Labour member Geraldine Smith added that sometimes irresponsible cycling was "dismissed as something trivial" but it was a common complaint at meetings in her constituency.
I'd imagine that it is dismissed as such because it really is something trivial to the police. Yet to the general public it's another crime that the police do nothing about, just like jumping red lights.
She said one constituent had been seriously injured and there appeared to be "very little" the police could do, adding: "A police superintendent was at this forum with me and he said that it was legal to cycle on pavements."
This, however is not "something trivial". For a superintendent to be this ignorant and for the police to be able to do "very little" is a cause for concern. If someone is breaking the law and injures someone in the process then a logical conclusion would be that the police should be able to prosecute for assault/GBH/ABH etc. dependent on the injuries sustained.
I'd imagine that it is dismissed as such because it really is something trivial to the police. Yet to the general public it's another crime that the police do nothing about, just like jumping red lights.
This, however is not "something trivial". For a superintendent to be this ignorant and for the police to be able to do "very little" is a cause for concern. If someone is breaking the law and injures someone in the process then a logical conclusion would be that the police should be able to prosecute for assault/GBH/ABH etc. dependent on the injuries sustained.