Getting Hassle From The Man
Good Cop Bad Cop - photo by gnosis / john r on Flickr
It’s taken me a week to get to write this post, as I was hoping to get CCTV footage of what happened. Unfortunately the response from my Freedom Of Information Request was that the camera overlooking the scene was not working. So you’ll have to take my word for this.
Last Saturday afternoon, we all had to head into Whitley Bay for a bunch of errands - I needed to get a new key cut, Wife was looking for a birthday present for someone, and Daughter had metaphorically smashed open her piggy bank, and HAD to visit the toy shop, Selling Smiles. We all rode in together along the sea front, before splitting up from Wife who had some serious browsing to do.
Anyway, we all met back together, and Wife was looking a bit sheepish. She’d bought a couple of framed prints, almost 20″ square, and was wondering about how to get them home. It was a problem . . . and in the end I volunteered to hang them from my handlebar while I rode home with Daughter through the centre of Whitley Bay - a route I chose to be out of the wind which would flap those pictures around.
In narrow streets and traffic, I ride in the primary position - take the lane, and if that means a few seconds’ delay for the traffic behind me, well that’s better than someone squeezing their car through a gap that’s not big enough. When riding with Daughter in such conditions, I put her about 2′ from the edge of the road, with me flanking, just behind her shoulder, and bang in the middle of the lane.
So, we stopped in the bike box for the lights outside the Fat Ox pub (”A” on the map - you can click to enlarge), and then when we got a green light, pulled away, just in time to see the next set of lights (”B”) change to red, and a bus pull out from the stop on the left, across the advanced stop line, and into the bike box. No problem - the sun was shining and we were in no hurry, so we rode down the street, and stopped ten feet or so behind the bus. I kept an eye on the lights and the [stationary] traffic around us, leaving Daughter to her own devices next to me. She’s as sensible as someone twice her age, and can be trusted not to go riding off or messing around when we’re on the road.
The lights turned green, the bus pulled away, and just as we were about to follow, a policeman ran up next to us, and asked us to pull off the road. He’d jumped out of the van two cars back, where he and five of his colleagues had been watching us. It seemed that . . .
- Daughter was too young to be on the road
- Uh, no officer, she’s with me, so she’s just fine
- Well, she was messing about on the road
- Um, no she wasn’t. She was sitting next to me, while we waited for the lights to change.
- Yeah, well bike’s too big for her. And it’s dangerous
- Daughter - please show the policeman how you know your bike’s the right size for you. Yes, that’s great - see, able to put the balls of both feet on the road while still on the saddle.
- This road’s too busy for you two to ride on . . .
- No it’s not - look, the traffic’s all stopped and completely stationary again.
- . . . and you’re slowing the traffic. And she shouldn’t be on the road.
- Ah. I see. And that’s a problem, is it? Could I just ask you, officer, what your experience or qualifications are to talk about this?
- Um, well, I er . . . Look, she just shouldn’t be on the road, right.
- Well the thing is, I am a cycling instructor, qualified to the National Standards for Cycle Training, and I say that she’s doing just fine, and that under supervision, with such slow moving traffic, this road is just fine for her to ride on.
And it was more or less at that point that the policeman went back to his van with his five friends. Daughter and I returned to the bike box at the once-again-red lights, and waited with the police behind us for the lights to change so that we could ride the rest of the way home.
I want to stress at this point that his five mates stayed in their van for the whole exchange, and aside from his uniform and uninformed statements, the policeman was not particularly intimidating or discourteous - to me.
But I still have lots of problems with this whole situation. The main thing for me is that Daughter looks up to policemen as people who are in the right. So when they say that she shouldn’t be on the road, or imply that its dangerous, or imply that motorised traffic must never be slowed by pedestrians or people on bikes, she takes it seriously. It doesn’t take too many interactions like that for her to take them as truth, rather than the misguided opinion of someone who ought to know better.
Your daughter sounds to be smart enough to develop the same healthy disrespect for authority that most of the rest of us have.
Something’s seriously amiss with Britain’s police. We keep seeing stories of such ill informed interventions by those who are paid to support and protect us. The events at the recent G20 rally (where police are alleged to have removed their number tabs in an attempt to avoid repercussions for their gratuitous violence) suggest that we have a problem. The continuing rumblings about Britain becoming a police state may hide an uncomfortable truth…
There are idiots everywhere. There are idiots in cars, and there are idiots on bikes and there are idiots in police uniforms…
Stuff like this just makes me laugh at the thought of increasing cycling numbers by allowing exemptions from traffic law for bikes, or painting more green lines on the road.
This is just one example of how much of a cultural change is required, imo.
Oh, dear. It amazes me how they find time to do silly things like this when the road is full of people using much more dangerous cars to get around. I kindof get the impression that he was either showing off, or drew the short straw.
I’m not entirely convinced about these exemptions either. That could easily be another stick for Daily Mail types to use against cyclists.
You deserve a medal for keeping your cool. I’d have got myself locked up.
I agree with the police - a 3 year old is too young to ride on the road.
In Hertfordshire many police officers have had bikeability training.
Perhaps it might be an idea to approach the local police hierarchy to suggest this - might even get you some work!
I looked at the date first to see if this was April 1st, but sadly not. Feel free to delete my comment, but to counter the fawning praise of your adoring fans I’d suggest that you must be a complete cretin to think that cycling with a couple of 20″ prints is safe on the road, LET ALONE in what you call the ‘primary position’ (and what everyone else calls ‘being an arrogant twat’), and LET ALONE in charge of a 3-year old child on another bike. That you go on to call yourself a ‘professional’ instructor would be the icing on the cake, if it wasn’t so depressing. Muppets like you are the EXACT reason why cyclists are held in such low regard by motorists - its because you think you have some divine right to dictate everyone elses speed, and that anyone who dares to pass is some sort of maniac who should never have a licence. You demand that other road users obey the law, yet flagrantly break it yourself. You insist that everyone else is a potential danger, while ignoring the danger you yourself present when your field of vision is limited by your goods, not to mention the inevitable compromise on your ability to manoeuvre. A pox on you, and all those you train to such dire standards.
thaksin, why don’t you actually read the blog above. It seems that the writer was obeying the law by stopping at red lights, not riding on the foot path etc. He was also being very considerate by not filtering past the bus, and was being held up by the motor traffic. —
IF anything the writer is an exemplary cyclist.
Tell me, would you consider a motorbike safe and responsible if he were riding his machine while balancing two 20″ boards on his handlebars? No? Whats the difference, exactly?
Mark - Daughter’s eight, not three. Where did you get the idea that she was three?
thaksin - no email address supplied for a direct response when you left your comment. How odd.
OK, so here goes, dealing with your concerns in turn (sorry - I’m an engineer, so I do make lists. Don’t read anything into having a list of points, all numbered):
1. Nope, I won’t be deleting your comment, and your opinion is always welcome. Remember to keep it civil though.
2. When the day comes that I have adoring fans . . . well, never mind.
3. No, I am not a cretin - my thyroid gland is just fine, and I get enough iodine in my diet.
4. Those 20″ prints. I’ve just taken a tape measure to them, and they’re 17″, and were in a bag, hung from the handlebars. You’re right, this is not ideal, and had the policeman suggested that this was a problem, I was ready to agree with him. If anything, it was this that kept my tone civil - the knowledge that I was not completely without sin. I also put this into the post to make just that point.
5. Primary position. For an explanation of this, please refer to Cyclecraft by John Franklin, which is the recommended text for Bikeability, something the DFT is very supportive of. What I’d also say on this is that I’m not dogmatic about it, and use the primary position for visibility, as it moves you from peripheral vision to being where drivers spend most of their time looking - right in front of them, ignoring anything that they’re possibly not actually going to drive right into. I do make Daughter pull over if there are a bunch of cars behind us. There’s nothing more dangerous on the roads than an impatient driver.
6. I have no idea where this idea of Daughter being just 3 years old comes from. When she finds out you reckon she’s just three years old, she’ll come right on down to Nottingham to kick your pasty . . . well, anyway, it’s been a long time since she was three.
7. At no point did I call myself a ‘professional’ instructor.
8. There is no divine right to dictate other road users speed (though if they were to keep to the speed limit, and stop using their fecking phones, that would be nice). However, when there is insufficient space for them so safely overtake, I will remove that option from drivers approaching from behind. Between these two sets of traffic lights, no-one was going anywhere, whether I was there or not. By taking the lane here, I prevented anyone following from attempting any kind of drag race from one set of lights to the next - 200 yds down the road.
9. I did not break the law. And if I had, I’d have hoped that the policeman would have pointed this out.
10. I have eyes in my head, not my thighs. I could see just fine.
11. No problems with the bike’s manoeuvreability - prints aren’t very heavy. Just a little bulky, and apt to flap annoyingly in the sea breeze.
12. A pox? Yeah, OK then.
On your second comment (You came back here - how lovely!)
1. The difference is about 25mph - assuming they stick to the 30 mph speed limit. When the majority of drivers and motorcyclists do, I’ll buy you a pint.
My education is in the Arts, so I don’t do lists.
But, in random impressionist order;
I got the idea that your daughter was three from a previous poster which hadn’t at the time I posted been corrected. Quite why she’d go to Nottingham to get a pasty is beyond me - I’m nowhere near there and as far as I remember pasties come from Cornwall;
‘Cyclecraft’ appears to be oft-mentioned in lieu of common sense, legislation, or The Holy Bible, when its not a replacement for any of the above. While I understand it might well have merit, I’m afraid it doesn’t carry any legislative weight even if the DFT believed it was carried down from Mount Sinai on stone tablets. I understand the anti-Christ Clarkson sells millions of copies of his books - does this mean that we should mow down all cyclists on sight as he recommends?
I’ve no doubt there are situations in which adopting the ‘Primary position’ are sensible and equitable to other road users. On the other hand, most adopters of the policy that I’ve experienced appear to practice it as a form of ‘control’ over the vehicles around them and are intentionally provocational;
Riding a bike in a manner whereby you were not in full control certainly renders you liable to a charge of dangerous cycling - there is no way that you could manoeuvre your bike as well with the prints as you’d be able to without. As a halfwit who once tried to take home a garden pond on the roof of a car I can attest to this;
A difference of 25mph in a limit of 30mph would intimate that you were travelling at a mere 5mph, which would mean that your primary position is even more irritating to other road users;
I don’t leave a valid email address on blogs because I’ve found an increase in spam when I do;
You inferred professionalism when you told the copper, and later the world, that you were an “instructor trained to National Standards for Cycle Training”.
The pox is an expression, don’t take it personally.
Karl,
Any chance you can recreate the “prints hanging from your handle bars” in a photo so we can get a more clear sense of this “dangerous” riding position?
Is it anywhere near as dangerous as the position used by so many drivers to hold their mobile phone in one hand, while eating a jam covered pastry and drinking a cup of coffee with the other hand, and holding their steering wheel steady with their knee?
As for thaksin, it seems to me that he’s clearly one of those irrational drivers who hates all cyclists. I’m not quite sure what you do about people like that, other than do our best to teach our children to not be those kind of people.
With respect to your daughter and having her have to witness you talking down a police officer, I have to agree with the other comments, that in general helping children understand how to respect authority while still knowing when and how to question authority when something seems wrong with the position it takes is a good thing. Oh how I wish we had more people willing to question authority in the world over the last 8 years. I think we would have saved us all a lot of pain and suffering.
Although I would agree that the police officer was way off beam and uninformed in his interaction, I do think it’s a sticky wicket admitting about those prints in a bag hanging off the handlebars. That is a dangerous example to set and a worry to do that with a young child out on a bike with you.
I also generally find myself agreeing with Thaksin. I have done the precious National Standards Cycle Training. It has made me a better cyclist but I hate the mantra that goes with it, it has turned ordinary people who liked cycing into motorist-hating monsters who think they have a right to tell everyone else on the road what to do and they are horrendously smug to boot. There are also a lot of so-called instructors making huge amounts of money ripping off others who (often wisely) are cautious about cycling on our crowded roads. The primary position is all very well, sometimes it makes sense but a lot of the time it just irritates drivers and it is more suited to athletic young males than to many women or indeed, young children who could easily make horrible mistakes through lack of experience.
Thaksin - your email address is only ever known to the owner of the site - i.e. Karl. It’s never published on the public-facing part of the site. You need not fear getting spammed by attaching your email address to your comments.
In essense, ‘Brad’s post above confirms the gulf that exists between ALL cyclists and ALL car-drivers - that both sides of that coin have people within them that let the rest of their ‘group’ down. It is definitely true that SOME (small minority of) drivers act irresponsibly and alienate cyclists in general. It is also definitely true that SOME (small minority of) cyclists act irresponsibly and alienate car-drivers in general. However, while I feel that society in general is willing to accept there are low-standard drivers, and condemn them for their poor road behaviour, I get the impression that cyclists are oblivious to their irresponsible peers and instead rely on the Tu Quoque school of thought - “yeah, but you (drivers) are worse than I am”.
Brad typifies this mentality - rather than accept the valid points raised (as, in fairness, a different poster did), he’d rather write me off as one of those nutter motorists who has a cyclist-hating agenda. It perfectly demonstrates why this issue has such polarised opinions - the arguments are generally full of such emotional terms that people tend to migrate to the extreme end of the debate rather than occupy middle ground.
As previously said, it simply cannot be that you were not ‘compromised’ by your goods - their general unweildiness (is that a word?) and vulnerability to wind forces must inevitably affect your stability, and there is at least the possibility that they could interfere with your field of vision too. Saying “yeah, but you’ve got a butty in one hand and your phone in the other” is a specious argument.
The DoT page in one of the posts above is useful, because it highlights, without the emotional language often used elsewhere, some of the issues that tends to polarise the ‘other group’ - nothing irritates me more as a driver than seeing a cyclist sauntering casually through a red traffic light, nipping up on the pavement to shortcut a corner, and then loudly demanding his ‘rights’ as a road user in taking the much-maligned primary position to ‘protect himself’. If he wants to be treated as an equal on the carraigeway, fine, but he must also accept the limitations of such a position, i.e. stopping at lights and keeping on the damn road!
Thaksin, u do have some valid points but why be so assuming and rude to the OP?? I am also a national standards cycling instructor but i also feel that i have a lot of common sense. The kids i teach may ride bikes, motorcycles and even drive cars or other vehicles when they are older. Its all about learning the rules of the road which everyone should follow and one of those rules is to have respect for all other road users and pedestrians alike. Its not a them and us situation. FWIW, tho i will teach being seen and knowing what is around you, looking over your shoulder and moving out when u pass parked cars and junctions and when you go thru pinchpoints but i will not enforce it neccessarily as a primary position just as common sense to be seen.
Hey my two year old has more road safety nouse than some kids 10 times his age. Its the thing about being a parent, you know and understand your kids and are the best judge of their capabilities.
Thaksin,
It is perfectly justified to concentratre on bad car drivers, rather than bad cyclists, as about 4-orders of magnitude (1000x) more people are killed by bad drivers than by bad cyclists. The biggest problems need to be tackled first…..
Also, your comment about getting irritated about cyclists ‘nipping up on the pavement to shortcut a corner’ ..etc.. is one that many people woud agree with you on, but I cannot. One of the joy’s of riding a bike, is that you can do things (safely) that both pedestrians and cars cannot. The UK is actually quite odd, in that bicyles are not supposed to go on pavements. So long as the cyclists gives 100% priority to pedestrians (whilst keeping to a low speed) on pavements and zebra crossings, then I see no problems with pavment cycling, or going through red lights at the crossings. I am well aware that the National Standards Cycle Training course does not promote this of course.
1000x is of course 3-orders of magnitude (not 4).
Thanks for perfectly proving my point - that cyclists ‘excuse’ regular, flagrant lawbreaking by simply saying “yebbut, you’re worse than I am”. Scrap all that rubbish, and recognise (and prosecute) ALL road traffic law infringement regardless of the chosen steed of the lawbreaker. Every time some (doubtless well-intentioned) blindly ignorant cyclist condones jumping red lights he give other road users the right to consider that lawbreaking cycling is endemic.
I break the law, and have no qualms about it. It is clearly ridiculous to apply the same law to bikes as to cars.
@thaksin … I drive a car AND ride a bike - I’m very confused now - who should I hate?