People attempting to promote cycling in a positive light, decide that exercising their rights and standing up against the machine of authority, while in possession of "bust cards", with legal advisers present, having revised their rights beforehand... is more important than promoting cycling in a positive light.How bizarre.
To wit,
Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you have to do it.
I was leaving the Olympics the other day and was told to avoid Stratford station. Now, I could have thought "well, it's my right to use Stratford station, I always use it!" and turned up anyway. I'd have ended up queuing for hours as it was mobbed, so I figured an alternate route would be a good move.
CM were asked to avoid an area. They could've ridden, just once, anywhere else in the country. It's a relatively big place. Yet they chose to avoid the request and turn up en masse in the one place they were asked not to, and then were, what, surprised when the police reacted to suddenly finding a pack of a couple of hundred cyclists descending on them?
Why? Why would they do that? Why would anyone [i]want [/i]to do that? Christ, Wolfie Smith civil liberties aside, is the fact that there's a huge event going on not reason enough to steer clear?
There's only one reason which makes any sense, other than an underactive critical thinking gland. They wanted attention, they wanted to cause a fuss. Be careful what you wish for.
The police ruling was a 'request', not an order.
Hmm, since it was a condition imposed, in writing, under the auspices of the public order act, I, frankly, don't believe you
[img] 
[/img]
From what i've heard, those who attended the ride did not see why they should obey what they believed to be an unreasonable request.
Irrelevant if it was reasonable or not, it was a lawfully imposed condition, therefore you follow it - if you choose not to, then you accept the responsibility for knowingly breaking the law, and the subsequent consequences.
Now now Z-11! Now that Mikes effectively outlawed opposing or contrasting opinions, don't be going chucking uncomfortable things like 'facts' into the mix
it was a lawfully imposed condition, therefore you follow it - if you choose not to, then you accept the responsibility for knowingly breaking the law, and the subsequent consequences.
I would imaging CM, if our spokesperson is anything to go by, would struggle with the concept of responsibilities. Its [i]rights[/i] they're concerned with. They're quite keen on stressing their [i]right[/i] to go where they want, when they want. Though they seem less keen on other peoples [i]right[/i] to do the same
Careful Binners - they've actually very keen to support other peoples right to do the same, as long as they agree with them, its just people with opposing or distateful opinions like the EDL that shouldn't have the right to hold a public procession when they want and where they want.
I don't know if you notices in the letter above, but its quite interesting that the police did not choose to treat the procession as a protest, as CM had originally claimed, nor did they only 'request' that they did not go north of the river - in fact they quite specifically prohibited them from doing so as a condition under S12 of the act, and made it [b]absolutley[/b] clear that if they chose to ignore this condition, then they may be arrested.
all of which seems to [b]completley[/b] contradict the claims made by Mike Connor on here, and that were made by CM on various Social media outlets and in the Guardian after the event...
Funny that, isn't it 🙄
Interesting document that.
Not only does it show that on the whole the CM defenders are talking total rot most of the time.
But more importantly, if CM are this leaderless bunch of free spirits, with no organisation or structure, then who the hell was that document sent to ?
Do they stop people with bikes in the street randomly and hand them out ?
Do they attach them to bikes parked in the street in the hope that CM "members" stumble access one.
Or do they send it to the person in charge of CM, as I suspect ?
this is a fun thread 😆
I'm sorry but mikeconnor has to be a fake, bless his flat pedals. Anyone who can get Z-11, my favourite crazed Genghis Khan-a-like and binners, self confessed northern waterphobic oddity, plus CFH, the forums very own Mycroft Holmes and the well balanced and handsome crikey all on the same side has to be a construct...
This is a fun thread
Not as much fun as those fireworks at the Olympic Ceremony though.
It's a shame that 180 dedicated firework fans missed out on them really
😉
who the hell was that document sent to
I'm reliably informed that they handed copies out to all attendees at the start of the procession 8)
The Black Knight - a man of redoubtable tenacity.
Well that was a good read.
After reading every page it's quite simple to sum up in my mind really.
Bunch of belligerent folk want to uphold some notion of 'rights' in order to cause a fuss and antagonise for the pure sake of it when they could have just gone somewhere else for one night and avoided a rather nasty and needless confrontation.
This argument has gone round so many times it's become a spiral.
The two sides of this will never agree. It's possible to suggest that the conditions created by the indifference and prejudice of one side are forming the basis of the protest of the other side. You have to look fairly deeply I grant you. 🙂
Which is nice and circular. I like it tidy.
Sorry, I decidedit was too nice a day to waste arguing on here again, so i went out for a bike ride and a swim. I see some of you just stayed on here arguing.
As for that PO Section 12 'order'; it's simply a joke that that's all the police can come up with to try to prevent a group of cyclists riding their bikes on public roads. I'm not even going to bother trying to explain why, as anyone with any real knowledge of the Law will know that Section 12 is a flimsy virtually unenforceable piece of flimsy legislation at best, and in fact detrimental to Law and Order at worst.
This is an interesting piece on it:
last year, in may, the metropolitan police lost an appeal in the high court which finally established that the mass is a 'commonly or customarily held procession' as described in the public order act, and so, exempt from prior notification as required by section 11 of that act. however, this does not exempt it from possible use of section 12 or (theoretically) 13.section 13 allows the possibility of a ban (signed by the secretary of state) where police can show a real risk of serious disorder - highly improbable for CM.
however, section 12, allowing the imposition of conditions, has a lower threshold, including the slightly open "risk of serious disruption to the life of the community", and this is what was used on friday.
in order to comply with human rights legislation, it is important that any conditions applied are proportionate and necessary.
since the police have shown themselves keen to control the critical mass previously, the fact that they haven't used section 12 before would suggest they were not over-optimistic about its likelihood of being upheld in the courts.
however, with the "special circumstances" of the olympics, they might have a stronger case for this particular ride. but conditions banning the ride from the whole of north london and beyond would seem to be quite an excessive interpretation of "proportionate or necessary" and might form the basis of a legal challenge for the cyclists detained on friday if they face court or later decide to challenge the police via compensation claims or judicial reviews later on.
also, given that the ride always takes place on the last friday of the month means that the police had five years to plan for this, and yet the letter handed out to cyclists gave no detail on how the police had arrived at the belief there would be serious disruption.
when the law was drafted, there were concerns and warnings that the new extension of power should be used carefully and that the police should weigh up whether by imposing conditions based on avoiding serious disruption, they might be causing a more serious problem of serious disorder in response to their actions. this may well have been the case on friday, both because the police caused far more disruption to the community themselves by closing off london bridges to all traffic for significant periods of time, and also because their actions significantly increased the incidents of scuffles and other disorder throughout the evening (unlikely to have occured had the mass gone ahead as normal).
the kettling of cyclists without food or water, their prolonged detention in handcuffs aboard the buses without toilet facilities, and further detention on concrete floors with little or no food or water, were all serious contraventions of the authorities' duty of care.
section 12 of the public order act used to be a 'non-arrestable' offence, only requiring a verified name and address for delivery of a fine. in 2005, the SOCPA act made most offences arrestable under certain prescribed conditions, and the one given to suspects on friday/saturday was "in order to allow the prompt and efficient investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question". however, no-one has reported being interviewed, so it is very hard to see what "investigation" the police carried out before releasing people, and this alone may be grounds for challenge and compensation.
as of sunday night, only three people have actually been charged with offences.
http://london.indymedia.org/articles/12612
I myself have been threatened with arrest under Section 12. As I stated earlier, I simply ignored the threat, explained to the officer why they had no real power to arrest me for such an 'offence', and went about my business. I was not arrested. Probably because the officer threatening me knew that he'd never be able to justify the arrest if it ever came to court.
I'll leave to to you lot to figure out why this 'order' was invalid, and obviously unenforceable, given that all but three people have actually been charged. I'd be surprised if the CPS bothered to pursue the matter.
During my bike ride earlier, I reflected on the fact that in situations like this some people will be forever opposed no matter how much you try to explain things. And that some people really need the internet to vent their own anger and frustrations, and will always look for what they consider to be 'easy targets'. The forum behaviour of certain individuals suggests that some really need to get out/laid more and relax a bit about things. Here we are, arguing quite needlessly about something we should instead be working together to find better solutions.
I look forward to meeting those who have an open mind and wish to find out things for themselves, on the next ride. 24th August, 6pm, by Waterloo Bridge/South Bank. See you there!
Ima gonna call you Che connor from now on, have you got a range of iconic posters I can buy for my bedroom wall?
CTC rides never seem to have these sort of problems.
Sorry, I decidedit was too nice a day to waste arguing on here again, so i went out for a bike ride and a swim. I see some of you just stayed on here arguing.
Bet ya didn't!
Ima gonna call you Che connor from now on, have you got a range of iconic posters I can buy for my bedroom wall?
ha ha! Why, do you need to frighten burlgars away?
CTC rides never seem to have these sort of problems.
Interestingly enough, nor do the Sky Rides.
Or the Tweed Run. Or the WNBR. Etc. Etc. Etc.
It's almost as if some of those rides really are a celebration of cycling.
And, in the words of Sesame Street....One of these rides is not like the others, one of these rides is not quite the same.....Can you guess which it is, kids?
No Che, because you can lead us on to a better tomorrow.
Perhaps.
With your flat pedals.
and your amazingly organized not-organized-at-all fellow cycling celebrants.
I love how you stick it to the man, how you make people sit up and think, but most of all how you smell...
Sorry, I decidedit was too nice a day to waste arguing on here again, so i went out for a bike ride and a swim. I see some of you just stayed on here arguing.
You don't see any irony at all in this statement?
some people will be forever opposed no matter how much you try to explain things.
For all this 'explaining' you claim you keep doing, you've still not answered my question. Is it a secret or something?
Interestingly enough, nor do the Sky Rides.
Strange, because I have seen confrontations between drivers and cyclists on Sky Rides. In fact, you get a high number of very inexperienced cyclists causing all sorts of problems on those rides. Maybe they should all stay at home instead?
And the Tweed run; is that the one with blokes with big moustaches and pipes on penny farthings and the like? Because I once saw a bit of a scene with some of them and a taxi, near St Pauls I think it was. Mayb e they're all confrontational asshats?
And if you actually attendee CM rides, you'd know that there is seldom any trouble. Which is why normally there are hardly any police in attendance.
Interesting how you can twist things to suit your own narrow view, isn't it?
but most of all how you smell...
It's the garlic. My girlfiend both loves and loathes it in equal measure!
[i]My girl[u]fiend[/u][/i]
Steady on lad, don't be insulting her until you're sure she's the one.
Have you got a straggly beard; it'd look better on the posters..
I myself have been threatened with arrest under Section 12. As I stated earlier, I simply ignored the threat, explained to the officer why they had no real power to arrest me for such an 'offence', and went about my business.
Must be interesting business to even come across a police officer let alone be threatened with arrest under section 12.
I'll leave to to you lot to figure out why this 'order' was invalid, and obviously unenforceable, given that all but three people have actually been charged.
I'll leave that to Metropolitan Police, CPS, and magistrates court to decide.
I reflected on the fact that in situations like this some people will be forever opposed
Challenging people's opinions simply polarises those opinions.
Most of my friends vote the other way. Every time they argue with me, it doesn't sway me to think "hmmm yeah see their point, maybe I'll vote that way next time".
(Actually I vote tactically, but they vote for the 1 party I'll never vote for, unless BNP are a genuine contender, but that's another story).
Strange, because I have seen confrontations between drivers and cyclists on Sky Rides.
Thought they were traffic free rides? ❓ 😕
Thought they were traffic free rides?
They stare at each other, across the boundary, hard.
Thought they were traffic free rides?
I have seen groups of cyclists with skyride tabards on numerous public roads. I don't know if they are part of the official route, but many of those cyclists seemed inexperienced and inept at riding on roads with traffic.
My girlfiend
I had to look hard to spot what was wrong there!
Have you got a beret?
I bet t'other half has; see if you can borrow it for the poster pic.
Have you got a beret?
No but i have got a bucket hat. Or at least I did have, until she stole it!
many of those cyclists seemed inexperienced and inept at riding on roads with traffic.
How DARE they take part in an event specifically intended to help them gain confidence and enjoy riding. HOW VERY DARE THEY!
😕
People riding in Sky Ride tabbards! Just a thought Mike, but if I put a United replica shirt on, it doesn't mean I'll be jogging onto the old Trafford pitch next to Wayne Rooney when the season starts.
Anyway.... Have you got any pithy and defiant quotes you'd like to go on the t shirts? I thought the classic Che pose, with you staring ruggedly into the middle distance.
Incidentally, our cats called Che Guevara! We could have a picture of you holding him, with your top off for the posters. In high contrast black and white? Or Is that a bit 80's Athena?
How DARE they take part in an event specifically intended to help them gain confidence and enjoy riding. HOW VERY DARE THEY!
Calm down. It was an observation, not a criticism. And proof that your statement was incorrect, in my experience.
Or Is that a bit 80's Athena?
I don't think a poster of me in a short tennis dress, scratching my bare arse would sell very well. Although it might, who knows?
DNR.
our cats called Che Guevara!
that's the second time you've mentioned that. try-hard. 😆
anyway, i'm a long way from the action, down here in the sunny south west. i live in a 'city' but we're still busy tying to get electricity and the wonder of TV. you'd be amazed how much effort i have to go to, to post this.
CM appears designed to shape opinion. i heard of it years ago and thought 'that sounds kinda cool'. sorry. not any more. my opinion has been shaped by these events and the reports thereof.
sorry i can't investigate in person but as it goes flights to syria are thin on the ground too.
as stated very early in the thread ( we're quiet at the mo, what can i tell you? ), we should be natural allies ripe for the picking on here, but like the sticker says 'just because i ride a bicycle, doesn't make us friends'.
if CM cannot police itself it will be policed by outside agencies as you have found.
you 'campaign' for cyclists. so does the CTC. you've reminded me i need to renew my subscription to an organisation that actually achieves positive results for cyclist's benefit in this country.
cheers!
