Police spotting (junction watch)

Police walked past me last night while I was having a pint and a fag outside the pub. One of them said "All right?" I said "Not bad."
Fuck you fucking pigs.

Yup, thats the way to "stick it to the man". He said Hello and you act like act like they've had you banged up in jail for the past 5 years

A real hero! Stick it to the man!

Oh - hadn't seen this - great minds think alike and fools seldom differ

I didnt say anything no, because i just dont like talking to the police to be honest. I was really tempted though. Seemed pointless. They kept laughing and pointing to people edging over the line.

Police currently (18:00) on corner of kingsland rd and St. Paul's rd. on the northbound kerb towards Dalston Kingsland handing out fines for no lights and turning left round the corner (northbound) on a red.

I'm sure that once they've finished solving these crimes they'll be fining drivers on mobiles too.

Apparently PCSOs can't give out tickets, so what good are they really?

I was approaching southwark tube at rush hours on blackfriars road, I got off my bike about to walk across the road (had some spare time, why not?) a car so nearly jumped the light trying to turning into The Cut, probably got slowed down by the cyclist in front. So he crossed both the white line (that's broken the law however you look at it). A PCSO approached him and gave him a leaflet and told him the usual, the driver played innocent and he actually said he didn't know he had to stop in front of the red light.

I then asked the PCSO shouldn't the driver get a ticket, he said he should be himself isn't a police officer so he can't issue it. And I asked if I jumped the red light now, would I get a ticket? He said no because he can't issue it.

As I was walking off he told me careful not to get run over while walking.

I bet if I did jump the red light, I would have gotten a ticket.

Plods day dreaming at Edgware Road/Euston Road , Angel/Old Street and Old Street/City Road junctions this morn. Cars in ASLs and riders being naughty but didn't see anyone being stopped or spoken to.

They're bored now, just marking time.

Guy was cycling on the pavement and then across 3 ped crossing, at least 5 plods saw him but did nothing. Although they may have been waiting to get him right at the end?

Walking at the moment because of a boo-boo - saw them in Trafalgar Square today looking baffled. An unwinnable battle, I think. A car crept through a red yesterday and drove off, policeman just sort of ambled after him, not knowing what to do. Decided on "nothing". Proactive bunch.

Just be thankful they aren't swabbing you and taking your blood http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/18/penn-police-pull-people-over-random-dna-tests-feds/

^^ This, rather neatly, is the crux of the problem that cyclists have (or should have) with the idea that not wearing a helmet should be regarded as a contributory factor in a collision caused by somebody else. But again, there's no provision in law for cyclists to wear one, so it's something that shouldn't happen in a court of law.

I think you're conflating two separate areas of the law, criminal and civil. It is not a criminal offence for a pedestrian to cross a public highway in any location and in any manner they like, provided (as you say) that it's not a motorway or other road on which pedestrians are prohibited from entering (underpasses and the like) or their behaviour amounts to an obstruction of the highway.

However, the civil law is different. While it is not a criminal offence for a ped to shamble into the road without bothering to look, it would amount to a tortious act of negligence. In that case, the ped would be liable to pay damages to anyone who suffered loss as a result of their negligence, in the same way that anyone who who rides a bikes or motorbike or drives a car, truck or van would be liable if they did so in a way likely to cause injury or loss to another person.

The bit about damages being reduced on account of cyclists not wearing helmets relates to the law on contributory negligence. At present, there is no decided case which establishes that, as a matter of law, not wearing a helmet is contributory negligence. Although insurers routinely demand deductions in negotiations regarding damages where a cyclist who has been injured was not wearing a helmet, in every case I'm aware of where this has been fought the insurers have backed down at the 11th hour. They really, really don't want to fight and lose as it would set a precedent and stop them from using of their many bullying tactics.

However, the civil law is different. While it is not a criminal offence for a ped to shamble into the road without bothering to look, it would amount to a tortious act of negligence. In that case, the ped would be liable to pay damages to anyone who suffered loss as a result of their negligence, in the same way that anyone who who rides a bikes or motorbike or drives a car, truck or van would be liable if they did so in a way likely to cause injury or loss to another person.

Yes. I agree with this. But I've been trying quite hard (deliberately) not to get into that because it doesn't directly relate to what hippy wants to hear which is, "there is some way for it to be illegal for peds to jump out in front of me like lemmings every goddamn day", when there isn't.

Criminally illegal, no. Unlawful at civil law, yes. An actionable claim in negligence is still based upon an act which the law considers illegal.

Sigh. Ok, hippy, you win. Every ped who jumps out in front of you in the West End is a bona fide criminal so you can take them all to court for their criminality starting from now.

Sigh. Ok, hippy, you win. Every ped who jumps out in front of you in the West End is a bona fide tortfeasor so you can take them all to court for their tortious acts starting from now. But only if they injure you or cause you loss by doing so.

ftfy

Can I take Starbucks and a ped to court for tort if I spill my hot coffee while cycling because I run a ped over?

this is one of the stupidest no left/right turns in london. If you know your way around you can go up king henry's walk and onto the cross way but otherwise you are fairly fucked (which is why everyone contravenes it). Should definitely be 'except for bikes'.

ftfy

I think being a tortfeasor sounds excellent, I shall jump out at Hippy from between two cars shouting "BOO!" at my earliest convenience.

This evening I was cycling though Fulham. Lights are red so I filter up to the empty ASL. Jovial plod starts chatting with me, commending my bright lights and how visible they make me. He then offers me a leaflet of cycling tips which I take from him.

While the lights are still red a motorbike squeezes between PCSO and myself to not just enter but roll through the entire ASL! As this is happening I ask plod what he is going to do, he makes a half arsed attempt to raise a hand into a stop signal and then shrugs his shoulders when the lights turn green and the motorcycle flies off.

I shall be sending a complaint to Hammersmith and Fulham police congratulating their public information campaign but asking if their time could be better spent catching law breakers. Another question will be whether jiggling hands and shrugging shoulders is the most efficacious way to enforce the law.

That motorcyclist was a tortfeasor and no mistake.

#Iknowhewasn'tbutIwantedtousethewordoftheday

plodulous outside euston station on monday night collared me for shouting a naughty word at a WVM that left hooked me sans indicating - at one point he threatened me with arrest because i wouldn't listen to his 'advice' and had caused a 'breach of the peace'.
Innocent little lamb. Hasn't he been to any Fucktones gigs? That would teach him about 'breach of the peace'.

Motherfucker, I said that two hours ago!!!! I will cut you

#boffrage

go to bed oliver, you're drunk!

Stone cold sober.

I don't need drink ... :)

i'm sober too.

i need to drive to brixton in a bit.

then i'm hitting the toilet duck.