"Operation Grimaldi" took place over a three day period last week, being the last instalment of the campaign which has been going on for most of the year. Last week's action was mainly in the South City centre area and around Oxford Road / Wilmslow Road . Yes, the student area where most cyclists are. Much safer going after young middle-class unarmed youngsters than the gun toting members of the community.
Joseph Grimaldi was a famous clown in the Regency Period and the operation to which his name was given has some clownish elements. Apparently cyclists can avoid paying their fines if they attend "Cyclist awareness events" . Whatever they are. ("Well it's got two wheels, a chain and no engine. It's either a broken commode or a cycle".) Interestingly cyclists using mobile phones were ticketed as well. Is it illegal to use a mobile on a bike? One driver had their car seized for " driving antisocially (section 59 police reform act warning)." Whatever THAT means.
We have no objection to genuine road safety campaigns, but there is something odd about a campaign which from the outset has a get out from paying fines.
12 comments:
It seems local authorities and police forces are a law unto themselves and fines for legal and illegal acts are a favourite of them all.
If I extorted money from people, I would go to prison. It seems that it is okay to steal, kill and murder so long as you do it on a massive scale and use the ill gotten gains to buy mercenaries and weapons.
They should stop people riding bikes on the pavement.
You are walking on the pavement and someone comes up behind you on a bike just missing you.
It's ridiculous situation.
Ask any professional driver who are the most ignorant, reckless and selfish group of road (and pavement when they feel like it) users and you'll get a universal answer: cyclists.
The leaders of cycling organisations need to apologise for the appalling behaviour of those they purportedly speak for instead of making utterly specious excuses and trying to pass the buck onto other road users.
As for the 'Green' moralising, it's got no relevance to the dreadful, dangerous and wilfully ignorant behaviour massive numbers of cyclists indulge in daily.
There's a reason some cyclists mount the pavement, cars and massive lorries shunting us into the potholed edges of the road and killing and injuring us.
The real problem is congestion.
Just because you have seen a couple of dickheads on cycles don't mean they all are. I can count far more driving cars. I see clueless drivers all the time spending more time fiddling with their iPods or whatever than looking where they are going.
Two conflicting press opinions just take your pick.
Israel should bomb Iran immediately! God is with them! America will suffer the wrath of God! If you do not know Jesus personally there's still time! Ask Him to save you from the wrath to come!
How can a country with 300 nukes, tons of chemical/biological weapons and a reputation of barbarism with no equal have anything negative to say about Iran, who doesn't possess even one nuclear weapon? It's not about Iran getting nuclear weapons it's about Zionist (not Jewish) expansion and control of the middle east along with the rest of the planet
Section 59:
Driving in a careless or inconsiderate manner
Driving on common land, a footpath or bridle way or any land which is not part of a road
Driving in a manner which is causing/has been causing, or is likely to cause alarm, distress or annoyance to members of the public.
Doesn't sound too unreasonable.
roads are for cars payed for by cars
Roads are spread all over our land, OUR land. We do not have to pay anybody to travel on these tarmac monstrosities that we have all over our towns, cities and villages.
I would pull them all up, but we have them and they are for everyone to use.
@Alf,
Roads are not paid for by cars. Car Tax is not a road tax and there is no link between it and what the government decides to spend on roads since 1937.
Vehicle Excise Duty is paid before you can use a car on a road. Nothing to do with paying for them. We all pay for roads if we use them or not.
Anonymous @20:55 Reference Section 59.
Sounded ok to me, initially. Then I started to think about it.
This act dates from 2002, we already had legislation dealing with careless and dangerous driving. Why this new act?
"Driving in a manner LIKELY to cause alarm." So now we can be prosecuted for what someone thinks MIGHT happen.
Off road driving seems to be the target of parts of this Act. Sounds like it might be an effective method of curbing travellers from parking on land where they are not wanted ie they had to DRIVE there....but somehow I don't think this will happen!
How many cars/lorries/motorcycles etc do you see jump blatant (i.e. full red for at least thirty seconds) red lights in a day? Answer: Virtually none.
How many cyclists do you see do it? Answer (if you're a professional driver): Dozens.
Post a Comment