"A POSTER boy for cycling in the Capital has a lodged a complaint with a police watchdog after two officers allegedly tried to slap him with a fine – for riding on a bike path."
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
Cyclist threatened with fine for riding on bike path
(35 posts)-
Posted 9 years ago #
-
predictable..... http://deceasedcanine.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/when-improving-facilities-for-cyclists.html
still unbearably stupid though
Posted 9 years ago # -
It's laughable that Police Scotland is cracking down on what they think is pavement riding close to a shared path when, the last time I cycled in town, I saw 2 police cars stopped in ASLs. (Different parts of town.)
Frankly, it sounds like they were anti-cyclist and saw a soft target.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Pity Spokes didn't take the opportunity to say 'shared use' is inadequate, poorly signed, and poorly understood. AS this case illustrates only too well, it leads to conflict between users and bad feeling. The council needs to do more than stick up some roundels and assume everyone understands them.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I don't quite see the "conflict between users" in this case, it was a conflict between a person on a bike and a police officer in a car. There are hardly any pedestrians in Seafield Rd. but plenty of aggressively driven lorries on the carriageway, so it seems to me that a shared path makes sense at this specific location and this particular incident is not such a good argument against shared paths. (Acknowledging that a protected bike lane would be feasible here and better, but also considerably more expensive and take much much longer to implement than a shared path).
The second issue in the article is a police officer getting confused and making a mistake, which in itself wouldn't be much of an issue either. Everybody makes mistakes, and if an officers sees something that he thinks is wrong, then I'm quite happy if they talk to the person to clear it up.
The real issue for me is that the officer was allegedly "condescending and confrontational". If she really "barked" something like "Just what do you think you’re doing?", that could be a sign of underlying prejudice, either individual police officers or - worse - institutional prejudice that by default cyclists are law-breaking and don't deserve the same respect as other ordinary members of the public.
See also: https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/hooligans/
Posted 9 years ago # -
What Stephan said ^^^
I was trying to think just what it was I thought was the problem I had with the 'incident' and that sums it up perfectly. Shared use certainly isn't always bad, and I'd agree that this particular path is one such where it makes a lot of sense (though the bit over the bridge could be widened).
Posted 9 years ago # -
this particular incident is not such a good argument against shared paths.
It does, however, demonstrate how they create bad feeling, as SRD suggests. Folk see cycling on a pavement and think there's another cyclist cycling on the pavement.
Of course, policemen/women aren't some sort of special breed and are just as fallible as everyone else.
Posted 9 years ago # -
If the guy had parked a Merc on the path, most likely the polis would have ignored him, and if they had stopped would have called him "sir".
Posted 9 years ago # -
Agree with Stephan on this. Also Ian Maxwell is right - the police ought to be better informed before reprimanding folk.
I've seen plenty of shared use facilities in Germany for example and nobody seems to have a problem with them. They can, and do work well, but junctions need to be properly thought out. Alas the junction at Seafield Street is a bit of a pig's ear!
Posted 9 years ago # -
if they had stopped would have called him "sir".
From my limited experience of dealing with the police, they are an incredibly hierarchical outfit (quasi-military in their dealings with senior officers). I suspect that translates into certain behaviours with the public seen through their own lens of where individuals stand in society...
Posted 9 years ago # -
Probably the best 'shared use' path in the city due to low numbers of pedestrians, wide width and a good onward routes. It's close as makes no difference a 'cycle path'
I just wish one leg (on road, ala London superhighway) continued away down past the garages and through Porty to avoid the sun seekers on nice afternoons. When it's busy it doesn't suit anybody to have the main prom a through route.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"If the guy had parked a Merc on the path, most likely the polis would have ignored him, and if they had stopped would have called him "sir"."
^^^ this
Posted 9 years ago # -
"I just wish one leg (on road, ala London superhighway) continued away down past the garages and through Porty to avoid the sun seekers on nice afternoons. When it's busy it doesn't suit anybody to have the main prom a through route."
Agreed. I contacted our local councillors when the roundabout was removed from outside Porty and replaced with the lights, and there weren't ASLs coming from Seafield or Sir Harry Lauder (or for turning onto either) and was told it was simply because they wanted to discourage people cycling on those roads.
I've been called Sir by the police when on the bike. Shades of grey.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"...they are an incredibly hierarchical outfit (quasi-military in their dealings with senior officers)..."
My dad used to have to deal with polices in a professional capacity and would concur.
At least this incident proves that the police are able to see things happening from their vans, given all the times we've seen police vehicles passing something we would have liked them to have taken more interest in.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I'm sure this isn't the most conflict-prone stretch of pavement, but it's by no means the first time that people have complained about cyclists cycling there and not udnerstood what a shared uase path is (as my blogpost linked to above points out).
I cycled that path a couple of weeks ago with kids, and we met another cyclist going our way - checking out the scenary and slower than our 5yo - and some walkers coming one way, and as we all tried to carefully negotiate our way through a jogger insisted on pushing through us all. I can't help but think that poor signage and poor public understanding leads to uncomfortable situations which don't need to happen.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I've been called Sir by the police when on the bike. Shades of grey.
You probably give off lawyer vibes. I give off worthless peasant vibes.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"You probably give off lawyer vibes"
You take that back!
(not something I think I've ever been accused of. A more common comment is, 'don't take this the wrong way, but you don't seem like a lawyer' - and I most certainly don't take it the wrong way)
Posted 9 years ago # -
Are shared paths such a new concept in the UK that many people don't understand them?
I wouldn't oppose shared path as a matter of principle. Whether they are a good practical solution depends on the locality. How much space is there? How busy is it? How long are we prepared to wait for a path being built?
On the continent, as crowriver said, they are not uncommon. They are not appropriate everywhere but are often the most appropriate solution. Even the Netherlands doesn't have some sort of higher-dimensional alternative space where cycle lanes run uninterrupted without ever crossing pedestrians' paths. You get the occasional "Kampfradler" ("fighter cyclist") but most people on bikes and on foot just get along and ignore each other, people on foot staying on the side and people on bikes slowing down.
Why are attitudes here so much less relaxed and more dogmatic? Some people seem quite determined to ignore the others' needs, with some pedestrians seemingly deliberately trying to obstruct cyclists and some cyclists barrelling along the path expecting people to get out of the way. Is each side trying to assert their exclusive use of the shared path as a "footpath" or "cycle lane"?
Posted 9 years ago # -
I've been called Sir by the police when on the bike.
Personally, I think its less about class, and more about polis reflecting the prevalent societal view that cycling is somehow childish and frivolous, whereas drivers are serious grown-ups going about their serious business.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"Why are attitudes here so much less relaxed and more dogmatic?"
I blame Thatcher (not entirely jokingly).
Posted 9 years ago # -
It reads to me like the police officer was in a stinking bad mood and wanted to take their anger out on someone they perceived as weak and vulnerable.
Posted 9 years ago # -
ENews has sensible comments, occasionally
"
A Friend of Fernando Poo
12:11 PM on 19/05/2016
It would help increase awareness if the police were required to use bicycles for six months before receiving their squad cars.
"
Posted 9 years ago # -
"some pedestrians seemingly deliberately trying to obstruct cyclists"
Oh yes. Had this just the other day. Luckily the weather was nice, the sun was shining, I wasn't in a hurry and was very chilled out about it. Bloomin' dog walkers though... :-)
"I blame Thatcher (not entirely jokingly)."
Certainly some truth in that. "No such thing as society", etc.
"the prevalent societal view that cycling is somehow childish and frivolous, whereas drivers are serious grown-ups going about their serious business."
Indeed.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Many many years ago, when every green space was filled with No Cycling signs, I was illegally riding through Inverleith Park on my way to work at the Western General.
Park policeman tried to stop me.
He was on foot, I was on wheels. I did a getaway and was not apprehended.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Why are attitudes here so much less relaxed and more dogmatic? Some people seem quite determined to ignore the others' needs, with some pedestrians seemingly deliberately trying to obstruct cyclists and some cyclists barrelling along the path expecting people to get out of the way. Is each side trying to assert their exclusive use of the shared path as a "footpath" or "cycle lane"?
I don't know what the answer to that is, but I do think you are dead right about this. There is something in British culture which does not seem to understand the concept of shared space. Without wishing to spark another argument I think we even see the attitude reflected on here and other forums where the idea that the more vulnerable user has priority translates into "the more vulnerable user can do exactly as they like and completely ignore anyone they perceive as less vulnerable." That, to me, is not 'sharing' the space. But perhaps that is an argument for another thread. But I think that the attitude that, one person has (for whatever reason) the right to complete use of a public area at the expense of others, is a real bane in this country. People in other countries seem to just rub along together.
Posted 9 years ago # -
the other day, I was opposite the new park on the canal (in front of the Napier housing), enjoying the sun. Park was fairly busy, as was canalpath. Two young women were coming along with several kids between them (not of the bourgeois Brunstfield sort) and a half loaf of bread to feed the ducks. Kids were larking about, doing no harm, but pretty oblivious. At least 2 of them were under-school age, the others maybe P1, P2 at most. I watched a cyclist slow down and navigate around them with absolute delicacy and no indication to the kids that they were doing anything at all wrong. Then heard one of the young women call to the other 'hey, that cyclist, he nearly ran her down'.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Blaming Thatcher for mouth-breather pedestrians' inability to comprehend blue pictorial roundels? Or bikes painted on the tarmac? Sheesh.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Not the most ridiculous thing I've heard...
Posted 9 years ago # -
There is a "me me me"attitude prevalent in the UK that is not prevalent on the continent. That must have come from somewhere.
Of course in the UK, a lot of people are taught that as children they can run around and do whatever they like and anyone who tries to stop them should be met with threats and aggression from the parent*. Then those children grow up and are handed
sweetie wrappersdriving licences although as we all know, that air of entitlement transfers to bicycle riding and walking too.I am sure there was a thread on here that discussed the behaviour of children in French and German restaurants as opposed to here but I can't find it.
* this is of course a generalisation and the lovely parents here will know better than me how some of their childrens friends are allowed to behave!
Posted 9 years ago # -
"Blaming Thatcher for mouth-breather pedestrians' inability to comprehend blue pictorial roundels? Or bikes painted on the tarmac? Sheesh."
Not quite, more blaming her (and her government, and the drive for uber capitalism for....
"... a "me me me"attitude prevalent in the UK that is not prevalent on the continent"
Hmmm. crowriver and I pretty much agreed on something, can someone check on the temperature in hell? ;)
"some pedestrians seemingly deliberately trying to obstruct cyclists"
Like kids on roads with cars?
Posted 9 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
