Forum menu
SECTION 44 OF THE TERRORISM ACT 2000. End of.
Let's take 2008-2009.
Section 44's invoked about 200,000 - 250,000 in that one year.
That's a lot of terrorists the coppers were putting the dabs on. Any coppers in here? - They will back me up. Hundreds, indeed, hundreds of thousands of kiddy killing, walking suicide bombers stopped.
Like Mr Wolfgang. Link
If we allow MPs to make badly formed laws, the Police WILL use them. They will use what they can, when they can - I'm not having a dig - they don't like ambiguous, interpretive legislation but if they are given an omni-law, they will use it.
See this link for the ****ing ludicrous use of the above laws: Linky
What I have no sympathy for is the blatant criminal damage which occurs hand in hand with travellers setting up on private land.
I think you will find it's the settled community taking the opportunity to dump waste, cause criminal damage, and go to the toilet in the open and blame the traveling community for it.
I think you will find it’s the settled community taking the opportunity to dump waste, cause criminal damage, and go to the toilet in the open and blame the traveling community for it.
Yeah I just can't wait for travellers to show up so I can indulge my public toileting fetish 😀
For everyone that's digressing into a discussion about travellers there's a new thread for you here...
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-travelling-community-and-the-new-bill/
Keep this one to a discussion about footpaths and the new Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021.
To the OP that asked what type of footpath. Presumably this Bill could equally apply to both dotted OS lines and footpaths next to road, i.e. 'sidewalks'.
Those who say no it won't have the potential to criminalise cyclists on both the above categories, i.e. dotted lines and pavement type footpaths can you clarify why this is? I'm still unclear.
I’m still unclear.
There's a specific offence of cycling on a footway attached to a carriageway (sidewalk) already, as opposed to cycling on a footpath (perhaps across a field or moor) , which is a trespass against the landowner.
OK, so focusing on OS dotted line footpaths, the breach of civil law null and voids any breach of criminal law, specifically with regards to cycling on the footpath?
Unless I'm very much mistaken this is the bit you're getting hett up about re trespass. It's not about trespass.
The green paper if you're interested enough
This is probably me being thick but how, as a random cyclist, would I get arrested? If A landowner or someone tells me to get off their land I’ll just cycle off. It’s not like I’m going to stop and offer them my details. What are they going to tell the police? “A bald man with a beard was cycling here” good luck with that being followed up.
Will they add footpath ranger to the police. Bobbies in bushes has got a nice ring to it.
OK, so focusing on OS dotted line footpaths, the breach of civil law null and voids any breach of criminal law, specifically with regards to cycling on the footpath?
Cycling on a footpath (your green dotted line) is not illegal if it's away from a carriageway.
If there's a green dotted line o a map, next to a road, which has a defined footway on it, is illegal (in some circumstances).
This is probably me being thick but how, as a random cyclist, would I get arrested? If A landowner or someone tells me to get off their land I’ll just cycle off.
If the landowner had a particular grudge against cyclists and so set up a camera trap that over a period of a few weeks showed systematic use of a footpath by a cyclist will this new Bill provide them with ammo to provide the police with video/photographic evidence who can then launch criminal proceedings against the cyclist. This is what I want to know.
dangeourbrain
Full Memberthis is the bit you’re getting hett up about
Not sure why you need to be condescending however cheers for the links.
This is important to many people on this forum, not all because I know many of you aren't keen cyclists, but the new Bill could affect many otherwise law abiding cyclists who need to use a path to avoid certain roads. This topic could easily be lost amongst all the other issues being raised by the Bill so each issue needs to be raised separately.
@Jimdoubleyou There's no present tense involved with this issue. The Bill has not been passed yet.
@Jimdoubleyou There’s no present tense involved with this issue. The Bill has not been passed yet.
Nothing I've written about the difference between footpaths and footways is changed by the bill...
If the landowner had a particular grudge against cyclists and so set up a camera trap that over a period of a few weeks showed systematic use of a footpath by a cyclist will this new Bill provide them with ammo to provide the police with video/photographic evidence who can then launch criminal proceedings against the cyclist. This is what I want to know.
They’d still need to spend considerable money and resources finding out who the cyclist is though. I can’t imagine the police have either going spare to warrant following up.
OK, so focusing on OS dotted line footpaths
You state if challenged " I believe that higher rights exist for this public right of way and I will continue to exercise them until settled at a public inquiry" and if you feel the need "I will ensure that a claim for these rights exists and support it at the public inquiry or will make sure on is lodged with the relevant authorities with urgency"
If you honestly think that money and influence can’t buy you a more favourable version of the law in this country, then you are living in la-la land.
Ive seen this applied in cases of drink driving. A flat refusal to take a breath test will result in a conviction, but not one of actually being over the limit.