"Paul D" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Do british road speed limits apply to cyclists? I was under the impression
that because it's not law to have a speedo on a bike then limits couldn't
apply, or should this read couldn't be enforced?
It's nothing to do with not being required to have a speedo on a bike. It
wouldn't be difficult, in legislative terms, to require it. It could, for
example, be made a requirement to sell new bikes with a computer in the same
way that they have to be fitted with bells and reflectors. There are also
plenty of examples where speed limits apply to vehicles that are not
required to have speedos fitted, for example cars made before the
Construction and Use Regs required them to have speedos are still subject to
the limits for motor vehicles, limits apply in some waterways to boats that
are not required to have a means of measuring their speed, and as others
have pointed out the Royal Parks limits apply to cyclists. It's probably
more to do with the fact that it was not considered likely, when the
legislation was laid, that unmotorised vehicles would be exceeding the
limits to be imposed to any significant extent, if at all.
As others have also pointed out, there is an offence of 'riding furiously' -
which is also capable of being used at speeds below the limit for motor
vehicles. What is interesting to me is that this is a very ancient law,
going back to the time when the primary means of 'powered' transport was a
horse. What does it mean to ride 'furiously'? I can imagine horse being
driven with its nostrils flared, sweat pouring from its flanks panting
heavily. That invokes an image that one might reasonably describe as
'furious' riding. I suppose in the same way a cyclist pushing on really
hard could also be described as doing it 'furiously'. But what if s/he is
simply coasting downhill? Or perhaps pedalling in a high gear at a slow
cadence, without really working up a sweat or breathing heavily, but still
going fast?
The term seems like it should be ridiculously hard to prosecute. You could
have, say, one very fit cyclist not really working hard going faster than
someone unfit pedalling at it 'furiously'. It would become 'furious' at
different speeds for different people. The same speed might require a
furious attempt to attain it in one place or direction, say going up a
slight incline, and be easy in another - going down it.
The cyclist who got prosecuted for furious riding at 25mph was a plonker for
not turning up in court to even try to argue his case. At any rate, the
decision in that case would set no precedent for any other prosecution, I
wonder if there is any case law that rules on the meaning of 'furiously'?
Rich
