Met Police stopping cyclists without helmets!

Home Forum Bike Forum Met Police stopping cyclists without helmets!

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 123 total)
  • Met Police stopping cyclists without helmets!
  • Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    Another sad step to helmet compulsion.

    The Met are apparently stopping cyclists who are not wearing helmets to offer them “education and advice”:

    http://road.cc/content/news/99098-london-police-stopping-cyclists-without-helmets-advice-education-exercise

    A worthy exercise or a complete waste of resources that could have been spent tackling road users who were actually doing something illegal!

    .

    (Note: Let’s not get into yet another helmet debate – I think we’ve established that the majority of people on here are anti-compulsion/pro-choice, regardless of whether or not they always wear one themselves)

    29erKeith
    Member

    I hope they’re stopping any drivers not in an NCAP 5* rated car too, and recommending they upgrade their cars as they’re putting themselves at risk ๐Ÿ™„

    I do always wear a helmet though, for all the good it’ll do me in a lot of accidents, I do believe it will help in others, but each to their own ๐Ÿ˜€

    [Edit]oh and to answer your question, imo a waste of time[\Edit]

    Premier Icon nedrapier
    Subscriber

    Some good stats, clouded by overempahsis on the same old boring helmet/hivis compulsion thing.

    Scotland Yard said that the intention was not enforcement and when asked if, for example, a cyclist riding through a red light would be issued a fixed penalty notice, said that no fixed penalty notices had been issued to cyclists.

    police at one location have stopped 20 HGVs and found a total of 60 offences, including vehicles in dangerous condition and drivers who had been working too long.

    Why didn’t we have:

    “In the week after 5 cyclists were killed by large vehicles, a Met polica operation to check legality and dispense safety advice to lorry drivers and cyclists finds an average of 3 offences per HGV, no offences at all for any cyclist. “XXX” demands action.”

    ?

    Premier Icon MoreCashThanDash
    Subscriber

    Definitely would be better dealing with idiot drivers and idiot cyclists to try and reduce the accidents that may require a helmet

    bencooper
    Member

    Are they stopping car drivers who don’t wear helmets?

    What if you tell them to get stuffed? Is the re-education compulsory?

    Premier Icon crazy-legs
    Subscriber

    Meanwhile, in Camberwell an hour ago, a cyclist has been killed by a left-turning lorry…

    http://www.lfgss.com/thread117573.html

    Dear Police & Politicians: it’s not the **** helmets that’s the problem you utter bunch of ****!

    billytinkle
    Member

    Time would be better spent catching people on their mobiles whilst driving in my opinion.

    Premier Icon roverpig
    Subscriber

    Ah bless. I’m sure they are doing it with the very best of intentions but it’s ironic that an “education exercise” is based on such a lack of education about even the basic facts.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    Yeah I liked that little detail ned:

    “If you’re going to cycle in London, wear a helmet, wear high-vis, make sure your bike has the right lights, don’t wear headphones and obey the rules of the road. stay away from the scores of illegal HGVs

    That way you will be a lot safer.”

    FTFY Chief-Superintendent Glyn Jones.

    Premier Icon nedrapier
    Subscriber

    Feel sick about yet another dead cyclist.

    For safety advice, what about “Wear whatever you like, but stay the **** away from left turning lorries.” or “All the helmets and hi-viz in the world are no good to you if you’re being crushed to death by a lorry whose driver couldn’t see you were there.”

    And some alarms for the lorries, too, cos you can’t reach everyone.

    Premier Icon nedrapier
    Subscriber

    Exactly, GrahamS. I started typing before I saw yours.

    Junkyard
    Member

    what an odd decision as just another example of how we must be blamed when someone crushes us

    Every report says whether the cyclist did or did not wear a helmet

    Mr Johnson and TFL have blood on their hands I’m afraid. Another senseless waste of life.

    As mentioned on another thread, please write to your MPs, coucillors, and the Mayor of London to express your utter disgust at the lack of action. They have the power to ban HGVs but just refuse, or rather don’t have the balls, to do it.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    I can’t see how you can make alarms on lorries effective though – if they were just proximity alarms then they’d go off all the time (e.g. whenever the lorry stops next to a lampost, bin, pedestrian on the pavement etc)
    And if they rely on cyclists having transmitters then it puts those without them at greater risk.

    IMO the better solution is to lift the ban on HGVs at night and ban HGVs from city centres during the day, or at least at rush hours. And make haulage companies liable too.

    Premier Icon stumpytom
    Subscriber

    IMO the better solution is to lift the ban on HGVs at night and ban HGVs from city centres during the day, or at least at rush hours.

    That does sound a potentially viable solution. It does appear to be a fact that most deaths have an HGV involved. Not having them on the London roads during the day would surely greatly reduce the number of incidents.

    clubber
    Member

    While I agree with the general consensus about victim blaming, to take a slightly different position (not on the helmet bit, rather the victim blaming)

    People are being killed now. We aren’t going to change the problems with HGVs/etc in London or elsewhere quickly. Anything that is actually effective (and that’s key – telling people to wear helmets isn’t effective) in teaching people about the high risk situations (eg HGVs turning left) if a good thing in helping to stop deaths until better solutions can be found.

    It’s just a shame that these initiatives seem to be run by people who don’t really understand the real issues.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    If I was in that there Lahndahn I’d be deliberately riding around without a helmet to see how many times I could get stopped.

    stumpy01
    Member

    +1 nedrapier.

    I hope they are also stopping people cycling without lights. It is getting stupid round my way; the number of people not using lights in the dark.
    It seems to be from all sides too; old dears on shoppers, kids on BMX’s, blokes commuting on 20yr old Halford specials, road riders who are caught out by the fact it’s not summer anymore……

    If I won the lottery, I would buy a massive box of front/rear lights and multi-packs of batteries to hand out to people who I saw riding without lights.

    Premier Icon zippykona
    Subscriber

    I have to cross a dual carriage way and recent road works means that it backs up a bit.
    As I wait for a gap in the slow moving traffic it’s alarming the amount of ladies who are texting with their phones on their laps.
    Makes running through the gap scary as you wrongly assume the motorists are looking where they are going.
    Far harsher penalties for mobile phone use would help.

    clubber
    Member

    Stumpy They’d use them until they went flat (if at all…) and then sue you when they got squashed…

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    People are being killed now. We aren’t going to change the problems with HGVs/etc in London or elsewhere quickly. Anything that is actually effective (and that’s key – telling people to wear helmets isn’t effective) in teaching people about the high risk situations (eg HGVs turning left) if a good thing in helping to stop deaths until better solutions can be found.

    I agree – which is why stopping people for not wearing helmets is so saddening, as they could be doing something a lot more useful. As non PC as it might sound, stopping every woman cyclist (and educating about lorries etc.) might be more effective – given that whatever the sex of the recent victims, the long term stats suggest women are at higher risk, and anecdotally they’re far more likely to put themselves in a dangerous position (that and the blokes who put themselves in dangerous positions are less likely to listen).

    Premier Icon funkrodent
    Subscriber

    As an aside, a guy I work with who cycles was questioned outside work by a colleague who queried his lack of helmet. She was given a soliloquy about his right as an individual to not wear a helmet, how they promote a false sense of security (questionable), how they reduce vision (eh? We’re not talking full face here)and how much he hates/resents helmet fascists. Essentially he was right that it is his choice, but his reaction was somewhat over the top and it caused a bit of wry amusement. Anyway, that was on the Friday afternoon. Come Monday morning he’s called in sick. Turns out he was riding along a canal towpath, misjudged a low bridge and rode slap bang into it. Upshot = 6 stitches in his head and a load of grief (of the banter variety) when he sheepishly returned to work. Still refuses to wear a helmet though ๐Ÿ™‚

    FWIW I think that anyone who doesn’t wear a helmet whilst cycling is somehwhat foolish. Head injuries are rare, but when they do occur they can be life-changingly (if not end-ingly) serious. Why take the risk? But it is also true that the vast amjority of cyclist deaths are caused by people undertaking long vehicles that then turn left. Seems there is an issue with visibility, but also one with educating cyclists. The amount of times I’ve winced on my daily commute seeing other cyclists thoughtlessly putting their lives at risk with buses/lorries is incredible. Problem is in the vast majority of cases they’re oblivious. I’ve actually been knocked off my bike by a car cutting the corner and forcing me off the road. I fell/stepped onto the kerb. I can’t help wondering how much of a role the pedestrian barriers you get on the corners of big junctions play, as if you fall into them you’re just going to get bounced back under the lorry…

    So police educating cyclists re helmets does seem to be a bit of a waste, I’d rather they were educating them about road habits, whilst at the same time educating lorry drivers. As an aside, apparently the sheer cabs are a big part of the problem. This in turn apparently stems from a European directive on max lorry length, without differentiating between cab area and load area. Hence cabs are as short and abrupt as possible in order to make load area bigger…

    clubber
    Member

    FWIW I think that anyone who doesn’t wear a helmet whilst cycling is an idiot. Why take the risk?

    To stop this thread veering off… Please everyone ignore this bit ๐Ÿ™„

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    his reaction was somewhat over the top and it caused a bit of wry amusement

    Perhaps it is a reaction to people calling him an idiot? Not that you’d do that..

    FWIW I think that anyone who doesn’t wear a helmet whilst cycling is an idiot.

    Oh there you go. ๐Ÿ˜€

    FWIW I think anyone who doesn’t wear a nice high-viz helmet cover, flouro jacket and leggings, handlebar mirrors, neck brace, spine protector and a neon sign is an idiot.

    And that’s just for riding on the pavement. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    Edit: taking clubber’s advice.

    Premier Icon stilltortoise
    Subscriber

    Any initiative to help drivers and cyclists be more aware of those around them – and make them more visible – is worthwhile. I’m not going to get hung up on the relatively minor helmet-wearing bit. If a police officer saw a cyclist riding safely and visibly, but with no helmet, I’d be very surprised if they went to the trouble of stopping them.

    MrSmith
    Member

    isn’t wasting police time a criminal offence?
    maybe i should make a citizens arrest on a plod.

    Premier Icon Nobeerinthefridge
    Subscriber

    Agree with clubber, we’ve done that do death, for want of a better word. As said above, the amount of people, and I have to say particularly women, that i see texting whilst driving is getting out of control. Quite frightening at 30mph.

    aP
    Member

    Why would the Police stop people wearing helmets when there’s no legal requirement to do so, but then not actively pursue motorists not wearing set belts, texting, talking on the phone, driving without insurance, parking on double yellows, driving illegal vehicles or speeding?

    Premier Icon ahwiles
    Subscriber

    because whoever dreamt this up is a ****ing moron.

    i’d love to see a crackdown on left-hooking vans in sheffield, but that’ll never happen.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    If a police officer saw a cyclist riding safely and visibly, but with no helmet, I’d be very surprised if they went to the trouble of stopping them.

    The suggestion is that that’s exactly what they are doing – otherwise they would be being stopped for being an idiot, when they clearly say that people are being stopped for not wearing a helmet.

    Premier Icon iainc
    Subscriber

    particularly women, that i see texting whilst driving is getting out of control.

    ah, see, you’re only looking at the buurds ๐Ÿ™‚

    Why would the Police stop people wearing helmets when there’s no legal requirement to do so

    Well, it could be argued that those without helmets may not be the more experienced rider, most of whom choose to wear one. As such, it could be one indicator of the sort of rider who might benefit from some additional education and information about using the road in a better, safer way.

    but then not actively pursue motorists not wearing set belts, texting, talking on the phone, driving without insurance, parking on double yellows, driving illegal vehicles or speeding?

    They do. At least once a week on the Embankment I used to see a police stop going on, primarily for commercial vehicles as it happens.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    Why would the Police stop people wearing helmets when there’s no legal requirement to do so, but then not actively pursue motorists not wearing set belts, texting, talking on the phone, driving without insurance, parking on double yellows, driving illegal vehicles or speeding?

    Because it’s easier, and general public perception is not only that helmets are more important for safety, but also that cyclists are the ones causing danger on the roads.

    Premier Icon GrahamS
    Subscriber

    whoever dreamt this up is a ****ing moron politician.

    Though I guess it’s the same thing really.

    uggski
    Member

    Apparently most of the ones stopped near me were mostly for riding on the pavement. Not for no helmet. A lot of them just happened not to have helmets.

    pingu66
    Member

    Personally I would like to see all HGVs banned at peak hours. This would alleviate a great deal of congestion and make roads safer at the busiest times. I simply do not see the need for these when they could arrange deliveries at night and distribution via smaller vehicles during the day.

    Any death is a tragedy but think there may be contributory factors from cyclists such as poor positioning in some instances, it is tragic but education and action is needed to stop this happening again. We won’t stop it all but its starting to be like a war zone. I advocate helmets and visible clothing BUT it won’t save you being crushed by 40 tons of truck.

    Condolences to all the victims family and friends.

    Premier Icon ton
    Subscriber

    how hard is it just to say,
    ‘i am very sorry officer, but until it is made law, i shall carry on regardless?’

    Premier Icon cookeaa
    Subscriber

    IMO the better solution is to lift the ban on HGVs at night and ban HGVs from city centres during the day, or at least at rush hours.

    Precisely!

    The recent spate of London Cyclist deaths seem to have a common thread:

    Large vehicles, being operated in a busy traffic environment at peak hours… That’s not to blame the HGV drivers, but it’s clearly an issue sticking such a mix of vehicles in that environment, as evidenced by the number of Deaths…

    The current LLCS, is more of a noise control measure than a congestion or road safety thing, and easy enough for HGV operators to apply for an exception to operate in the exclusion zone between 21:00 – 07:00…

    A Peak Hours HGV Exclusion may not be popular with the construction industry, but might just be what London needs TBH…

    As for the OP about the MET’s new helmet “Education” exercise, I suppose their intentions are good, but the response would have to be “which type of helmet will protect me from being crushed between a Left turning aggregate lorry with faulty indicators, and a not very yielding steel barrier?”

    belugabob
    Member

    Helmet debate aside, the issue that I can see is that behaviour on the roads in general is appalling.

    Pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclist, cars, vans, lorries – they’re all at it. (And a business trip to London, last week, reminded me that train users can be twunts, too)

    The absolutely ridiculous, selfish, behaviour that I see everyday on my 30 mile (each way) commute is beginning to really annoy me. Most things that people do have no point whatsoever as they don’t usually result in the offender getting there quicker (I know, because I often see them again 10 miles further on) and all they do is slow things down for everybody.

    Can’t help thinking that we need some more 1970 style road safety campaigns on TV – just to explain to the hard of thinking, just how wrong their decisions are. Top Gear would be an excellent platform for such advice, but I don’t think that it would fit in with their macho image.

    (Hatching a plan)

    P.S. The news of another cyclist death makes me very unhappy.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 123 total)

The topic ‘Met Police stopping cyclists without helmets!’ is closed to new replies.