Cyclists without lights caught in police crackdown in Oxford

Cyclists without lights caught in police crackdown

Cyclists’ details are taken by police after they were stopped in Oxford’s High Street

Pc Mark Pilling

First published in News Oxford Mail: Photograph of the Author by , Crime Reporter, also covering Barton and Wood Farm. Call me on (01865) 425427

IN JUST three hours, police issued fines totalling more than £8,500 to cyclists riding in Oxford with no lights.

The operation on Friday evening saw 171 cyclists stopped in the city centre for breaking road laws.

Pc Mark Pilling, right, of the Abingdon traffic police unit, said the £50 fixed penalty notices were handed out between 6pm and 9pm in High Street.

Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.

Police traditionally carry out similar checks every year after the clocks go back.

Earlier this year Oxford police launched a campaign called Operation Bike to educate cyclists about the rules of the road and in turn make them safer.

Comments (51)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:52am Mon 4 Nov 13

Neonlights says...

And not before time. And look how many people in that photograph are also wearing dark clothing. They are asking to be roadkill, IMHO.

Can we also have a similar campaign for the motorists (inc. taxi drivers) who have numerous lights not working on their cars too.
And not before time. And look how many people in that photograph are also wearing dark clothing. They are asking to be roadkill, IMHO. Can we also have a similar campaign for the motorists (inc. taxi drivers) who have numerous lights not working on their cars too. Neonlights
  • Score: -112

11:52am Mon 4 Nov 13

bart-on simpson says...

Wonder how many cough the money?

Can we not get to the stage where bike shop suppliers could be on hand to sort out lights straightaway - after all, are these cyclists really going to walk home? And how about some flourescent clothing sellers?

What about brakes?

Ultimately, the universities should add a cycling proficiency cert to their entrance requirement!
Wonder how many cough the money? Can we not get to the stage where bike shop suppliers could be on hand to sort out lights straightaway - after all, are these cyclists really going to walk home? And how about some flourescent clothing sellers? What about brakes? Ultimately, the universities should add a cycling proficiency cert to their entrance requirement! bart-on simpson
  • Score: 18

12:07pm Mon 4 Nov 13

boomer68 says...

Nail them up
Always the motorists fault when they are turned into road kill. The damage your car and have no insurance, ride on pavements, run red lights and don't care then whine when they end up in A & E spending the tax payers money!
Nail them up Always the motorists fault when they are turned into road kill. The damage your car and have no insurance, ride on pavements, run red lights and don't care then whine when they end up in A & E spending the tax payers money! boomer68
  • Score: -56

12:43pm Mon 4 Nov 13

lil_miss_ME says...

They should still have to pay the fine. If a driver was caught speeding they don't get off by promising to slow down! Maybe a reduced fine (say half) if they produce light too. But just buying lights isn't gunna make them fit and maintain them is it!
They should still have to pay the fine. If a driver was caught speeding they don't get off by promising to slow down! Maybe a reduced fine (say half) if they produce light too. But just buying lights isn't gunna make them fit and maintain them is it! lil_miss_ME
  • Score: -59

12:43pm Mon 4 Nov 13

fishstew says...

This is a waste of time if they can "buy lights" to avoid a fine.. and get a refund the next day.

This should be treated like if a driver has no insurance. if they have no lights or run red lights they should have their bikes seized. no buts no excuses there are far too many rouge cyclists out there who dont think traffic laws apply to them. which in turn gives all cyclists a bad name esp ones who do bother to obey the traffic laws
This is a waste of time if they can "buy lights" to avoid a fine.. and get a refund the next day. This should be treated like if a driver has no insurance. if they have no lights or run red lights they should have their bikes seized. no buts no excuses there are far too many rouge cyclists out there who dont think traffic laws apply to them. which in turn gives all cyclists a bad name esp ones who do bother to obey the traffic laws fishstew
  • Score: -32

1:10pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Floflo says...

I've been pulled over for not having any lights on. The kind officer had a chat with me, I turned them on and he let me drive off.

It's not only cyclists who get let off for not having their lights on. Forgetful motorists also get let off.
I've been pulled over for not having any lights on. The kind officer had a chat with me, I turned them on and he let me drive off. It's not only cyclists who get let off for not having their lights on. Forgetful motorists also get let off. Floflo
  • Score: 19

1:42pm Mon 4 Nov 13

lil_miss_ME says...

Forgetting to turn your light on when u pull out of a lit up fuel station or car park is one thing. We've all done that! Not even bothering to fit them on your bike when you fully intend to cycle after dark is just careless, lazy, dangerous and stupid! And when the cyclists get hit by a vehicle......it immediately seems to be the drivers fault, when most of the time I see cyclist behaving In a way which is asking to be knocked off! I accept there are many responsible cyclists out there, but the ones that are not should get equal punishment to any other road user!
Forgetting to turn your light on when u pull out of a lit up fuel station or car park is one thing. We've all done that! Not even bothering to fit them on your bike when you fully intend to cycle after dark is just careless, lazy, dangerous and stupid! And when the cyclists get hit by a vehicle......it immediately seems to be the drivers fault, when most of the time I see cyclist behaving In a way which is asking to be knocked off! I accept there are many responsible cyclists out there, but the ones that are not should get equal punishment to any other road user! lil_miss_ME
  • Score: -40

2:00pm Mon 4 Nov 13

fishstew says...

Worst example of careless cycling I have seen is down the Eynsham Road there was someone cycling on and off the path both hands off the handlebars and texting with both hands. There are a few double decker buses that use that road also. Wonder who would come off worse?

In turn Best example of careful cycling is on the B4044 where its not the most safest place to cycle but there is a guy who has high vis, wearing a helmet and lit up like an xmas tree not dazzling other road users but you could see this guy for ½mile away. So there isome good cyclists but in turn there a few bad ones too who need eduction or learn the hard way the law of Darwin
Worst example of careless cycling I have seen is down the Eynsham Road there was someone cycling on and off the path both hands off the handlebars and texting with both hands. There are a few double decker buses that use that road also. Wonder who would come off worse? In turn Best example of careful cycling is on the B4044 where its not the most safest place to cycle but there is a guy who has high vis, wearing a helmet and lit up like an xmas tree not dazzling other road users but you could see this guy for ½mile away. So there isome good cyclists but in turn there a few bad ones too who need eduction or learn the hard way the law of Darwin fishstew
  • Score: -29

2:21pm Mon 4 Nov 13

yabbadabbadoo256 says...

worse case ive ever saw was a cyclist with hardly any lights squeeze past me on the outside at Haddon Hill in didcot since the road is so narrow there and cars were coming in both directions Im amazed he wasnt injured.. he then proceeded to "Power" up Haddon hill still with no lights weaving all over the road.
worse case ive ever saw was a cyclist with hardly any lights squeeze past me on the outside at Haddon Hill in didcot since the road is so narrow there and cars were coming in both directions Im amazed he wasnt injured.. he then proceeded to "Power" up Haddon hill still with no lights weaving all over the road. yabbadabbadoo256
  • Score: -130

3:45pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Sandy Wimpole-Smythe says...

When will the Police carry out the same operation in the morning because cyclists are just as bad then, or is that too much to ask that they get up early.
When will the Police carry out the same operation in the morning because cyclists are just as bad then, or is that too much to ask that they get up early. Sandy Wimpole-Smythe
  • Score: -57

4:13pm Mon 4 Nov 13

colinharry says...

Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money............. colinharry
  • Score: -159

4:30pm Mon 4 Nov 13

John Wilson Oxford says...

Floflo wrote:
I've been pulled over for not having any lights on. The kind officer had a chat with me, I turned them on and he let me drive off.

It's not only cyclists who get let off for not having their lights on. Forgetful motorists also get let off.
No Floflo, you are wrong, you had lights, but had forgotten to turn them on, if there had been no bulbs in your lights then you would have been nicked fullstop, there would be none of this pop down to the garage and get some bulbs. Cyclists and motorists are NOT treated equally.
[quote][p][bold]Floflo[/bold] wrote: I've been pulled over for not having any lights on. The kind officer had a chat with me, I turned them on and he let me drive off. It's not only cyclists who get let off for not having their lights on. Forgetful motorists also get let off.[/p][/quote]No Floflo, you are wrong, you had lights, but had forgotten to turn them on, if there had been no bulbs in your lights then you would have been nicked fullstop, there would be none of this pop down to the garage and get some bulbs. Cyclists and motorists are NOT treated equally. John Wilson Oxford
  • Score: -238

4:38pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Oly Shipp says...

Agree this is a good idea, in that it is about safety, and like the way the fine is waived on production of receipt for bike lights. However, I was in town on Friday and saw four separate checkpoints - that's a lot of resources. Should we be asking if they will put a proportionate amount of effort into cracking down on (FAR more dangerous to others) car drivers who break the 20mph law?
Agree this is a good idea, in that it is about safety, and like the way the fine is waived on production of receipt for bike lights. However, I was in town on Friday and saw four separate checkpoints - that's a lot of resources. Should we be asking if they will put a proportionate amount of effort into cracking down on (FAR more dangerous to others) car drivers who break the 20mph law? Oly Shipp
  • Score: 49

4:54pm Mon 4 Nov 13

EMBOX2 says...

Oly Shipp wrote:
Agree this is a good idea, in that it is about safety, and like the way the fine is waived on production of receipt for bike lights. However, I was in town on Friday and saw four separate checkpoints - that's a lot of resources. Should we be asking if they will put a proportionate amount of effort into cracking down on (FAR more dangerous to others) car drivers who break the 20mph law?
Yes, and likewise cyclists who break the 20mph limit, but who can't be prosecuted because they do not legally have to have a speedo.

Get road laws on an even keel, and then we'll really sort road users behaviour out.
[quote][p][bold]Oly Shipp[/bold] wrote: Agree this is a good idea, in that it is about safety, and like the way the fine is waived on production of receipt for bike lights. However, I was in town on Friday and saw four separate checkpoints - that's a lot of resources. Should we be asking if they will put a proportionate amount of effort into cracking down on (FAR more dangerous to others) car drivers who break the 20mph law?[/p][/quote]Yes, and likewise cyclists who break the 20mph limit, but who can't be prosecuted because they do not legally have to have a speedo. Get road laws on an even keel, and then we'll really sort road users behaviour out. EMBOX2
  • Score: -120

5:03pm Mon 4 Nov 13

John Wilson Oxford says...

Oly Shipp wrote:
Agree this is a good idea, in that it is about safety, and like the way the fine is waived on production of receipt for bike lights. However, I was in town on Friday and saw four separate checkpoints - that's a lot of resources. Should we be asking if they will put a proportionate amount of effort into cracking down on (FAR more dangerous to others) car drivers who break the 20mph law?
Have you ever thought about being a writer for bad comics? Or do you really believe what you just wrote? Every day of the week there are over 10 checkpoints for motorists in Oxon, now that is a real waste of man (and woman) power.
[quote][p][bold]Oly Shipp[/bold] wrote: Agree this is a good idea, in that it is about safety, and like the way the fine is waived on production of receipt for bike lights. However, I was in town on Friday and saw four separate checkpoints - that's a lot of resources. Should we be asking if they will put a proportionate amount of effort into cracking down on (FAR more dangerous to others) car drivers who break the 20mph law?[/p][/quote]Have you ever thought about being a writer for bad comics? Or do you really believe what you just wrote? Every day of the week there are over 10 checkpoints for motorists in Oxon, now that is a real waste of man (and woman) power. John Wilson Oxford
  • Score: -258

5:29pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Danny A says...

colinharry wrote:
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
What is the purpose of this police effort?
Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark.
The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise..

Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed.

Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling.

A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.
[quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money.............[/p][/quote]What is the purpose of this police effort? Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark. The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise.. Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed. Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling. A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed. Danny A
  • Score: 15

6:04pm Mon 4 Nov 13

LetsBeRational says...

Danny A wrote:
colinharry wrote:
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
What is the purpose of this police effort?
Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark.
The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise..

Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed.

Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling.

A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.
A bad cyclist will get harmed, as will the innocent motorist that couldn't see them and knocks them off. God forbid it is fatal, then the drriver will have to live with that, and the mental image of what they see will be in their head forever. Their family are then left to deal with that trauma.

Then there is the cyclists family. Whether it's parent buring their child, or young children burying their parent, or members of the extended family or friends that have to deal with the loss.

Add to the list the emergency services that have to deal with the horrific scene, informing families, dealing with the aftermath and their families that have to deal with their bad mood when they get home. That police officer issuing the fine may have spent the previous day scraping a cyclist of the road because they couldnt be bothered to wear lights.

There are probably a lot more people as well, so actually a bad cyclists that gets themselves killed, or seriously hurt will 'harm others'
[quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money.............[/p][/quote]What is the purpose of this police effort? Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark. The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise.. Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed. Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling. A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.[/p][/quote]A bad cyclist will get harmed, as will the innocent motorist that couldn't see them and knocks them off. God forbid it is fatal, then the drriver will have to live with that, and the mental image of what they see will be in their head forever. Their family are then left to deal with that trauma. Then there is the cyclists family. Whether it's parent buring their child, or young children burying their parent, or members of the extended family or friends that have to deal with the loss. Add to the list the emergency services that have to deal with the horrific scene, informing families, dealing with the aftermath and their families that have to deal with their bad mood when they get home. That police officer issuing the fine may have spent the previous day scraping a cyclist of the road because they couldnt be bothered to wear lights. There are probably a lot more people as well, so actually a bad cyclists that gets themselves killed, or seriously hurt will 'harm others' LetsBeRational
  • Score: 21

6:34pm Mon 4 Nov 13

JacobS says...

Great, now how about cracking down on the real danger, those who insist on bringing private motor vehicles onto the road and all the speeding, texting, **** viewing, chatting to mates on the phone, shouting abuse out of the window etc that they do at the same time to add to the danger. If you're too idle to cycle, get the bus.
Great, now how about cracking down on the real danger, those who insist on bringing private motor vehicles onto the road and all the speeding, texting, **** viewing, chatting to mates on the phone, shouting abuse out of the window etc that they do at the same time to add to the danger. If you're too idle to cycle, get the bus. JacobS
  • Score: 9

6:46pm Mon 4 Nov 13

faatmaan says...

why not just enforce all laws for situations, Governments elected democratically by the electorate mandated these laws, so there can be no complaints, except for non-enforcement.
why not just enforce all laws for situations, Governments elected democratically by the electorate mandated these laws, so there can be no complaints, except for non-enforcement. faatmaan
  • Score: 10

7:42pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Floflo says...

faatmaan wrote:
why not just enforce all laws for situations, Governments elected democratically by the electorate mandated these laws, so there can be no complaints, except for non-enforcement.
That would be great. In an instant you remove around half the traffic from the motorways - myself included, so I'm not so sure about 'no complaints'.

I actually wanted to comment on Danny's observation - it's interesting how people endlessly complain about speed camera's being revenue generators then the same people complain about how this operation may not be generating as much revenue as it could. Funny world..
[quote][p][bold]faatmaan[/bold] wrote: why not just enforce all laws for situations, Governments elected democratically by the electorate mandated these laws, so there can be no complaints, except for non-enforcement.[/p][/quote]That would be great. In an instant you remove around half the traffic from the motorways - myself included, so I'm not so sure about 'no complaints'. I actually wanted to comment on Danny's observation - it's interesting how people endlessly complain about speed camera's being revenue generators then the same people complain about how this operation may not be generating as much revenue as it could. Funny world.. Floflo
  • Score: 21

8:35pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Dilligaf2010 says...

Perhaps they could issue tickets to the cyclists disobeying the dismount signs along the closed stretch of St. Aldate's at the moment.
The ignorant cyclists who don't dismount, ride along the pavement at the same speed they would on the road, and when you ask them to get of and push their bikes, invariably you get a mouthful of abuse in response.
Some even cycle along the bit of road that's open for residents etc., before continuing along the path, despite there being signs stating "No Unauthorised Vehicles Past this Point".
What makes it even more of a joke is, it's all happening right outside St. Aldate's Police Station.
Perhaps they could issue tickets to the cyclists disobeying the dismount signs along the closed stretch of St. Aldate's at the moment. The ignorant cyclists who don't dismount, ride along the pavement at the same speed they would on the road, and when you ask them to get of and push their bikes, invariably you get a mouthful of abuse in response. Some even cycle along the bit of road that's open for residents etc., before continuing along the path, despite there being signs stating "No Unauthorised Vehicles Past this Point". What makes it even more of a joke is, it's all happening right outside St. Aldate's Police Station. Dilligaf2010
  • Score: -25

9:46pm Mon 4 Nov 13

yabbadabbadoo256 says...

Danny A wrote:
colinharry wrote:
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
What is the purpose of this police effort?
Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark.
The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise..

Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed.

Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling.

A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.
The difference is tho, when a bad cyclist harms himself through his or her own actions, they have recompense to blame the car, bus or lorry driver if there is one involved. and there is little said driver can do to fight their corner as its always deemed to be "The Drivers fault".
[quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money.............[/p][/quote]What is the purpose of this police effort? Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark. The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise.. Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed. Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling. A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.[/p][/quote]The difference is tho, when a bad cyclist harms himself through his or her own actions, they have recompense to blame the car, bus or lorry driver if there is one involved. and there is little said driver can do to fight their corner as its always deemed to be "The Drivers fault". yabbadabbadoo256
  • Score: -117

9:47pm Mon 4 Nov 13

yabbadabbadoo256 says...

yabbadabbadoo256 wrote:
Danny A wrote:
colinharry wrote:
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
What is the purpose of this police effort?
Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark.
The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise..

Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed.

Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling.

A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.
The difference is tho, when a bad cyclist harms himself through his or her own actions, they have recompense to blame the car, bus or lorry driver if there is one involved. and there is little said driver can do to fight their corner as its always deemed to be "The Drivers fault".
I cite my example early in this thread of a cyclist passing me on the outside at hadden hill in the narrow stretch, in oncoming traffic.. If I had not seen him and swerved to avoid him hitting me, it would have been my fault for not having 360 degree vision for not seeing a poorly lit cyclist.
[quote][p][bold]yabbadabbadoo256[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money.............[/p][/quote]What is the purpose of this police effort? Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark. The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise.. Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed. Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling. A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.[/p][/quote]The difference is tho, when a bad cyclist harms himself through his or her own actions, they have recompense to blame the car, bus or lorry driver if there is one involved. and there is little said driver can do to fight their corner as its always deemed to be "The Drivers fault".[/p][/quote]I cite my example early in this thread of a cyclist passing me on the outside at hadden hill in the narrow stretch, in oncoming traffic.. If I had not seen him and swerved to avoid him hitting me, it would have been my fault for not having 360 degree vision for not seeing a poorly lit cyclist. yabbadabbadoo256
  • Score: -135

10:05pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Danny A says...

LetsBeRational wrote:
Danny A wrote:
colinharry wrote:
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
What is the purpose of this police effort?
Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark.
The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise..

Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed.

Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling.

A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.
A bad cyclist will get harmed, as will the innocent motorist that couldn't see them and knocks them off. God forbid it is fatal, then the drriver will have to live with that, and the mental image of what they see will be in their head forever. Their family are then left to deal with that trauma.

Then there is the cyclists family. Whether it's parent buring their child, or young children burying their parent, or members of the extended family or friends that have to deal with the loss.

Add to the list the emergency services that have to deal with the horrific scene, informing families, dealing with the aftermath and their families that have to deal with their bad mood when they get home. That police officer issuing the fine may have spent the previous day scraping a cyclist of the road because they couldnt be bothered to wear lights.

There are probably a lot more people as well, so actually a bad cyclists that gets themselves killed, or seriously hurt will 'harm others'
And all of these indirect effects apply equally to a case of bad driving. Indeed a bad driver can easily harm themselves too. This doesn't take away from the fact that there is an clear imbalance in power and threat in the direct incident.
[quote][p][bold]LetsBeRational[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money.............[/p][/quote]What is the purpose of this police effort? Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark. The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise.. Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed. Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling. A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.[/p][/quote]A bad cyclist will get harmed, as will the innocent motorist that couldn't see them and knocks them off. God forbid it is fatal, then the drriver will have to live with that, and the mental image of what they see will be in their head forever. Their family are then left to deal with that trauma. Then there is the cyclists family. Whether it's parent buring their child, or young children burying their parent, or members of the extended family or friends that have to deal with the loss. Add to the list the emergency services that have to deal with the horrific scene, informing families, dealing with the aftermath and their families that have to deal with their bad mood when they get home. That police officer issuing the fine may have spent the previous day scraping a cyclist of the road because they couldnt be bothered to wear lights. There are probably a lot more people as well, so actually a bad cyclists that gets themselves killed, or seriously hurt will 'harm others'[/p][/quote]And all of these indirect effects apply equally to a case of bad driving. Indeed a bad driver can easily harm themselves too. This doesn't take away from the fact that there is an clear imbalance in power and threat in the direct incident. Danny A
  • Score: 24

10:08pm Mon 4 Nov 13

Danny A says...

yabbadabbadoo256 wrote:
yabbadabbadoo256 wrote:
Danny A wrote:
colinharry wrote:
Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station.



what a total waste of taxpayers money.............
What is the purpose of this police effort?
Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark.
The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise..

Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed.

Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling.

A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.
The difference is tho, when a bad cyclist harms himself through his or her own actions, they have recompense to blame the car, bus or lorry driver if there is one involved. and there is little said driver can do to fight their corner as its always deemed to be "The Drivers fault".
I cite my example early in this thread of a cyclist passing me on the outside at hadden hill in the narrow stretch, in oncoming traffic.. If I had not seen him and swerved to avoid him hitting me, it would have been my fault for not having 360 degree vision for not seeing a poorly lit cyclist.
You can quote anecdotes but the DofT accident records show that in car-cyclist incidents, the driver is more often at fault.
[quote][p][bold]yabbadabbadoo256[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yabbadabbadoo256[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Danny A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: Cyclists will not have to pay the penalties if they buy lights for their bikes and produce a receipt for inspection at a police station. what a total waste of taxpayers money.............[/p][/quote]What is the purpose of this police effort? Surely, and this is what the police themselves say, it is to get cyclists to use lights in the dark. The alternative is that it is a straight money raising exercise.. Given the frequent description of speed cameras as a pure money raising exercise, I would have thought that this fine-or-action alternative was to welcomed. Correctly implemented road laws should reflect the potential threat that respective behaviours exhibit. In this respect, as born out by the causes of kills/serious injuries, bad driving is more of a threat to society than bad cycling. A bad driver will likely harm others, a bad cyclist will likely get harmed.[/p][/quote]The difference is tho, when a bad cyclist harms himself through his or her own actions, they have recompense to blame the car, bus or lorry driver if there is one involved. and there is little said driver can do to fight their corner as its always deemed to be "The Drivers fault".[/p][/quote]I cite my example early in this thread of a cyclist passing me on the outside at hadden hill in the narrow stretch, in oncoming traffic.. If I had not seen him and swerved to avoid him hitting me, it would have been my fault for not having 360 degree vision for not seeing a poorly lit cyclist.[/p][/quote]You can quote anecdotes but the DofT accident records show that in car-cyclist incidents, the driver is more often at fault. Danny A
  • Score: 21

11:04pm Mon 4 Nov 13

grandconjuration says...

25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.
25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights. grandconjuration
  • Score: 70

6:57am Tue 5 Nov 13

fishstew says...

i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37.

sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them.

"Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right

you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.
i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37. sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them. "Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse. fishstew
  • Score: -48

8:15am Tue 5 Nov 13

Geoff Roberts says...

"Police traditionally carry out similar checks every year after the clocks go back."

I look forward to reading the same story with the same comments next year, and the year after, and the year after that.

Alternatively if perhaps the police could save us from this nightmare but actually doing their job on a daily basis instead of leaving to high profile operations which bring in some fines but don't actually reduce crime.
"Police traditionally carry out similar checks every year after the clocks go back." I look forward to reading the same story with the same comments next year, and the year after, and the year after that. Alternatively if perhaps the police could save us from this nightmare but actually doing their job on a daily basis instead of leaving to high profile operations which bring in some fines but don't actually reduce crime. Geoff Roberts
  • Score: 66

8:18am Tue 5 Nov 13

Geoff Roberts says...

"why not just enforce all laws for situations"

Because it's not possible.
"why not just enforce all laws for situations" Because it's not possible. Geoff Roberts
  • Score: 53

8:18am Tue 5 Nov 13

Geoff Roberts says...

"why not just enforce all laws for situations"

Because it's not possible.
"why not just enforce all laws for situations" Because it's not possible. Geoff Roberts
  • Score: 46

9:24am Tue 5 Nov 13

museli says...

Always tempting to try and introduce a bit of balance and common sense when reading through yet another stream of comment diarrhea much of which can be summarized as 'cyclists are evil yet it's always the motorists who get picked on and anyone who says otherwise thinks they are above the law'.

On reflection though it's probably a good way for the motor dependent to get all that anger out their system - a sort of cathartic release that just possibly means they drive a bit less stupidly and dangerously when around those nasty cyclists - so I won't bother.
Always tempting to try and introduce a bit of balance and common sense when reading through yet another stream of comment diarrhea much of which can be summarized as 'cyclists are evil yet it's always the motorists who get picked on and anyone who says otherwise thinks they are above the law'. On reflection though it's probably a good way for the motor dependent to get all that anger out their system - a sort of cathartic release that just possibly means they drive a bit less stupidly and dangerously when around those nasty cyclists - so I won't bother. museli
  • Score: 42

10:40am Tue 5 Nov 13

Neonlights says...

fishstew wrote:
i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37.

sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them.

"Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right

you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.
Take no notice of the thumbs up / down voting. It can easily be rigged in favour of / against by saddos out there with nothing better to do than spend 24/7 in front of their screens.
[quote][p][bold]fishstew[/bold] wrote: i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37. sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them. "Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.[/p][/quote]Take no notice of the thumbs up / down voting. It can easily be rigged in favour of / against by saddos out there with nothing better to do than spend 24/7 in front of their screens. Neonlights
  • Score: -130

11:05am Tue 5 Nov 13

Major Rhode-Werks says...

Think I'll try running my car without tax, insurance and MoT. If I get stopped I'll just offer to buy it all and produce it at the police station. Should work OK don't ya think
Think I'll try running my car without tax, insurance and MoT. If I get stopped I'll just offer to buy it all and produce it at the police station. Should work OK don't ya think Major Rhode-Werks
  • Score: -124

12:46pm Tue 5 Nov 13

Oxonian says...

grandconjuration wrote:
25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.
So 171 people cycling without lights is acceptable? In three hours that is almost one every minute.

Road users (and pavement users) are right to be worried about cyclists behaving dangerously.
[quote][p][bold]grandconjuration[/bold] wrote: 25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.[/p][/quote]So 171 people cycling without lights is acceptable? In three hours that is almost one every minute. Road users (and pavement users) are right to be worried about cyclists behaving dangerously. Oxonian
  • Score: -96

1:14pm Tue 5 Nov 13

the wizard says...

This is an age old chestnut and the police are as equally guilty as the cyclists themselves, because unless there is a purge such as this they don't want to know unless there is an accident.

the answer lays with central government which has let this rumble on for years while they sit back and do nothing other than hike up taxes on other road users.

The answer is legislation. All bikes in this day and age should come fitted with robust lighting systems fitted from new, and also another law needs to be made where all existing bikes should be fitted with working lights after a certain date. End of. After which any cyclist found without lights gets hit with a fine, no quibble, just fined on the spot, seven days to pay. That does away with all this nonsense across the whole of the country, because everywhere you go the same arguments are being fought. The law specifically states it is the bike and not the rider that should be fitted with lights, but as a former motor cyclist and now car driver I do welcome the riders that wear the flashing belts etc in addition to their bikes lighting. There are some good guys out there on bikes, but the problem here in Oxford lays predominantly with students who choose to think they are above the law. Fifty quid fines and no let off soon brings things to a sharp focus, Cheap compared to the cost of an ambulance admission and police time . Time for the government to man up and get up to date.
This is an age old chestnut and the police are as equally guilty as the cyclists themselves, because unless there is a purge such as this they don't want to know unless there is an accident. the answer lays with central government which has let this rumble on for years while they sit back and do nothing other than hike up taxes on other road users. The answer is legislation. All bikes in this day and age should come fitted with robust lighting systems fitted from new, and also another law needs to be made where all existing bikes should be fitted with working lights after a certain date. End of. After which any cyclist found without lights gets hit with a fine, no quibble, just fined on the spot, seven days to pay. That does away with all this nonsense across the whole of the country, because everywhere you go the same arguments are being fought. The law specifically states it is the bike and not the rider that should be fitted with lights, but as a former motor cyclist and now car driver I do welcome the riders that wear the flashing belts etc in addition to their bikes lighting. There are some good guys out there on bikes, but the problem here in Oxford lays predominantly with students who choose to think they are above the law. Fifty quid fines and no let off soon brings things to a sharp focus, Cheap compared to the cost of an ambulance admission and police time . Time for the government to man up and get up to date. the wizard
  • Score: -71

1:14pm Tue 5 Nov 13

grandconjuration says...

Oxonian wrote:
grandconjuration wrote:
25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.
So 171 people cycling without lights is acceptable? In three hours that is almost one every minute.

Road users (and pavement users) are right to be worried about cyclists behaving dangerously.
Where in my comment do I say that I find this acceptable? I was noting that there was a large number of comments, arguably completely out of proportion to the offence being committed.

Tell me, why should road users (and pavement) users be worried about 'dangerous' cyclists. How many people are killed/maimed by cyclists every year? In such incidents, what is the proportion of cyclists that are unlit? Let's have some statistics.

Cyclists without lights are primarily a danger to themselves. Cycling without lights is a stupid thing to do; a cyclist needs to do everything they can to give them a fighting chance on today's roads. Are they dangerous to others? No, not really.

I see that this thread is ticking off all of the anti-cycling generalisations, anecdotes and misconceptions.

There's another news story at the moment, someone managed to make their car 'leave the road' down an embankment. No comments yet. Come on people, let's have some rants and generalisations for this story. I'll start you off - all motorists are... was she wearing a helmet?...
[quote][p][bold]Oxonian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grandconjuration[/bold] wrote: 25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.[/p][/quote]So 171 people cycling without lights is acceptable? In three hours that is almost one every minute. Road users (and pavement users) are right to be worried about cyclists behaving dangerously.[/p][/quote]Where in my comment do I say that I find this acceptable? I was noting that there was a large number of comments, arguably completely out of proportion to the offence being committed. Tell me, why should road users (and pavement) users be worried about 'dangerous' cyclists. How many people are killed/maimed by cyclists every year? In such incidents, what is the proportion of cyclists that are unlit? Let's have some statistics. Cyclists without lights are primarily a danger to themselves. Cycling without lights is a stupid thing to do; a cyclist needs to do everything they can to give them a fighting chance on today's roads. Are they dangerous to others? No, not really. I see that this thread is ticking off all of the anti-cycling generalisations, anecdotes and misconceptions. There's another news story at the moment, someone managed to make their car 'leave the road' down an embankment. No comments yet. Come on people, let's have some rants and generalisations for this story. I'll start you off - all motorists are... was she wearing a helmet?... grandconjuration
  • Score: 60

2:35pm Tue 5 Nov 13

Richard of Wantage says...

boomer68 wrote:
Nail them up
Always the motorists fault when they are turned into road kill. The damage your car and have no insurance, ride on pavements, run red lights and don't care then whine when they end up in A & E spending the tax payers money!
O dear, where do you people come from?

With 60,000 drink driving and 450 death by dangerous driving convictions each year, you can't really complain about wasting tax payers’ money.
[quote][p][bold]boomer68[/bold] wrote: Nail them up Always the motorists fault when they are turned into road kill. The damage your car and have no insurance, ride on pavements, run red lights and don't care then whine when they end up in A & E spending the tax payers money![/p][/quote]O dear, where do you people come from? With 60,000 drink driving and 450 death by dangerous driving convictions each year, you can't really complain about wasting tax payers’ money. Richard of Wantage
  • Score: 23

7:14pm Tue 5 Nov 13

the wizard says...

Oxonian wrote:
grandconjuration wrote:
25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.
So 171 people cycling without lights is acceptable? In three hours that is almost one every minute.

Road users (and pavement users) are right to be worried about cyclists behaving dangerously.
I would like to know the numbers of who were Oxonian's and who were students/temporary residents.
[quote][p][bold]Oxonian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grandconjuration[/bold] wrote: 25 comments. Nothing gets them frothing at the mouth more than some cyclists without lights.[/p][/quote]So 171 people cycling without lights is acceptable? In three hours that is almost one every minute. Road users (and pavement users) are right to be worried about cyclists behaving dangerously.[/p][/quote]I would like to know the numbers of who were Oxonian's and who were students/temporary residents. the wizard
  • Score: -69

10:06pm Tue 5 Nov 13

JacobS says...

yabbadabbadoo256 wrote:
worse case ive ever saw was a cyclist with hardly any lights squeeze past me on the outside at Haddon Hill in didcot since the road is so narrow there and cars were coming in both directions Im amazed he wasnt injured.. he then proceeded to "Power" up Haddon hill still with no lights weaving all over the road.
So when he "squeezed past" he had "hardly any lights" but by the time he was powering up the hill he had no lights?! What exactly is meant by "hardly any lights"? Do you read this stuff before you submit it?
[quote][p][bold]yabbadabbadoo256[/bold] wrote: worse case ive ever saw was a cyclist with hardly any lights squeeze past me on the outside at Haddon Hill in didcot since the road is so narrow there and cars were coming in both directions Im amazed he wasnt injured.. he then proceeded to "Power" up Haddon hill still with no lights weaving all over the road.[/p][/quote]So when he "squeezed past" he had "hardly any lights" but by the time he was powering up the hill he had no lights?! What exactly is meant by "hardly any lights"? Do you read this stuff before you submit it? JacobS
  • Score: 15

10:11pm Tue 5 Nov 13

JacobS says...

fishstew wrote:
i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37.

sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them.

"Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right

you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.
The motor car kills, on average, five people each day in this country and many serious injuries on top of that. Children with ribs crushed before they are even properly developed, bystanders who will never walk again, parents' lives destroyed, families permanently broken. But I'm sorry for your suffering when you had to see your numbers go down - life can be tough.
[quote][p][bold]fishstew[/bold] wrote: i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37. sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them. "Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.[/p][/quote]The motor car kills, on average, five people each day in this country and many serious injuries on top of that. Children with ribs crushed before they are even properly developed, bystanders who will never walk again, parents' lives destroyed, families permanently broken. But I'm sorry for your suffering when you had to see your numbers go down - life can be tough. JacobS
  • Score: 15

10:48pm Tue 5 Nov 13

rabbitrr says...

They should have crushed every bike without lights on the spot and made the owners pay for the crusher hire AND carry the twisted remains of their bike home.
They should have crushed every bike without lights on the spot and made the owners pay for the crusher hire AND carry the twisted remains of their bike home. rabbitrr
  • Score: -140

11:52pm Tue 5 Nov 13

the wizard says...

JacobS wrote:
fishstew wrote:
i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37.

sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them.

"Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right

you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.
The motor car kills, on average, five people each day in this country and many serious injuries on top of that. Children with ribs crushed before they are even properly developed, bystanders who will never walk again, parents' lives destroyed, families permanently broken. But I'm sorry for your suffering when you had to see your numbers go down - life can be tough.
It is indeed a shame, and you quote quite accurate statistics,but indeed a bigger shame there are no complied stats for mothers who feel intimidated by cyclists on the pavement, kids that fall over trying to get out of their way or indeed the amount of verbal abuse pedestrians suffer from rogue cyclists who refuse to dismount while inconveniencing others riding their bikes in places where they shouldn't. It is not all one sided. There are many good cyclists, but there are also others that are just plain bone idle and refuse to adhere to the law. I just love it when they make the mistake of trying to take me on. Get off it or wear it, simple. The clue is in the name, Pedestrian footpath.
[quote][p][bold]JacobS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fishstew[/bold] wrote: i see the pro cyclist biased has come to this board a bit late.. esp when my score went from +8 and +6 on my last two comments right down to -48 and -37. sorry but there are SOME rouge cyclists out there you need to open your eyes. if you noticed like you failed to notice red lights. i actually tried to make my posts balanced by having comments about GOOD things that other cyclists do (i.e are visible and wear helmets) i seen this before on other comments pages that about cyclists doing things wrong and its the always the same from them. "Oh motorists are just as bad / they do worst stuff" well 2 wrongs do not make a right you would thought that they are jockeys not cyclists the amount on here that are on their high horse.[/p][/quote]The motor car kills, on average, five people each day in this country and many serious injuries on top of that. Children with ribs crushed before they are even properly developed, bystanders who will never walk again, parents' lives destroyed, families permanently broken. But I'm sorry for your suffering when you had to see your numbers go down - life can be tough.[/p][/quote]It is indeed a shame, and you quote quite accurate statistics,but indeed a bigger shame there are no complied stats for mothers who feel intimidated by cyclists on the pavement, kids that fall over trying to get out of their way or indeed the amount of verbal abuse pedestrians suffer from rogue cyclists who refuse to dismount while inconveniencing others riding their bikes in places where they shouldn't. It is not all one sided. There are many good cyclists, but there are also others that are just plain bone idle and refuse to adhere to the law. I just love it when they make the mistake of trying to take me on. Get off it or wear it, simple. The clue is in the name, Pedestrian footpath. the wizard
  • Score: -57

11:02am Wed 6 Nov 13

John Wilson Oxford says...

Being only a mere Shopworker I may have missed the point of this story, but I thought it was about the number of people caught breaking the law, not about who causes the most damage, the amount of money raised, or whether car/van/bus/taxi/cyc
le road users break the most laws. The number of people caught in the short time of this operation should cause concern, not only because of the lack of peoples thought for their own safety, but for others that may become embroiled in the problems that the lawbreakers actions could cause. P.S. We cannot bring the rule of law down to the basics of who causes the most damage (that is already reflected in the scale of punishments) because if we did then the tin of value beans that you steal from Tesco causes no harm (except to your stomach) and as such should be ignored. Oh by the way our home brand standard beans are as good as Heinz IMHO.
Being only a mere Shopworker I may have missed the point of this story, but I thought it was about the number of people caught breaking the law, not about who causes the most damage, the amount of money raised, or whether car/van/bus/taxi/cyc le road users break the most laws. The number of people caught in the short time of this operation should cause concern, not only because of the lack of peoples thought for their own safety, but for others that may become embroiled in the problems that the lawbreakers actions could cause. P.S. We cannot bring the rule of law down to the basics of who causes the most damage (that is already reflected in the scale of punishments) because if we did then the tin of value beans that you steal from Tesco causes no harm (except to your stomach) and as such should be ignored. Oh by the way our home brand standard beans are as good as Heinz IMHO. John Wilson Oxford
  • Score: -286

9:57am Thu 7 Nov 13

Simon33 says...

Let off if they produce a receipt?

Why not let off if they show some working lights fixed to their bike?
Let off if they produce a receipt? Why not let off if they show some working lights fixed to their bike? Simon33
  • Score: -82

12:14pm Thu 7 Nov 13

Ian Perry says...

How many motorists with defective lights have the police stopped in the past year?
How many motorists with defective lights have the police stopped in the past year? Ian Perry
  • Score: 8

5:22pm Thu 7 Nov 13

colinharry says...

Ian Perry wrote:
How many motorists with defective lights have the police stopped in the past year?
I would guess countrywide......THO
USANDS ......and those motorists wouldnt get let of either ;)
[quote][p][bold]Ian Perry[/bold] wrote: How many motorists with defective lights have the police stopped in the past year?[/p][/quote]I would guess countrywide......THO USANDS ......and those motorists wouldnt get let of either ;) colinharry
  • Score: -183

6:23pm Thu 7 Nov 13

grandconjuration says...

colinharry wrote:
Ian Perry wrote:
How many motorists with defective lights have the police stopped in the past year?
I would guess countrywide......THO

USANDS ......and those motorists wouldnt get let of either ;)
Do you actually believe the rubbish you type?
[quote][p][bold]colinharry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ian Perry[/bold] wrote: How many motorists with defective lights have the police stopped in the past year?[/p][/quote]I would guess countrywide......THO USANDS ......and those motorists wouldnt get let of either ;)[/p][/quote]Do you actually believe the rubbish you type? grandconjuration
  • Score: 61

10:41pm Thu 7 Nov 13

JacobS says...

Is there any empirical evidence that putting lights on cycles actually makes cyclists any safer? In urban areas, I doubt whether it makes much difference. www.abc.net.au/catal
yst/stories/3857163.
htm
Is there any empirical evidence that putting lights on cycles actually makes cyclists any safer? In urban areas, I doubt whether it makes much difference. www.abc.net.au/catal yst/stories/3857163. htm JacobS
  • Score: 4

6:51am Fri 8 Nov 13

LetsBeRational says...

JacobS wrote:
Is there any empirical evidence that putting lights on cycles actually makes cyclists any safer? In urban areas, I doubt whether it makes much difference. www.abc.net.au/catal yst/stories/3857163. htm
If you drive at night, with other vehicles coming towards you on the other side of the road, and orange street lights creating a glare then having lights makes a cyclist stand out.

But a cyclist dressed in black with no lights is often only visable when they break the line of sight of other lights. As a cyclist, as well as a driver, I want to be as visable as early as possible so the driver can plan to go around me safely.
[quote][p][bold]JacobS[/bold] wrote: Is there any empirical evidence that putting lights on cycles actually makes cyclists any safer? In urban areas, I doubt whether it makes much difference. www.abc.net.au/catal yst/stories/3857163. htm[/p][/quote]If you drive at night, with other vehicles coming towards you on the other side of the road, and orange street lights creating a glare then having lights makes a cyclist stand out. But a cyclist dressed in black with no lights is often only visable when they break the line of sight of other lights. As a cyclist, as well as a driver, I want to be as visable as early as possible so the driver can plan to go around me safely. LetsBeRational
  • Score: 7

2:20pm Fri 8 Nov 13

dhomer says...

fishstew wrote:
This is a waste of time if they can "buy lights" to avoid a fine.. and get a refund the next day.

This should be treated like if a driver has no insurance. if they have no lights or run red lights they should have their bikes seized. no buts no excuses there are far too many rouge cyclists out there who dont think traffic laws apply to them. which in turn gives all cyclists a bad name esp ones who do bother to obey the traffic laws
Your lack of tolerance is disturbing. In a car your lights are fixed and available permanently on a bike someone could have easily have gone to work when the clocks changed and got caught short.

I think this is a pretty balanced approach to get people to use lights.

Also I'm not sure what a rouge cyclist is? Someone with red makeup perhaps.
[quote][p][bold]fishstew[/bold] wrote: This is a waste of time if they can "buy lights" to avoid a fine.. and get a refund the next day. This should be treated like if a driver has no insurance. if they have no lights or run red lights they should have their bikes seized. no buts no excuses there are far too many rouge cyclists out there who dont think traffic laws apply to them. which in turn gives all cyclists a bad name esp ones who do bother to obey the traffic laws[/p][/quote]Your lack of tolerance is disturbing. In a car your lights are fixed and available permanently on a bike someone could have easily have gone to work when the clocks changed and got caught short. I think this is a pretty balanced approach to get people to use lights. Also I'm not sure what a rouge cyclist is? Someone with red makeup perhaps. dhomer
  • Score: 8

11:49am Wed 13 Nov 13

Spollock says...

TIP ONE

How to get people to comment on your site:

1. Write an article about cyclists.

See you next time guys for TIP TWO.
TIP ONE How to get people to comment on your site: 1. Write an article about cyclists. See you next time guys for TIP TWO. Spollock
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree