http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/transport/drunk-cyclists-face-charges-1-2290664
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
SEVEN cyclists were charged with riding a bike while drunk.....
(19 posts)-
Posted 12 years ago #
-
"The unit has covered thousands of miles of patrols in the Meadows, Morningside, Southside and Newington areas."
Must be on unmarked bikes - or after dark.
(Or maybe just when I'm not around?)
Posted 12 years ago # -
"The unit has covered thousands of miles of patrols in the Meadows, Morningside, Southside and Newington areas."
Pity they are not patrolling Easter Road and Leith Walk area. The high incidence of neds on BMX/MTBs (with saddles too low) careering downhill on the pavement means you really need to keep your wits about you.
Then again, I suppose nobody bothers to complain to the police about it...
Posted 12 years ago # -
I didn't know there was an offence of being drunk on a bike.
Furious riding perhaps…
Posted 12 years ago # -
"Drunk in charge of a bicycle" I believe is the offence?
Posted 12 years ago # -
Good.
Posted 12 years ago # -
MMhh I would think that 7 drunk folk on a bike would attract some attention ! :0)
Posted 12 years ago # -
Jings. I hope they don't start that around here of a Thursday. I'd never get home in time for This Week if I had to walk.
Posted 12 years ago # -
They can't be trying very hard. If you just stopped ten cyclists in the Meadows at a certain time of night, at least seven will have had a drink...
Posted 12 years ago # -
As I understand it you have to be visible impaired by alcohol - there's no limit to be breathalysed against. I'm pretty sure the offence is also valid if you're walking your bike next to you as you're still in charge of it.
All rather odd.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I heavily suspect that it's one of those offences that you only ever get charged for if you're cheeky to the cop.
@Darkerside I Googled briefly, and in England there was a judge who declared the notion that there be any legal difference between a person pushing a bike and just walking to be silly and tossed out a case on that basis. Dunno what that means for up here.
Seems pretty vulnerable to a defence of "the officer misjudged how impaired I was, because I was not unfit to ride, so there." Not that I'm condoning drunk riding, but I suspect the likes of Danny McAskil can sink half a dozen pints and still handle a bike more competently than me when stone cold sober.
Posted 12 years ago # -
@Darkerside - yip, no specific limit when it comes to cycling, it's all in the opinion of the particular cop. Not sure about the 'walking next to your bike' thing... An ex of mine used to be convinced that you could get done for drink driving if you had your car keys in your pocket while out in the pub.
@Uberuce, I think that walking case was one where a guy was pushing a bike over a zebra crossing and a driver hit him, then tried to argue that he shouldn't have been on the zebra crossing because he had a bike (I'm still uncertain how that justifies omwing the cyclist down but there you go). The judge applied rigourous common sense, which was nice to see.
Posted 12 years ago # -
@anth @uberuce ah. good to know where that comes from. had a woman yell abuse at me the other day as I walked the bike across Leven Street/GP intersection.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Here you go SRD, from an excellent BikeHub cycling and the law page:
"Don’t fall for the piffle that you have to carry a bicycle when on a footway or pedestrian crossing. Anyone pushing a bicycle is a “foot-passenger” (Crank v Brooks [1980] RTR 441) and is not “riding” it (Selby). In his judgment in the Court of Appeal in Crank v Brooks, Waller LJ said: “In my judgment a person who is walking across a pedestrian crossing pushing a bicycle, having started on the pavement on one side on her feet and not on the bicycle, and going across pushing the bicycle with both feet on the ground so to speak is clearly a ‘foot passenger’. If for example she had been using it as a scooter by having one foot on the pedal and pushing herself along, she would not have been a ‘foot passenger’. But the fact that she had the bicycle in her hand and was walking does not create any difference from a case where she is walking without a bicycle in her hand.”"
Posted 12 years ago # -
That's what my Googling got me, yarp.
Posted 12 years ago # -
"Crank v Brooks"
Excellent
Posted 12 years ago # -
Good.
Agree.
Is it just an offence to cycle / be in charge of bicycle when drunk if you are on the road? I.E. are you allowed to be one of the no-lights, 3-sheets-to-the-wind late night / early morning Meadows cyclists?
Posted 12 years ago # -
The BikeHub article quotes the law thusly:
Section 30 Road Traffic Act 1988 says: "It is an offence for a person to ride a cycle on a road or other public place when unfit to ride through drink or drugs - that is to say - is under the influence of a drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the cycle.In Scotland a PC may arrest without warrant a person committing an offence under this section. There is no obligation for a cyclist to submit to a blood or urine alcohol test.
Edit - looks like they took it direct from here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52
Posted 12 years ago # -
Probably a good thing - I got stopped after "cutting a red light too close" after work drinks one night (end of the meadows by the old Dick Vets - didn't slow down as could see road was clear and knew that the light would be going to green about 0.1 seconds after I passed the front of the ASZ - probably a bit cheeky). Three cops stopped me and asked whether I knew why they'd stopped me I knew why - then proceeded to tell me that operating a bike after drinking is illegal but because I was wearing a light shirt, had a helmet and lights they'd let me off.
All rather confusing.
Posted 12 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
