inability to measure
you blood alcohol exempts you if you exceed the drink driving limit.

Surely if you know how much you drank then there is a reasonable
expectation that you'd know if you were over the limit or not?

If you know what you're metabolisation rate for alcohol is.

Most folk haven't had themselves measured.

Quoted message said:

If you
have half a pint you can reasonably assume you're below the limit. If you
have four then it would be difficult for you to argue that you would be
under the limit. I don't see how one can be expected to know ones speed
with any sort of accuracy.

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

"Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I've seen a photo of the interior of Nick Mason's Ferrari 250 GTO,
which has a second tachometer fitted, with Dymo numbers to indicate
approximate speeds in 4th and 5th. Which apparently pleaseth Plod.

I wonder if that's the same one that Plod advised my uncle to, ahem,
"borrow" and told him exactly where it was parked. This was under the
strict understanding that the length of the borrowing was only as long as
PF's debt to his company existed (he used to do rather a lot of work for
them back in the 70s). I do know it was a Ferrari, but NM does have rather
a few of those.

Graeme

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:13:34 +0100, "Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Peter Amey said:

I have driven a completely road legal car* that lacked a speedometer.
Another driver in the same car received a speeding ticket for doing
36mph in a 30 limit, an event commemorated on a Punch front cover.

*A 1902 James and Brown should anyone be interested.

Bo?

Small world, eh? 🙂
Mr Larrington, how the devil are you?
--
David Shepherd
Wymondham,
Norfolk

Dave Larrington said:

Not sure about the km speedo business, though. AIUI legalising grey imports
includes changing the speedo to one which reads in miles as well.

My grey motorbike had 3 stickers on the speedo, marking (IIRC) 30mph,
70mph and either 40 or 50 mph. Apparently that's legal.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine