-
So the solution would be to dismount the bike, lift it onto the pavement, walk round the red light, put the bike back on the road, remount it and continue.
I'm not sure of this one. When it has come up elsewhere some people claim that the stop line should 'obviously' extend to include the pavement.
In doing the above, and getting nabbed by the police for it, I'm sure they'd just go with an inconsiderate cycling charge.
Alternatively, lift the bike 1 inch off the ground walk through the red light put it down again, remount it and continue.
That's what The Cycling Lawyer thinks would be legal. The subsequent ride through the junction might get you an caseless/reckless/dangerous/inconsiderate cycling charge though.
I don't know what you mean by this despite your repeating it. Of course the bike doesn't actually disappear but it does, arguably, change from being a vehicle to something else, "luggage" maybe.
I'm saying the bike remains as 'a vehicle being propelled', which is then specifically worded for in other laws.
The whole 'propelling a vehicle' clause is there to combat the silly ways you think you could get away with RLJ-ing, even in cars. Does 'driving' include:-
- Having the engine running (e.g. get away with it by turning the ignition off and coasting through the red light)
- Having the keys in the ignition (e.g. getting out and pushing the car past the stop line)
- Even being in the vehicle (e.g. slowing down enough, engine off, jumping out and letting the car coast across the stop line and then jumping back in).
- etc
- Having the engine running (e.g. get away with it by turning the ignition off and coasting through the red light)
Greenbank-
From a completely non-lawyer viewpoint, I'd suggest that to propel a bike is to make it move in its normal way, ie with its wheels turning, along the ground.
If you were to pick it up, it's moving but it's not being propelled.
If you were to take it to bits, it's moving but it's not being propelled.
What if you were to leap off it before the line and let it ghosty across whilst you run behind it (not touching it) then jump back on at the other side?
PS: IANAL
-
The whole 'propelling a vehicle' clause is there to combat the silly ways you think you could get away with RLJ-ing, even in cars. Does 'driving' include:-
I think the problem with all those scenarios is the ability of a driver to instantaneously become a foot passenger. The fact that you have dispowered your car does not remove your responsibility for it and it clearly still is a vehicle. A bike is sufficiently small that it can be pushed or carried like an item of luggage/pram (which a car generally cannot), which renders its status as a vehicle questionable (and it's certainly not a vehicle being propelled in its normal way), even though you're still responsible for it.
IA(absolutely)NAL though so my ramblings here are of little value.
TurtleRecall
ffm
So the solution would be to dismount the bike, lift it onto the pavement, walk round the red light, put the bike back on the road, remount it and continue. Alternatively, lift the bike 1 inch off the ground walk through the red light put it down again, remount it and continue.
I don't know what you mean by this despite your repeating it. Of course the bike doesn't actually disappear but it does, arguably, change from being a vehicle to something else, "luggage" maybe. I'd go on the principle that until something is tested in court and found to be illegal then it remains legal (on the broad basis that everything is legal until specifically contraindicated by the law).