Bournemouth council wants officers to have police powers (From Thisisdorset)

Adrian XX wrote:
Ha ha. Will these be fast and fit council officers? I can't help wondering about the chase when I go zooming through Boscombe precinct at 30mph on my bike! Seriously, no one in their right mind is going to give out their name or address to a council officer. It seems it won't be long before we imprison people just for being in possession of a bicycle.

Bob49 wrote:
"Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements"

Perhaps the Daily Echo could ask the police just how mant fines for cycling through the precinct the police have ACTUALLY issued.

We read these council press releases, but the Daily Echo never really seems to challenge or follow up on any story.

MikeFrench wrote:
"Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements"

As reassuring as it was to see a visible presence on Sunday evening (20:20) opposite McDonalds by two officers I was not at all surprised to observe that on three seperate occasions within 5 minutes that 4 cyclists cycled past just a few feet in front of the officers.
I am not saying that fines should have been issued but it would only take one of the officers a minute for a piece of friendly advice.
So do Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements?? - I think not.....

MikeFrench wrote:
"Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements"

As reassuring as it was to see a visible presence on Sunday evening (20:20) opposite McDonalds by two officers I was not at all surprised to observe that on three seperate occasions within 5 minutes that 4 cyclists cycled past just a few feet in front of the officers.
I am not saying that fines should have been issued but it would only take one of the officers a minute for a piece of friendly advice.
So do Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements?? - I think not.....

thevisitor wrote:
OH HERE WE GO AGAIN! Bournemouth Council couldn't even shout 'CHARGE' let alone 'TAKE CHARGE'. That has been proven so often over the last two years. Take a little advice and stick to what you are good at...'NOTHING'! Just continue to squander tax payers money with your hair brained ideas that are created by unqualified councillors and illqualified officers.

beachcomber1 wrote:
went for a brief walk along the prom yesterday. saw about 12 people cycling and 8 dogs on the beach, beachfront staff ignoring them. did see a RNLI bloke have a word with a cyclist, but i didn't know that was part of their job.

elite50 wrote:

Adrian XX wrote:
Ha ha. Will these be fast and fit council officers? I can't help wondering about the chase when I go zooming through Boscombe precinct at 30mph on my bike! Seriously, no one in their right mind is going to give out their name or address to a council officer. It seems it won't be long before we imprison people just for being in possession of a bicycle.

No, they only need to imprison the criminal cyclists. You know, the ones that ride their bikes to the detriment of other road users.
That would get rid of at least 30% of all cyclists.

ajj-dorset wrote:
Interesting to see if any of the conservative councillors will openly criticize the cuts in police funding imposed by the conservative government? Party of Law and order?

Winstonchilled wrote:
If Antisocial behaviour is against the local society, then these officers and fines are actually completley Antisocial.
.
Who dictates what is and is not Antisocial?
.
Some OCD people would love everyone to be the same, have neat net curtains, floral decor, wear a suit and tie every day and speak in an eloquent projected tone - but for some that type of thing is antisocial too.
.
Surley it is possible that Bournemouth and Boscombe have different levles of acceptance of what is and is not socially acceptable?
.
Boscombe will never be Bournemouth and Bournemouth will never be Sandbanks.
.
Antisocial is in the eyes of the beholder.
.
There is more of a close knit society in Boscombe than in Bournemouth or Sandbanks.

Adrian XX wrote:
Ha ha. Will these be fast and fit council officers? I can't help wondering about the chase when I go zooming through Boscombe precinct at 30mph on my bike!

Seriously, no one in their right mind is going to give out their name or address to a council officer.

It seems it won't be long before we imprison people just for being in possession of a bicycle.

chrspeters wrote:
I am not totally against cycling on the pavement, even though it is still illegal in UK. In fact, these days with such heavy traffic and potholes, I would be scared to cycle on the road. So I don’t now own a bike.

I lived in Germany for ten years and rode a bicycle on the pavement. However, in Germany they made good provision for such. For a start, the pavements were far wider (in this country we often prefer wasteful and costly grass verges instead). In Germany, a special cycle path is marked out on the pavement in which pedestrians understood the cyclists had full access. Not only that, there was also plenty of room for cars to park on the very edge of the pavement, to allow the traffic to fully pass through. Even motorcycles under 50cc were also allowed to use the cycle paths.

But then, that was Germany. In UK our pavements go back to the horse and cart days. Hardly enough room for one person and an oncoming mother with a double pushchair, let alone the now increasing mobility scooters whizzing by and the occasional car half-parked up on the pavement in a narrow street, trying to be considerate to all other passing traffic.

However, within this on-going animosity about cyclist today, in which is reflected above, it’s not really about cyclists being on the pavement or whatever, but mainly about the selfish no care attitude of many who do. As when in Germany, I have noticed a good few times where some cyclists, either on the pavement or in a precinct, have given first right of way to pedestrians. In fact, I encountered one yesterday whilst she was cycling across a pedestrian crossing, she stopped to let me pass first. In return, I allowed her to pass by first instead, and we parted with a friendly greeting and a smile.

To me, and maybe to many others that is fine and acceptable. But the cyclists who fast race down busy pedestrian areas (as suggested above), or the cyclists that jump red traffic lights whilst people or vehicles are crossing – they are the ones that really upset people, cause all this anger (even hatred), and in turn, give the decent cyclist a really bad name.

Not long ago I was on crutches from a broken hip and I became far more aware of cyclists on the pavement dashing past and in front of me. It was so scary. And that’s how many elderly people feel, plus mothers with young toddlers, when the cyclist does that.

In summary, it’s just a matter of consideration for others. From the cyclist, the pedestrians, the motorist, the mobility scooter riders and even the skateboarders., then, and only then, those travelling on our crap small pavements that we have in UK, just might become a little more tolerant towards each other.

chrspeters wrote:
O'Reilly,

Sad to say, though you reprinted my comments in full, you did not really address my sentiments at all.

All you did was explain the law to me that you are legally permitted to race down the pavements, ignoring all pedestrians young and old, and can feel so smug about this.

Now you understand why many people so hate you selfish cyclist.

You bring it on yourself and seems to me, always will.

As to the other reply above, cyclists may have fewer accidents, but I wonder how many do they cause and then ride away fast (like the reply above), to escape it all. After all, unlike motor vehicles, you have no identification licence plates, no insurance to compensate injured parties. In fact, not any road tax for the space in which you yourself, so legally demand.

One day, I might just come up behind you on the pavement in my little red car and force you out of the way. But then, as a cyclist, you have your ‘rights’ and will no doubt be quick to claim from me because I do not.

You are to my mind a most typical selfish cyclist. So don’t blame the rest of us for continually despising the most of you.

chrspeters wrote:
O'Reilly,

Sad to say, though you reprinted my comments in full, you did not really address my sentiments at all.

All you did was explain the law to me that you are legally permitted to race down the pavements, ignoring all pedestrians young and old, and can feel so smug about this.

Now you understand why many people so hate you selfish cyclist.

You bring it on yourself and seems to me, always will.

As to the other reply above, cyclists may have fewer accidents, but I wonder how many do they cause and then ride away fast (like the reply above), to escape it all. After all, unlike motor vehicles, you have no identification licence plates, no insurance to compensate injured parties. In fact, not any road tax for the space in which you yourself, so legally demand.

One day, I might just come up behind you on the pavement in my little red car and force you out of the way. But then, as a cyclist, you have your ‘rights’ and will no doubt be quick to claim from me because I do not.

You are to my mind a most typical selfish cyclist. So don’t blame the rest of us for continually despising the most of you.

chrspeters wrote:
O'Reilly,

Sad to say, though you reprinted my comments in full, you did not really address my sentiments at all.

All you did was explain the law to me that you are legally permitted to race down the pavements, ignoring all pedestrians young and old, and can feel so smug about this.

Now you understand why many people so hate you selfish cyclist.

You bring it on yourself and seems to me, always will.

As to the other reply above, cyclists may have fewer accidents, but I wonder how many do they cause and then ride away fast (like the reply above), to escape it all. After all, unlike motor vehicles, you have no identification licence plates, no insurance to compensate injured parties. In fact, not any road tax for the space in which you yourself, so legally demand.

One day, I might just come up behind you on the pavement in my little red car and force you out of the way. But then, as a cyclist, you have your ‘rights’ and will no doubt be quick to claim from me because I do not.

You are to my mind a most typical selfish cyclist. So don’t blame the rest of us for continually despising the most of you.

paulthefish wrote:

MikeFrench wrote:
"Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements"

As reassuring as it was to see a visible presence on Sunday evening (20:20) opposite McDonalds by two officers I was not at all surprised to observe that on three seperate occasions within 5 minutes that 4 cyclists cycled past just a few feet in front of the officers.
I am not saying that fines should have been issued but it would only take one of the officers a minute for a piece of friendly advice.
So do Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements?? - I think not.....

dorset police are useless. i have seen, more than once an "officer of the law"totally ignoring people in cars at crossings or juntions talking on mobile phones. but then maybe this was not one of the "no excuse" days....

chrspeters wrote:
O'Reilly,

I know nothing about you nor presume to do so. Neither do I have any fantasies. I was only responding to your reply that angered me with your seemingly ‘no care’ attitude that seemed to support some offending cyclists, of which I interpreted was also you.

As a long-term non-cyclists and walker instead, I now wonder why you wrote as you did. My earlier reply was to request ‘consideration’ on all sides, yet you came back demanding your legal rights as a cyclist, of which you now tell me you are not.

Thirty years ago, as you will no doubt know, cycling was not the same as it is today. We all respected the law and even had lights on our bikes.

Though sometimes it might have got a bit silly. I can remember once when I was a young school kid doing an early morning paper round. I was at the Winton banks traffic lights. They were red and I had to turn left down Alma Road. I got off my bike and pushed it over the corner past the traffic lights into Alma Road. I got back on my bike and was suddenly approached by a big fat policemen.

He accused me of ‘jumping the lights’ but said he would let me off with a caution.

That’s how ridiculous it was back then, but now it’s got even more ridiculous the but other way. Same goes for Policemen and Teachers. Back then, we all feared but respected them. Now it’s gone too far the other way and all enforcers are more frightened of the perpetrators’ – because they have their rights.

I am very sorry if I got on the wrong foot with you, but your reply lead me to that. I do hope I can have much happier correspondence in the future with you here at this site.

I totally agree with your last comment and was the same reason I also do not ride a bike. In fact, I had the same problems when I bought a 50cc Honda. All the cars just had to overtake me, even though I was doing 40mph in a thirty zone. I soon gave that up and went back to a car.

Maybe now on second thoughts, you were not condoning the non-caring cyclists, but instead, telling us all that there is nothing we can do about it, because the Law prevents us from doing so.

If that is the case, then again I am truly sorry for my so naïve reply.

Christine Peters

O'Reilly wrote:

chrspeters wrote:
O'Reilly,

I know nothing about you nor presume to do so. Neither do I have any fantasies. I was only responding to your reply that angered me with your seemingly ‘no care’ attitude that seemed to support some offending cyclists, of which I interpreted was also you.

As a long-term non-cyclists and walker instead, I now wonder why you wrote as you did. My earlier reply was to request ‘consideration’ on all sides, yet you came back demanding your legal rights as a cyclist, of which you now tell me you are not.

Thirty years ago, as you will no doubt know, cycling was not the same as it is today. We all respected the law and even had lights on our bikes.

Though sometimes it might have got a bit silly. I can remember once when I was a young school kid doing an early morning paper round. I was at the Winton banks traffic lights. They were red and I had to turn left down Alma Road. I got off my bike and pushed it over the corner past the traffic lights into Alma Road. I got back on my bike and was suddenly approached by a big fat policemen.

He accused me of ‘jumping the lights’ but said he would let me off with a caution.

That’s how ridiculous it was back then, but now it’s got even more ridiculous the but other way. Same goes for Policemen and Teachers. Back then, we all feared but respected them. Now it’s gone too far the other way and all enforcers are more frightened of the perpetrators’ – because they have their rights.

I am very sorry if I got on the wrong foot with you, but your reply lead me to that. I do hope I can have much happier correspondence in the future with you here at this site.

I totally agree with your last comment and was the same reason I also do not ride a bike. In fact, I had the same problems when I bought a 50cc Honda. All the cars just had to overtake me, even though I was doing 40mph in a thirty zone. I soon gave that up and went back to a car.

Maybe now on second thoughts, you were not condoning the non-caring cyclists, but instead, telling us all that there is nothing we can do about it, because the Law prevents us from doing so.

If that is the case, then again I am truly sorry for my so naïve reply.

Christine Peters

Big hugs then................ ;-)

jobsworthwatch wrote:
This is political pandering to those that shout loudest; the anti cycling brigade. Just take a look at the facts and figures, cyclists and pedestrians is a far safer mix than cars and cyclists by orders of magnitude! It should be the norm to be able to cycle where ever you can walk unless of course you believe cyclists live don't matter!.

beachcomber1 wrote:

jobsworthwatch wrote:
This is political pandering to those that shout loudest; the anti cycling brigade. Just take a look at the facts and figures, cyclists and pedestrians is a far safer mix than cars and cyclists by orders of magnitude! It should be the norm to be able to cycle where ever you can walk unless of course you believe cyclists live don't matter!.

i hardly think the anti-cyclist lobby (if such a thing exists) shouts louder than the pro-cyclists!

as for your statistics argument, as i said in an earlier post cycling on the pavement is a relatively recent phenomenon, so there's not a great deal to base that assertion on. you might as well argue it's safe to walk across the motorway as few people have been killed doing so.

jobsworthwatch wrote:
LOOK AT THE FACTS Bob49! Its all over net, what I have stated above is true.
Try doing a bit of research before making your presumptuous remarks!Try doing some cycling too!

greasy Lils breakfast emporium wrote:
You been lying in bed all day watching Dads Army
L/Cpl Jones is good though he should ov been at least an inspector.
Dont do it I will only kick your ****.
you no you want me to
It was too late before they stayed.early..

chrspeters wrote:
Thank you bryanchallice for your reply.,

Though now I feel very intrigued over how it is different from the British Army and Royal Air Force, for the Royal Navy to not make the same allegiance to our HM the Queen.

Please explain. Also explain the ‘Queen’s Shilling’ as also asked previous.

I also feel I am in the same camp as you. I have great pride in our armed forces. The comradeship of the ordinary rank and file and the subordinate lower rank officers that lead them. It goes right back throughout our British military history.

So for somebody in a council pin-stripe suit to associate themselves as an ‘officer’, surely belittles and offends that.

It’s about time all councils respected and amended that.

chrspeters wrote:
greasy Lil,

Do you do an all-day full English?

retry69 wrote:
That guy in the photo really is acting anti-social, see all the people running for their lives.Another opportunity for the persistent trouble makers to stir up the anti motorist/cyclist campaign.Well Done Echo!

muscliffman wrote:
If 'anti-social' behaviour includes wasting millions of pounds of public money in Boscombe on features that do not work, if it includes wasting taxpayers money hiring consultants and fancy 'artistes' to do a bit of gardening or paint a beach hut. If it includes issuing countless meaningless sound-bite statements about 'regenerating' Boscombe when nothing meaningful actually ever happens. If it includes grinning inanley in photo-shoot opportunities whilst pulling down a Council Centre the good folk in the area actually want to retain. If it includes agreeing publicly funded Contracts in Boscombe with questionable private enterprises that turn out to be as water-tight as a colander when it goes horribly wrong.
Then great, bring on the fines. Appointed Officers won't have to take to the streets to issue them, just walk the Town Hall corridors to find these 'anti-social' culprits.
On second more serious thoughts, NO, never in a million years entrust a Town Hall with a reputation on the scale of Bournemouth's with the power to raise more money, especially in this way.
This is for the Police to do, as they already should be. Maybe they would like to pop into the Town Hall whilst they are at it!

Adrian XX wrote:

Bob49 wrote:
"Dorset Police currently issue £30 fines for cycling on pavements"

Perhaps the Daily Echo could ask the police just how mant fines for cycling through the precinct the police have ACTUALLY issued.

We read these council press releases, but the Daily Echo never really seems to challenge or follow up on any story.

Well, having researched the law on cycling this morning...

Cyclists should note that they probably do not commit an offence by cycling through the precinct. For cycling through the precinct to be an offence would require a by-law.

According to a statement in parliament in 2008:

"It is already an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835, as amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888, to cycle on a footway (THE PAVEMENT ADJACENT TO THE CARRIAGEWAY). The maximum fine is £500 or the police can issue a fixed penalty notice costing £30.

Cyclists have no right to cycle on a footpath away from the road but ONLY COMMIT AN OFFENCE WHERE LOCAL BY-LAWS OR TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS CREATE SUCH AN OFFENCE"

Although precincts are not mentioned here, the law against cycling away from the road relates only to "the pavement adjacent to the carriageway".

I would suggest that if any cyclist is challenged for cycling in the precinct, they should explain the law to the officer challenging them and if this does not work they should seek legal advice.

O'Reilly wrote:

chrspeters wrote:
I am not totally against cycling on the pavement, even though it is still illegal in UK. In fact, these days with such heavy traffic and potholes, I would be scared to cycle on the road. So I don’t now own a bike.

I lived in Germany for ten years and rode a bicycle on the pavement. However, in Germany they made good provision for such. For a start, the pavements were far wider (in this country we often prefer wasteful and costly grass verges instead). In Germany, a special cycle path is marked out on the pavement in which pedestrians understood the cyclists had full access. Not only that, there was also plenty of room for cars to park on the very edge of the pavement, to allow the traffic to fully pass through. Even motorcycles under 50cc were also allowed to use the cycle paths.

But then, that was Germany. In UK our pavements go back to the horse and cart days. Hardly enough room for one person and an oncoming mother with a double pushchair, let alone the now increasing mobility scooters whizzing by and the occasional car half-parked up on the pavement in a narrow street, trying to be considerate to all other passing traffic.

However, within this on-going animosity about cyclist today, in which is reflected above, it’s not really about cyclists being on the pavement or whatever, but mainly about the selfish no care attitude of many who do. As when in Germany, I have noticed a good few times where some cyclists, either on the pavement or in a precinct, have given first right of way to pedestrians. In fact, I encountered one yesterday whilst she was cycling across a pedestrian crossing, she stopped to let me pass first. In return, I allowed her to pass by first instead, and we parted with a friendly greeting and a smile.

To me, and maybe to many others that is fine and acceptable. But the cyclists who fast race down busy pedestrian areas (as suggested above), or the cyclists that jump red traffic lights whilst people or vehicles are crossing – they are the ones that really upset people, cause all this anger (even hatred), and in turn, give the decent cyclist a really bad name.

Not long ago I was on crutches from a broken hip and I became far more aware of cyclists on the pavement dashing past and in front of me. It was so scary. And that’s how many elderly people feel, plus mothers with young toddlers, when the cyclist does that.

In summary, it’s just a matter of consideration for others. From the cyclist, the pedestrians, the motorist, the mobility scooter riders and even the skateboarders., then, and only then, those travelling on our crap small pavements that we have in UK, just might become a little more tolerant towards each other.

Unless there is a bye law - displayed - that states it is illegal to cycle on the pavement then it is not. The same applies to lights on cycles....it is not a legal requirement, check it out.
Darn nuisance I grant you but............

alanhl wrote:

O'Reilly wrote:

chrspeters wrote:
I am not totally against cycling on the pavement, even though it is still illegal in UK. In fact, these days with such heavy traffic and potholes, I would be scared to cycle on the road. So I don’t now own a bike.

I lived in Germany for ten years and rode a bicycle on the pavement. However, in Germany they made good provision for such. For a start, the pavements were far wider (in this country we often prefer wasteful and costly grass verges instead). In Germany, a special cycle path is marked out on the pavement in which pedestrians understood the cyclists had full access. Not only that, there was also plenty of room for cars to park on the very edge of the pavement, to allow the traffic to fully pass through. Even motorcycles under 50cc were also allowed to use the cycle paths.

But then, that was Germany. In UK our pavements go back to the horse and cart days. Hardly enough room for one person and an oncoming mother with a double pushchair, let alone the now increasing mobility scooters whizzing by and the occasional car half-parked up on the pavement in a narrow street, trying to be considerate to all other passing traffic.

However, within this on-going animosity about cyclist today, in which is reflected above, it’s not really about cyclists being on the pavement or whatever, but mainly about the selfish no care attitude of many who do. As when in Germany, I have noticed a good few times where some cyclists, either on the pavement or in a precinct, have given first right of way to pedestrians. In fact, I encountered one yesterday whilst she was cycling across a pedestrian crossing, she stopped to let me pass first. In return, I allowed her to pass by first instead, and we parted with a friendly greeting and a smile.

To me, and maybe to many others that is fine and acceptable. But the cyclists who fast race down busy pedestrian areas (as suggested above), or the cyclists that jump red traffic lights whilst people or vehicles are crossing – they are the ones that really upset people, cause all this anger (even hatred), and in turn, give the decent cyclist a really bad name.

Not long ago I was on crutches from a broken hip and I became far more aware of cyclists on the pavement dashing past and in front of me. It was so scary. And that’s how many elderly people feel, plus mothers with young toddlers, when the cyclist does that.

In summary, it’s just a matter of consideration for others. From the cyclist, the pedestrians, the motorist, the mobility scooter riders and even the skateboarders., then, and only then, those travelling on our crap small pavements that we have in UK, just might become a little more tolerant towards each other.

Unless there is a bye law - displayed - that states it is illegal to cycle on the pavement then it is not. The same applies to lights on cycles....it is not a legal requirement, check it out.
Darn nuisance I grant you but............

you are completely misinformed. it is completely illegal by law to ride a cycle on a footway or without lights after sunset. BET YOU'RE ANOTHER CYCLIST TRYING TO CAUSE CONFUSION

greasy Lils breakfast emporium wrote:
According to a report in the DM today Bournemouth is the 8th most dangerous town in which to drive .
And you are driving us all mad . for Petes sake shut the ****up you do go on on on on and on dont you.

greasy Lils breakfast emporium wrote:
PLEASE Ive told you not to quot-ionise me .

chrspeters wrote:
greasy Lil – Just go away and get me a bacon sandwich. Or would that be a dried rat sandwich?

I think that this debate about cyclist should really be solved by our Government or Local Council, because it is causing so much hatred and animosity.

Many people here have agreed that if the cyclist is considerate and careful to the pedestrians, then they see no problem about them riding on the pavement. I am in that same camp.

For those who argue and state the Law, I say just how many laws are so outdated and ignored today. You would be very surprised to learn.

Not long ago I heard that a policeman was only allowed to walk in the gutter, back in the days of the ‘Peelers’. How many of us today would prosecute a policeman for not obeying such a stupid outdated and unchanged law?

Those against cyclists riding on the pavements, put yourself in this scenario. If you had a young child of eight, nine, ten or even older – would you much prefer them safe on the pavement than on the road? Same goes for your elderly parent who might still like to ride a bike.

When I was a kid I rode a bike daily to school and on the road. Roads and traffic congestion was not as bad as it is today, though I and others like me, did have some very nasty experiences.

As said by me and many others, it’s all down to proper training to allow consideration for others. I believe that is still in the Highway Code and so could also be included for pavement cycling for Cycling Proficiency Tests for the young.

Like the Policeman now walking on our streets, soon cyclists on pavements will also fully arrive. It’s just down to our Governments to accept these facts and incorporate some kind of real law towards it all.
Otherwise this bickering and hatred towards the cyclist will just go on and on.

I am not a cyclist, I am a pedestrian and motorist. But I see all sides.

greasy Lil – Change my order to an Albatross Burger!

greasy Lils breakfast emporium wrote:
According to a report in the DM today Bournemouth is the 8th most dangerous town in which to drive .
And you are driving us all mad . for Petes sake shut the ****up you do go on on on on and on dont you.