Skip to main content

Policing the roads - Bike Safe

I spent a rather enjoyable Sunday riding around with the Surrey motorcycle police as part of the Bike Safe programme that many police forces run across the country.

I can only imagine the confusion that some motorists must have felt seeing me fly past both them and a fully marked police rider as we practised overtaking.  I even felt a bit sorry for one silly sod who seemed barely able to ride a motorbike and found himself and his expired tax disc in the middle of a big group of policemen.

The day was good fun despite the early tellings off from the officer observing me to stop speeding - both I and the other rider who spent the day with us found it very difficult to keep the bikes at low speeds especially on the more open roads - and generally doing things that we all do everyday in London, but which are not seen so often on rural Surrey roads.

I learnt quite a lot from the day and would definitely recommend it to anybody else who rides a motorbike and who would like a few tips on improving their riding ability.

The officer I spent the day with made some interesting points about how they police the roads.  In particular, he emphasised that if you want to go speeding around the back roads where the national speed limit applies then they police won't be very interested, although if it goes wrong you'll end up in a pond or in a tree.  But, they pay particularly close attention to speeding in the 30 and 40 limits - generally anywhere you might come into conflict with more vulnerable road users.

Comments

  1. By 'low speeds' I presume that you mean 'legal speeds'?

    See you in court - one way or another.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BS could you just lay off motorists and motorcyclists for once, and concentrate on locking up scroats and other professional thieves and robbers ?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I reckon motorists and motorcyclists (surely the same thing?) will be 'laid off' once they realise that the laws apply to them just as much as they apply to professional thieves and robbers.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bystander, yes I do mean legal speeds, that's why the officer kept telling me off ;) The PC wanted us to be dead on the speed limit rather than going a few MPH over the posted limit, which is actually how most riders I've come across were taught to ride! I remember being told to sit at 3 or 4MPH above the speed limit when I took the test as the examiner would prefer to see you do that than go to slowly!

    The roads we were on are very different to those I normally ride and I did find being on a big open country road with a speed limit of 30MPH (even 20MPH on some) to be quite difficult. I'm sure it's psychological but the bike does feel like it wants to speed up and it's a battle to keep it down. I'm sure that if I rode that sort of road more often I'd get used to it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ched Evans

Before I begin, I will say that at around 4,500 words this is probably the longest blog I’ve ever posted but I think it’s all necessary to set the scene for this case and explain the background that has been largely ignored or airbrushed in the press. Despite its length, I have not attempted to include every little detail of either fact or law but have done my best to provide a balanced picture of the Ched Evans case, what happened and why the courts reached the decisions they did. There has been so much written about the Ched Evans case over the past weekend, much of it based on a very shaky grasp of the facts and law, that I decided I would read up about the case and weigh in (hopefully on a slightly firmer footing than most of the articles I’ve read so far).

Broadly speaking there seem to be three groups who have opinions on the case:
1.Sexual violence groups (including people describing themselves as “radical feminists”) who appear to take the view that the case is awful, the Court o…

How do the police decide whether to charge a suspect?

A question I’m often asked by clients (and in a roundabout way by people arriving at this blog using searches that ask the question in a variety of ways), is “how do the police decide whether to charge or take no further action (NFA)?”
What are the options?
Let’s have a quick think about what options are available to the police at the end of an investigation.
First, they can charge or report you for summons to attend court.  Charging means that you are given police bail and are required to attend court in person.  A summons is an order from the court for you to attend or for you to send a solicitor on your behalf.  In many cases where a person is summonsed, the court will allow you the option of entering a plea by post.
Second, you may be given a caution.  These can be a simple caution, which on the face of it is a warning not to be naughty in future, or it can be a conditional caution.  Conditions could include a requirement to pay for the cost of damage or compensation, etc.  Either…

Bid to prevent defendants knowing who accuses them of a crime

When I read The Trial by Kafka and Nineteen Eighty-Four by Orwell, I took them as warnings of how a bad justice system wrecks lives of those caught up in it. Sadly, some Members of Parliament and the House of Lords seem to view the books more as a guide to how they would like our Criminal Justice System to run. Today, I read of plans to hide the names of accusers and witnesses from defendants in a large number of cases. Victims of sexual offences, such as rape, have had the right to lifelong anonymity for many years now. This means that it is a criminal offence to publish information that will lead to a complainant being identified. A Bill currently being considered by Parliament would extend that anonymity to bar defendants and their lawyers knowing the name of the person accusing them. This would apply not only in sexual offences, as has been reported in the press, but also in violent offences.
The anonymity currently offered to victims of sexual offences is not total, the complainant…