Speed limit

Simon Brooke wrote:
in message , Tony Raven
') wrote:

Gawnsoft wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:31:34 +0100, Jeremy Collins
wrote (more or less):

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:

Does it state anywhere that a pedal cycle is a *vehicle*???

I couldn't find a UK legal definition of "vehicle",

That's becuase it varies from part to part of the UK.

Legally, IIRC, under Scottish law bicycles can be viewed as a
pedestrian with additional equipment, although I've no idea what the
specific phrasing is.

Hansford vs London Express Newspapers (1928):

"I cannot see any reason for putting a limitation on the meaning of
the word "vehicle" and I hold that the word included a bicycle."

In what jurisdiction was that decision made and what relevance has it to
Scotland?


Its in the English Courts which have no relevance to Scotland other than
precedents from other legal systems can be used in the Scottish Courts. I
have had an Australian court decision used in helping an English Court
interpretation. However since the definition of vehicle was in respect of the
RPOOSR 1984 which only applies to the Royal Parks etc in London, English Law
is the relevant one for interpreting the Regulations.

Tony

Jose Marques wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Tony Raven wrote:

That's your problem. Your inability to measure your speed no more
exempts you if you break the speed limit than your inability to measure
you blood alcohol exempts you if you exceed the drink driving limit.

Surely if you know how much you drank then there is a reasonable
expectation that you'd know if you were over the limit or not? If you
have half a pint you can reasonably assume you're below the limit. If you
have four then it would be difficult for you to argue that you would be
under the limit. I don't see how one can be expected to know ones speed
with any sort of accuracy.

Well if you pedal very slowly you can probably reasonably assume you are below
the limit and if you pedal furiously in top gear you can probably assume you
are over the limit. So where's the difference.

Tony

PS Blood alcohol depends on many more factors than how much including body
size, metabolism, how quickly you drank it, what the drink was, how long ago
so not at all easy to estimate with any accuracy at all. In fact I bet you
can judge your speed more accurately than your blood alcohol level.

Ian G Batten wrote:

I can't believe that anyone who rides a bike cannot ride in such a
manner as to be certain they are riding at under 20mph. They may do
that by riding at 10mph, of course.


You forget they belong to the Church of Cager which beleives that speed limits
are the speed you must go at and not the maximum speed you are allowed to go.

Tony

In message
"Pete Biggs" wrote:

Ningi wrote:

I was going to ask about this. The 20mph speed limit in Richmond
Park has bee introduced.........

We're lucky cycling is allowed at all there. Shame about Windsor Great
Park: "No cycles -- ridden or otherwise".

~PB


The situation in Windsor Great Park is complicated by poor signing. You can
legally cycle on most park roads south of the Copper Horse - Sustrans route
4 goes through the park.

Paul Luton

--
CTC Right to Ride Representative for Richmond upon Thames

Paul Luton wrote:

We're lucky cycling is allowed at all there. Shame about Windsor
Great Park: "No cycles -- ridden or otherwise".

The situation in Windsor Great Park is complicated by poor signing.
You can legally cycle on most park roads south of the Copper Horse -
Sustrans route 4 goes through the park.

Oh right. I don't know the area well at all.

I was thinking of one particular glorious bit: The Long Walk, I think,
south of the A308. Why no cycles there? Keeping the off-roading riff
raff out, or just because Her Maj doesn't like bikes?

~PB

"Pete Biggs" wrote in message ...

I was thinking of one particular glorious bit: The Long Walk, I think,
south of the A308. Why no cycles there? Keeping the off-roading riff
raff out, or just because Her Maj doesn't like bikes?

There's been no cycling there since way before off-roading was popular.

--
Dave...

"Pete Biggs" wrote in message ...
Paul Luton wrote:

We're lucky cycling is allowed at all there. Shame about Windsor
Great Park: "No cycles -- ridden or otherwise".

The situation in Windsor Great Park is complicated by poor signing.
You can legally cycle on most park roads south of the Copper Horse -
Sustrans route 4 goes through the park.

Oh right. I don't know the area well at all.

I was thinking of one particular glorious bit: The Long Walk, I think,
south of the A308. Why no cycles there? Keeping the off-roading riff
raff out, or just because Her Maj doesn't like bikes?

I used to ride through it a lot, was always intrigued by the speed
limit; 38mph, was this the speed below which it was not possible to
collide with a corgi? ;-)

In article , Martinm2
@wcms.org.uk says...
I used to ride through it a lot, was always intrigued by the speed
limit; 38mph, was this the speed below which it was not possible to
collide with a corgi? ;-)

Surely as long as you try hard it is possible to collide with a corgi at
any speed. I guess at lower speeds it is easier to ensure that you hit
with the drive side of the bike, thus increasing the chance of
inflicting injury with the chain ring!

Jon

Dave S wrote:

Small world, eh?
Mr Larrington, how the devil are you?

Alive, moderately well, bruised and battered after falling off last week and
still, mirabile dictu, gainfully employed...

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
================================================== =========
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
================================================== =========