Nope. My mum taught me to step aside for the police and let them get on with their often difficult work, not play my rights to within an inch of being nicked with a camera to back me up.
So what could the cyclist have been 'nicked' for exactly? Being assertive in a built up area?
As it happens nothing at all. But it's unusual behaviour and the Police focus on people behaving oddly as a starting point to work out if they are knife weilding maniacs or the like. Again... you guys are focussing on something that is just too much like hard work. Why not stop and let him pass. He's the police. I would have.
rick99 wrote:My mum taught me to step aside for the police and let them get on with their often difficult work, not play my rights to within an inch of being nicked with a camera to back me up.
My mum taught me to question the status quo and stand up, peaceably, for what I believe in. She was arrested once for drawing a dove on a wall in Whitehall during a peace protest.
reohn2 wrote: And still misses the point,this time by a mile........
No im not missing the point. Perhaps you are taking what 'sir' said too literally? You seem to be missing my point. Take it for granted I have your interpretation of events on board and that I understand the reason for the OP posting.
Then tell what point it is that you don't miss.
That the policeman has no respect for what is considered even 'officially' to be best practice on road position for a cyclist and he is willing to push that incorrect view to the point of endangering the poster by passing him then pulling him over and ACTUALLY arguing that the cyclist was in the wrong and implying he might book him.
rick99 wrote:My mum taught me to step aside for the police and let them get on with their often difficult work, not play my rights to within an inch of being nicked with a camera to back me up.
My mum taught me to question the status quo and stand up, peaceably, for what I believe in. She was arrested once for drawing a dove on a wall in Whitehall during a peace protest.
Fair enough. My mum was coming at it from a 'pick your battles' direction.
rick99 wrote:No im not missing the point. Perhaps you are taking what 'sir' said too literally? You seem to be missing my point. Take it for granted I have your interpretation of events on board and that I understand the reason for the OP posting.
Then tell what point it is that you don't miss.
That the policeman has no respect for what is considered even 'officially' to be best practice on road position for a cyclist and he is willing to push that incorrect view to the point of endangering the poster by passing him then pulling him over and ACTUALLY arguing that the cyclist was in the wrong and implying he might book him.
Is that ok for you headteacher?
Sorry I missed the bit about how it signifies that cyclists can expect no quarter from our police force if this is their attitude to a life threatening situation that happens day in and day out on our mean streets.
Now. What was my point, please?
Last edited by rick99 on 11 Apr 2017, 6:49pm, edited 1 time in total.
rick99 wrote:That the policeman has no respect for what is considered even 'officially' to be best practice on road position for a cyclist and he is willing to push that incorrect view to the point of endangering the poster by passing him then pulling him over and ACTUALLY arguing that the cyclist was in the wrong and implying he might book him.
Is that ok for you headteacher?
Well I'm not a headteacher but you can go back to you seat now you've understood the situation
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
rick99 wrote:Sorry I missed the bit about how it signifies that cyclists can expect no quarter from our police force if this is their attitude to a life threatening situation that happens day in and day out on our mean streets.
Now. What was my point, please?
Did you have one?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
rick99 wrote:My mum taught me to step aside for the police and let them get on with their often difficult work, not play my rights to within an inch of being nicked with a camera to back me up.
My mum taught me to question the status quo and stand up, peaceably, for what I believe in. She was arrested once for drawing a dove on a wall in Whitehall during a peace protest.
Fair enough. My mum was coming at it from a 'pick your battles' direction.
But this was the right battle IMO as a) it was winnable and b) encouraging a police officer to go and update his knowledge on cycling rights and best practice is an excellent place to start- until PC Plod has this 'on board' Joe Public is never going to get it...
niggle wrote:But this was the right battle IMO as a) it was winnable and b) encouraging a police officer to go and update his knowledge on cycling rights and best practice is an excellent place to start- until PC Plod has this 'on board' Joe Public is never going to get it...
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
My point is A) the copper made up the obstructing vehicles chat. His motivation was 100% to be 'in charge'. He would have said anything. Threatened him with arrest for terrorist offences. Anything. B) shouting out at him was always going to elicit this response so: C) don't bother with them. They won't change. The whole uk police force is like this. It's easier to let them get on with the horrible bits of their job ... which is horrible. D) the pass...... was it really that close? Or was the OP spoiling for a 'discussion' empowered by his camera.
rick99 wrote:Exactly. Well done. You have a camera so you feel justified and empowered in annoying the police by shouting at them . The police then annoyed you back. .... and it must have been annoying.
No one was hurt. No camera. No shouting at police. No being stopped. No tedious conversation. That's the way I'd play it
Exactly. Well done. You have a police vehicle so you feel justified and empowered in alarming the public by driving closely to them . The public then alarmed you back. .... and it must have been confusing.
No one was hurt. No use of powers to stop. No alarming the public. No being said "excuse me" to. No uncomfortable challenging of my attitude. That's the way I'd play it
I've watched a number of vids linked on here and so often the cameraman has recorded some apparent transgression of their own. Possibly something relatively minor but weakening their claim to the high ground. I've watched this a couple of times now and without the sound and I didn't see anything wrong with the riding. I think that view is reinforced by the fact that the police officer didn't seem to witness any offences either or we may well have seen the pen and paper coming out. Top marks to the rider for not saying anything which might have been construed as a public order offence.
Suitable background music might be "Ain't misbehavin' "
reohn2 wrote:The cyclist made the mistake of not explaining why he was riding "in the middle of the road",ie;avoiding the door zone and why he has reason to fear it.
Rule 67 of the Highway Code:
"[cyclists should] leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened"
