Po-po n' brakeless

Has anybody have any stories to share about ridin' brakeless and runnin' into the police?

personally ...it has'nt happened to me yet (yet)

I thought you was going to say ridin' brakeless and runnin' into the back of a
bus.;)

Brakeless, don't do it mate...

No.. oh wait this is a brakeless thread.. my bad. :P

Couldn't stop myself.. geddit?! couldn't stop.. ah.. try the fish..

Haha! Stop it! oh, wait...

BTW, the cops have never noticed my lack-thereof.

Have only ever heard about it from reading 'the couriers are revolting' pamphlet which was early 90s i think...

i don't think they even bother looking now.

in the uk it's ok (I think?)

the fixed wheel is regarded as a brake here, unlike the US0fA

so, the coppers should only grizzle if you do actually run into them and knock them over

When reading abusive comments and letters in the mainstream press about the "Cyclist debate", I always think we're lucky that they are not even aware of this whole brakeless thing... Imagine the insults if they knew.

oh and I never had any police trouble here, in Paris or NYC with the lack of brakes, to answer the question.

I think that the UK law requires two independently operated brakes and so it is illegal to run brakeless (the back wheel is only one brake), but legal to run a single front brake. Lima got busted by the 5-0 during one of the alleycats last year and had to walk back to the finish line while they followed him to make sure he didn't dide his bike. He ended up mooning them which was pretty funny.

"cyclist debate"

that thing pisses me off.

there's no fuckin debate to be had! bikes are better in the city. full stop. (brakeless or not)
Time Out need a collective slap.

can you imagine such nonsense being spouted in any other country?

that's not a debate that's a 'tirade'

the bottom line is this

people find cyclist irritating because we don't obey the rules

but we don't kill people

other road users do

end of debate

One of the comments said "change the law so cyclist only have to give way at junctions and not stop". Unfortunately it'll NEVER happen, but probably the most sensible suggestion I've heard.

Ive been stopped by the parks bobbies a few times in greenwich park. In the winter i make sure im seen by using my Lumi Hid but not quite tilting it down enough. Every time they have said "we thought you were a scooter on the footpath" then "nice light by the way, wheres it from, how much etc etc". As for not having brakes, they were to dazzled by the light to notice :)

never had a problem from the police about no brakes,

however i did hear one copper (on a bicycle) say to the other (also on a bicycle) as jack was doing some skids and backwards circles at the front of CM, "they're illegal aren't they?"

uh oh

Technically you're supposed to have a front and rear brake and they're supposed to be `efficient'. The current Highway code is a bit of a joke when it comes to cycling (ie you're not allowed to have flashing lights or more than one front and rear light on the bike as it may confuse drivers).

The new draft Highway code should bring it closer to reality, if they can just get rid of the 'must use cycle facilities when available' bit.

The law changed on flashing lights last October or November. You are permitted to have them, though I personally think blinking lights make it harder for other road users to assess speed and direction with accuracy and in a short time. The brain has to do more work to assess precisely where the intermittent blink is, and the distance and time between blinks to work out the speed and direction.

They may be legal, but I prefer to burn a bit more battery to ensure that other road users know precisely where I am and where I'm going.

Redundant in the summer months, but when Autumn and Winter comes around I won't be using flashing LED's.

I agree with that DK but flashing LEDs are automatically associated with bicycles. e.g. drivers see flashing and know there's a bike up the road and can then do as necessary to avoid them. Optimum solution touted by people is one of each - flashing and fixed.

I like to flash.

flashing attracts the eye more

i'm a flasher - reckon it catches the eye better

[quote]velocity boy The law changed on flashing lights last October or November. You are permitted to have them, though I personally think blinking lights make it harder for other road users to assess speed and direction with accuracy and in a short time. The brain has to do more work to assess precisely where the intermittent blink is, and the distance and time between blinks to work out the speed and direction.
The hell people drive these days? Fighter jets????

Stef
The hell people drive these days? Fighter jets????

No, but if you think drivers give you more than a few milliseconds look, then you overestimate them. In my mind, the more information you can give them in that few milliseconds the better. I don't think yellow workers jackets add substantially, but as someone who has driven around London a lot I find constant lights easier to process quickly over flashing lights which require several looks.

I have stigmatism though and red light jars me... I cannot place the precise location of a red light really quick. So with blinkers I simply cannot determine where a cyclist is. That simple. Can you be so confident that there are drivers out there who don't also have stigmatism? I'm not taking that chance.