It's a fair cop, when the cop's fair."I set my speed dial to 15.5mph", and the police are struggling to prove that.
It's a fair cop, when the cop's fair."I set my speed dial to 15.5mph", and the police are struggling to prove that.
Just as a matter of interest, do electric cycles with a throttle have to cut off the assistance when the bike reaches 15mph? If so then is connection to a speedometer compulsory.Ah, obviously the police suspect he's up to no good then. Reading between the lines his bike is able to provide assistance above 15.5mph, "I set my speed dial to 15.5mph", and the police are struggling to prove that.
It's illegal to ride a bike that is able to provide assistance above 15.5mph, even if you're only riding at say 5mph.That aside, the police would have no grounds to pull him over for speeding so long as he was within the speed limit of the road. He could have been doing 30mph unassisted.
Another curiosity I saw recently (probably on this forum) is that the regular speed limit does not apply to bikes ... as I understand it he could legally be doing 40mph unassisted in a 20mph zone.That aside, the police would have no grounds to pull him over for speeding so long as he was within the speed limit of the road. He could have been doing 30mph unassisted.
Which is what they were evidently testing for with their free bike ride. Fortunately, for him, he'd switched it out of that mode. It sounds like the battery pack excuse was just that and they're on to him.It's illegal to ride a bike that is able to provide assistance above 15.5mph, even if you're only riding at say 5mph.
That's due to the UK speed limits only being part of motor vehicle law in the Road Traffic Acts.Another curiosity I saw recently (probably on this forum) is that the regular speed limit does not apply to bikes ... as I understand it he could legally be doing 40mph unassisted in a 20mph zone.
Yes, they were unlikely to tell him that they'd stopped him initially because they thought his bike was able to provide assistance over 15.5mph.Which is what they were evidently testing for with their free bike ride. Fortunately, for him, he'd switched it out of that mode. It sounds like the battery pack excuse was just that and they're on to him.![]()
Agreed. Enough typing for me. I'm off to practice my hot mode switching.Yes, they were unlikely to tell him that they'd stopped him initially because they thought his bike was able to provide assistance over 15.5mph.
I know that, I made no mention of an illegal bike, just that doing 30mph (or it appears even above) is not grounds for police to stop someone.It's illegal to ride a bike that is able to provide assistance above 15.5mph, even if you're only riding at say 5mph.
Remember that we are not in Nazi Germany but in the UK, apparently the land where spot checks, inspections and giving a reason to be doing what you are doing, providing ID isn't compulsory but somehow that hasn't been explained to the police who frequently breach the law.Ah, obviously the police suspect he's up to no good then. Reading between the lines his bike is able to provide assistance above 15.5mph, "I set my speed dial to 15.5mph", and the police are struggling to prove that.
if i was in that situation i would let the officers take it for a ride as from what i have seen f those in patrol cars they need some exercise lolObviously Bobajob wasn't there. This was the info given - "a police officer stopped him in Bristol because of his battery in a triangle bag"
Then they came up with a load of weight blarney before taking his steed for a joyride. The officer was clearly clueless, misquoting the law, had no justifiable reason to be hunting for further evidence that the owner of the
bike was not obliged to give.
or if the police stopped and man carrying a machete, machine gun and a bomb would that be unlawful, no it wouldn't.Coincidently my local paper today had a report of a guy who'd been stopped in the town centre and found to be carrying a lock knife. He was arrested and found guilty of "possessing the blade without lawful excuse".
Was that unlawful police harassment?
So it's lawful to stop a man who's carrying nasty weapons but not lawful to stop him if he's carrying no weapon.or if the police stopped and man carrying a machete, machine gun and a bomb would that be unlawful, no it wouldn't.
If they were to enter your property (home) without a warrant to ascertain whether you are not growing drugs, making bombs, or doing nasty things without probable cause would you welcome them well?So it's lawful to stop a man who's carrying nasty weapons but not lawful to stop him if he's carrying no weapon.
How are the police to know whether or not he's carrying a weapon?