Cyclists in Lowestoft

Post by **boatbuilder** » Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:09 pm

Is it any wonder cyclists get 'moaned about' by motorists?

This is a screenshot taken from my dashcam yesterday afternoon on Ashburnham Way, Carlton Colville. The cyclists had earlier just 'barged' across Elm Tree Road having ridden out of Rosedale Park without any thought for the considerable amount of traffic on the road at the time and continued to ride in a reckless manner up Ashburnham Way in front of me as shown in the photograph.

I decided to post this having just read the following story on the BBC which portrays cycling (and a driver) in a totally different light.

Cyclist aged 4 gives lorry driver thumbs up for perfect pass

Post by **nikkai** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 9:02 pm

I met a similar situation with four "cyclists" who came out of the school entrance in Kirkly Run and made route to victoria road, I myself was taking the wife to the surgery in victoria road. the four rode in the road and swerved to and fro while laughing at myself and wife in the car now traveling at around 3 or 4 MPH there IS a cycle path designated use in victoria road and they were very aware of it as one actually did bump the kerb and rode it for a short distance before rejoining the group.
We did report to the school (academy) with a full description of the lads and the cycles and a picture from my wifes phone but can you guess the outcome ??
It is NOT permitted to take pictures of minors without full permission of their parent / guardian and just reason !!!

I have nothing against cyclists when they conform to the rules the same applies to motorists I have no problem with them so long as they conform to the rules. That said, there seems to be a totally different Highway Code in use to the one I studied for each of my tests (bike - car - 2 type of truck - Specialist Cat heavy haulage) Oh and there was also a section during the cycling proficiency exam where you were awarded a certificate and a badge if you satisfied the examiner that you knew how to ride safely.

Post by **boatbuilder** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 9:11 pm

nikkai wrote:It is NOT permitted to take pictures of minors without full permission of their parent / guardian and just reason !!!

You had JUST REASON - they were breaking the law! Why not give it to the police and see what they say! Or better still, send (email) it to Tim Passmore for his comments. I have a mind to do just that with my recording. I would think those in my picture were from the same 'academy' as well.

Post by **nikkai** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 9:31 pm

I and the wife were "requested to destroy the image (s)" by a nice DC from Halesworth ! who was asked to approach us by the school ?!?!?!?!?
which is the only thing the DC (female) would say even though she agreed with what we had done it was what she had to do.
I dont think my wife thought much of the outcome as it was her who phoned the *school* gave our name and details etc including where our journey was and mentioned that she could email images of these 'very silly children' if they could give us an address to send them. Apparently the person did not think it was in his power to pass on any information for this type of thing and we should call back at a later date to talk with the head of the children's department? Not knowing the children that would be extremely difficult, the conversation became convoluted as the person requested our child or children's name and class information, we have NO children of school age ! to which he became even more confusing so the call ended with my wife saying she would call back at a different time.
We did not as a day or two later the Detective Constable turned up at the door.

Post by **boatbuilder** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 9:46 pm

That is a strange response from the DC, nikkai. Here is a similar sort of incident where I took a picture with a totally different outcome.

A few years ago we had a problem with a couple of youngsters (maybe 12-13 years old) who were making a nuisance of themselves outside the house (I won't go into details as they are immaterial). It wasn't just the once but several times and so I contacted the police and the local PCSO came around. I had decided to take a picture through our window of the offenders and printed it out and gave it to the PCSO. He recognised one of them and dealt with the matter through the boy's parents and the matter was amicably resolved as he reported back to us some days later and the boy's parents were fully understanding and dealt with him. Now nothing was mentioned to us about the taking of the image. If they are in a public place where photography is not banned then I don't believe there is anything to stop you taking a perfectly legitimate image under such circumstance.

If you want my opinion, it's that the schools just don't want to know!!!

Post by **nikkai** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:59 pm

boatbuilder wrote: If you want my opinion, it's that the schools just don't want to know!!!

I will agree to that BB as I have the honor of the school delivery pick-up parking issue in the cul-de-sac where we live and the local Police / council and schools do sweet fanny adams about the blatant flouting of the rules and laws

I don't think it was the actual pictures which was the instigator of the visit by the DC.
I think it could have been the confused / misunderstanding reason for the telephone call to the school (the following morning at about 9.15) and that we did not have any child at that school or any factual information regarding who and where the boys were going and were we sure that they were from that school? "just because they came out of the gateway does not say they are pupils of this academy" even though the clothing style was that of the school.
It was a waste of energy to get the person on the other end of the line to take any notice, he was a very good candidate for a politician (probably is by now) because he had an answer for every thing which was questioning every thing.

We gave up ! then the CD visited us and from then on we just avoid school end / start times for traveling any where near there.
If one does get knocked down it will be the car drivers fault as they did not take enough care !

Post by **boatbuilder** » Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:12 pm

nikkai wrote:then the CD visited us.....

Ah, so it wasn't a DC who visited, it was a Compact Disc was it?

Post by **morty1753** » Fri Jun 08, 2018 5:59 am

nikkai wrote: It is NOT permitted to take pictures of minors without full permission of their parent / guardian and just reason !!!

If they are in a public place, which they appear to have been, then that is rubbish. You are allowed to photograph anything or anyone in a public place.

Publication of photographs may be different.

Post by **muzzy** » Sat Jun 09, 2018 1:16 pm

morty1753 wrote:
nikkai wrote: It is NOT permitted to take pictures of minors without full permission of their parent / guardian and just reason !!!
If they are in a public place, which they appear to have been, then that is rubbish. You are allowed to photograph anything or anyone in a public place.

Publication of photographs may be different.

Not quite true. Try taking photos in London of the entrance to Downing Street or even Trafalger Square, and see what happens! I had that happen, and was asked/ordered by a police officer to delete the photos as they could be of use to terrorists!

We're becoming a nanny state, not allowed to do anything that rocks the boat.

Post by **boatbuilder** » Sat Jun 09, 2018 1:30 pm

Perhaps you looked a bit 'suspicious' Muzzy.

Google doesn't seem to have a problem and their images are available to all. Even the blue lines on the map image below show how much of Trafalgar Square their 'camera' covered.