Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
- simonineaston
- Posts: 8062
- Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
- Location: ...at a cricket ground
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
...although its simply not possible to know why the topic was added to the programme's running order without asking the editor/s, the segment amounts to free advertising for the individual concerned, when you consider that he was able to make unfounded assertions (probably very carfully scripted ahead of time), while at the same time, staying calm, reasonable-sounding and dependable. Very clever. Next time I'm caught driving my Porsche at 60-plus down the local school lane, I will definitely give him a ring - he sounds ideal...
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
-
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
If it's not clear, my grouse here is that the supposedly "serious" channel of BBC Radio, is now lead by populism.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jun 2021, 11:44am
...and who does, to be fair, study the law very carefully, whatever our personal views of him and his style.
He's on a programme with a point of view that he may or may not hold - I suspect that my bolded section is closest to the truth, and may also have little to do with his clients' views.
Did he during this programme point out the obvious legal obstacle to number plates or the like for cyclists? (I ask this question of anybody who listened to the programme.)
I take my hat off to Nick Freeman for spotting an opportunity an capitalising on it. All I really know about him is what he has said himself: eg there was one of those financial success analysis articles - probably in the Daily Telegraph - in which he frankly explained what he'd done.
Pre-CPS IIRC, he was a prosecuting solicitor employed by the Greater Manchester Police (GMP.) One day in court, it occurred to him that it must be a lot easier to defend a motoring prosecution than to prosecute one. ie A prosecutor must prove everything, where a defence advocate need only expose a single missing element - the "loophole." His lucky break was through being based in Manchester and having a high profile case linked to Man U (as we call it in Leeds.)
Looking for such "loopholes" is hardly challenging: look at what I refer to as "twiddly bits" when I link to legislation.
It's purely a guess on my part - and nothing to do with reg plates for cycles or cyclists - but I fancy a lot of people go to his company believing that only he has the magic escape route, only to be told that a guilty plea is the only way. I suspect that the only thing any lawyer can offer most people who receive a summons - these days generally from an enforcement camera - is pleading "exceptional hardship" to avoid a totting up disqualification.
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Unfortunately the other nick (Robinson) is gaining form in the anything-threatening-driving bashing. He recently had to be corrected claiming (or parroting a guest's claim) that you 'cannot use your car' in an LTN.
So not surprising that he was willing to scrape mr poophole from the bottom of the barrel for his annual free advertising segment.
So not surprising that he was willing to scrape mr poophole from the bottom of the barrel for his annual free advertising segment.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Unfortunately not, a decade of cuts have left police and the CPS stretched so procedural mistakes do get made too often. Also those same cuts have left local roads in an appalling state such that signage and marking problems can often be used to escape points.thirdcrank wrote: ↑14 Jun 2021, 12:14pm I suspect that the only thing any lawyer can offer most people who receive a summons - these days generally from an enforcement camera - is pleading "exceptional hardship" to avoid a totting up disqualification.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
-
- Posts: 976
- Joined: 5 Dec 2010, 6:31pm
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Supposedly Carlton Reid was asked to appear to argue the case for not doing so, and refused on the grounds that HMG have repeatedly said this isn't happening (and one would assume it's also arguing on the basis of false equivalence, which the BBC have been in warm water for before).
I didn't listen to this (haven't listened to Today for years) but if I had I would still be lodging a complaint, even accepting the response would be to be fobbed off. And of course, number plates are so effective in making sure drivers are licensed, insured and driving road-legal vehicles.
I wonder if CyclingUK will be formally complaining?
I didn't listen to this (haven't listened to Today for years) but if I had I would still be lodging a complaint, even accepting the response would be to be fobbed off. And of course, number plates are so effective in making sure drivers are licensed, insured and driving road-legal vehicles.
I wonder if CyclingUK will be formally complaining?
-
- Posts: 126
- Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
The only possible way I could support this would be if I could have a guaranteed custom number plate.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 14 Jun 2021, 2:46pm
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
I have a vague memory of there being a Government study being done on this subject.
Has anyone got a link to it? I've had a quick search but have yet to find it.
The findings (again, from memory) were there would be no discernible benefit and it would be very expensive to administer.
Perhaps Mr Freeman has forgotten it has already been considered, studied and abandoned?
Has anyone got a link to it? I've had a quick search but have yet to find it.
The findings (again, from memory) were there would be no discernible benefit and it would be very expensive to administer.
Perhaps Mr Freeman has forgotten it has already been considered, studied and abandoned?
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
A reg no for each and every bike would indeed be quite an admin burden and cost. A reg no printed on a 5 quid sleeveless viz vest cheap and easy. Fee c. 25 quid and a staff of 10-12, job done. Nil cost to exchequer. I'll take the outsourced contract!
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
And what would be the environmental impact of all those short-life plastic-microfibre-producing garments?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Do you really think of any relevance in pandering to the driving classes, who are already winning the battle against any intrusion upon "their" road space by cyclists and pedestrians?
I don't.
I don't.
- simonineaston
- Posts: 8062
- Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
- Location: ...at a cricket ground
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Part of me says I can't wait for the final demise of ice-powered vehicles and then it dawns on another part of me that e-cars have super-fast & super-quiet acceleration - and that they're just as big and heavier than the others!!
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
-
- Posts: 976
- Joined: 5 Dec 2010, 6:31pm
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Not quieter - most of the noise at typical traffic speeds is tyre noise, and oddly enough bigger heavier vehicles make more of that.simonineaston wrote: ↑14 Jun 2021, 4:17pm Part of me says I can't wait for the final demise of ice-powered vehicles and then it dawns on another part of me that e-cars have super-fast & super-quiet acceleration - and that they're just as big and heavier than the others!!
-
- Posts: 9509
- Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
Just curious as to whether hiring nick Freeman on a retainer to advise on loopholes and legal matters relating to bike number plate and registration schemes would shut him up about this?
Aiui a lawyer with a conflict of interest cannot act against the interests of the first client, thus declining other, opposing work. It would mean giving him money and possibly a lot every year. But it would be fun seeing him in public arguing against such proposals aimed against cyclists and cycling.
Aiui a lawyer with a conflict of interest cannot act against the interests of the first client, thus declining other, opposing work. It would mean giving him money and possibly a lot every year. But it would be fun seeing him in public arguing against such proposals aimed against cyclists and cycling.
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
I don't think that there's such a principle for causes, or across cases.Tangled Metal wrote: ↑14 Jun 2021, 4:20pmAiui a lawyer with a conflict of interest cannot act against the interests of the first client, thus declining other, opposing work.
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 2445
- Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am
Re: Today programme and reg. numbers for us.
^^^ This is the approach all cycle campaigners should be taking - and other minorities who are the target of the whipped up culture wars.ratherbeintobago wrote: ↑14 Jun 2021, 1:06pm Supposedly Carlton Reid was asked to appear to argue the case for not doing so, and refused on the grounds that HMG have repeatedly said this isn't happening (and one would assume it's also arguing on the basis of false equivalence, which the BBC have been in warm water for before).
There is absolutely zero risk of any such daft proposal - and Freeman is not remotely interested in promoting it.
As with all culture warriors, all he is interested in the publicity that comes from the controversy - and the more unreasonable the proposal the better it is for generating controversy - and the BBC can be gulled into platforming time in order that a "balanced debate" with preponements both for and against. It doesn't matter that the case he is arguing is utterly absurd, all that he is doing is engineering another motorists-vs-cyclists battle and loudly presenting himself to be on the side of motorists.
It is really best not to engage with this sort of stuff, because the very act of that engagement acts as confirmation that there is a serious issue worthy of debate. The BBC should be challenged on this on the grounds of balance - in the same way they eventually came to the understanding that explaining climate science was not a matter of pitting a legitimate climate scientist agains Nigel Lawson.