Stopped by a Garda for cycling with no hands

eldon

Looking for any thoughts on this

Was stopped at 17:00 yesterday by the Garda thats stationed outside the British Embassy on Merrion Road. Said he was stopping me for being dangerous, cycling with no hands. Wasn't able to specifiy under the law what section i wasn't complying with.

He was combative from the off, whipping out his notebook. My side of the road was devoid of cars in both lanes at the time. I had a large rucksack on which after a while can cause my back to ache so stretching back with no hands is appreciated from time to time.

My frustration was evident from the beginning being already late for an appointment in town. Said I was a professional cyclist and that I knew what I was doing (have ridden a uni cycle and been paid for it so i'm happy enough with saying that)

He spent ten minutes with me checking out my bike, testing brakes, giving me grief that there was no back reflector, even though my bike is flurescent orange and I was able to show him a set of lights in my pocket.

Threatened at one point to take my off bike. He took all my details as I did his and it was left with him saying that I may be hearing from him. Now when I heard that I asked him was there possibility that this could go further, I reminded that I voluntariliy pulled over for him, and that I co-operated and gave him genuine details, there was no sense of reason with him. Just dimissivly said that I may be hearing from him and vainly bade me good day.

I have been raging ever since. Ruined my evening. Have been told by my father and a solicitor friend that there is no point in pursuing it any further with his station or any other place. That it would make matters worse.

Thought it might help to vent on this board.

aaarrgh


eldon

Thomas_S_Hunterson

Gob****e garda tbh.

You got very unlucky.

I've seen that guy stop guys for breaking red lights a few times. Straw & camel's back maybe.

stuf

Did you get his name and details? Not that I'm suggesting a vendetta but the confidence to take a Garda's details and the contact details of their superior can diffuse a situation where they're trying to intimidate.

I'm actually surprised that the Garda on the embassy duty is allowed to partake in such pettiness.

Caroline_ie

bcmf

I remember many,many,many moons (I was still in school) ago I was cycling home from a friends house in the middle of the summer with a friend on the crossbar.It was slightly downhill and the brakes were at best non-existant.Anyway as we passed 2 Gardai on footpatrol and as we passed my friend went "oink,oink".We broke our bo***x laughing and consequently hit the kerb and went arse over tit.Long story short (ish) the Garda pursued it all the way to court to which I recieved the probation act.

niceonetom

Not being fully in control of your vehicle... or some such bs. Nonsense, but enough for him to do as he pleases I guess.

Is is my firmly held opinion that many of the people who choose to become guards do so because they like to be in a position of unassailable and unchallengeable power. People who seek power over others for its own sake are rarely decent, and may actively enjoy ruining your evening. If one of these types has a bad day, he can decide to ruin yours, for no good reason and with no possibility of negative consequences for himself.

I hate it, but there's very little you can do in this situation but yes-sir-no-sir-three-bags-full-sir your way out of it. Say as little as possible - if he wants to escalate things you risk giving him ammunition by 'being cheeky' - and don't press him too hard on the fact that he hasn't a bull's notion about the law he's claiming you're breaking. Many guards operate on minimal knowledge of the law it seems.

I very much doubt you'll hear any more about it. If you do, I can't really imagine anything coming of it. He's had his fun.

Forget about it. Seriously. Don't stew. Rise above it.

There are good guards too, but they are less obvious because they tend to leave you alone unless you are actually doing something genuinely illegal. The dickheads are much more obvious.

mickoneill30

eldon wrote: »

Said he was stopping me for being dangerous, cycling with no hands. Wasn't able to specifiy under the law what section i wasn't complying with.

Just to be contrary, how would you stop if an idiot pedestrian walked out in front of you? Happens to me frequently. Is it not dangerous to not have your hands near the brakes. Or do you have an old fashioned back pedal brake thingy

UnderpantsGnome

Why in the name of all that is sensible and logical would you want to cycle "with no hands" which I assume means that your arms are stuck to your sides like an Irish dancer?

Does it save energy? Do you think it looks good, or cool or anything positive? Do you need your hands for carrying cups of tea/coffee?

What would happen if you hit a tiny pebble? Would the bike carry on or be sent flying into a ditch? Or are the roads in Ireland so impeccable that this isn't an issue?

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Caroline_ie

lol - Tim Allen does have friends!

Chips Lovell

OP, I think you played it all wrong. The best approach is usually to appear polite and apologetic. You may feel that he was being petty, but arguing the toss with him simply just keeps you there longer and increases the chance that he'd escalate it. It's never really worth it.

Countdown to TimAllen intervention in 5...4...3...

Raam

Cycling with no hands is bliss. It's always good form to pretend to be adjusting or removing some item of clothing while doing it. This lets you feel like you are in a pro race and are about to hand something off to your domestique.

I regularly see a chap cycling with no hands on the Clontarf track while on his mobile phone.

Sleipnir

eldon wrote: »

I reminded that I voluntariliy pulled over for him, and that I co-operated and gave him genuine details, there was no sense of reason with him.

You didn't "voluntarily pull over", you complied with the directions of a Garda, which you have to do under the law. You also need to co-operate and give genuine details so I don't see how you can argue that because of all that, he could have been more reasonable?

"Hey, I could have kept going or given you false details but I didn't so you really should let me off."
"Yeah, you're right. Thanks so much for co-operating"

If a driver hit a cyclist because he didn't have his hands on the wheel because he was "stretching his back" you'd all be up in arms.

Does the "I'm a professional driver" thing work when a trucker does something wrong on the road?

How about "I'm late for an appointment"?

Lumen

I also used to ride a unicycle, although not professionally. My lack of dedication to the career is presumably why I can't yet ride my road bike with no hands, something that fills me with dark shame. I'm also too chicken to practice on my crabon fibré bike for fear of unrepairable damage.

Anyway, the car analogy doesn't quite work. Apart from the fact that cars cause massively more damage when they crash, you can't steer a car with your body weight.

You would hope that this garda's dedication to duty also extends to stopping cyclists without lights after dark, but I fear not.

I would be half inclined to not pull over and risk a chase then claim gardaphobia-induced temporary insanity in court, but then I've always had an authority problem.

CheGuedara

eldon wrote: »

Looking for any thoughts on this.... aaarrgh
eldon

stuf wrote: »

Did you get his name and details? Not that I'm suggesting a vendetta but the confidence to take a Garda's details and the contact details of their superior can diffuse a situation where they're trying to intimidate.

Yup, if you think it's not a legit reason for them approaching you ask them for their number, which they're obliged to give on request, and their station they're very quick to disappear, prob. leaving you with a 'warning'. I've had a run in or two with some (evidently) new bobbies who were trying to excessively use their new found power and it made them go away.

Example; I was on a narrow footpath walking with my bike beside me (just on the very edge of the road) talking to friend beside me, then a garda car came up, stopped beside me, porker jumps out and starts reading me the riot act for having the bike on the road (wtf) so I calmly ask for his number and station and he turns a whiter shade of pale, mumbles something about a warning, gets back in the car and continues to abuse his power elsewhere.

A lesson for the future, give it a go.

That said it'd be hard to argue about being in full control without having hands on the bars with a garda - I think the world can be a bit black & white (blue) with them

abouttobebanned

Guard was very much in the right tbh. Something tells me the op wasn't stopped as he reached for his banana...more like when he began acting like a poser.

Billy Whizz

Not another thread that has descended into driver v cyclist.

The OP seems to have run onto a Garda on a power trip. It's happened to all of us before in a different shape or form - 99.9% of the time not on a bike either. Best thing is to say "yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir" and continue on your way.

I cycle with no hands when I'm fiddling around in my back pockets, eating a banana, rearranging my water bottles or stretching my back. I probably give up a marginal amount of control when I do this.

However when I'm driving, I also give up a marginal amount of control when I change the radio station, look in my wallet for change for the toll bridge, fiddle around in the glove box, wind down the window or drive with one hand.

Perhaps I "break the law" when I do both (probably when I jaywalk too) but put things in perspective and calm down.

Húrin

probably the same law that says you can't drive a car with no hands on the wheel.

Funkyzeit

Raam wrote: »

Cycling with no hands is bliss. This lets you feel like you are in a pro race and are about to hand something off to your domestique.

.

Thanks Raam - morning tea all over the keyboard....

Junki3

Roffles... hope he throws the book at you, then you'll fall backwards off your bike as your hands weren't on the handlebars. Wouldn't life be boring without An Garda Síochána...

Sleipnir

Lumen wrote: »

Anyway, the car analogy doesn't quite work. Apart from the fact that cars cause massively more damage when they crash, you can't steer a car with your body weight.

Come on, you might be able to slightly affect the direction of the bike by shifting your body weight, but you couldn't call it "steering"!

Cycling with no hands is inherently dangerous, more so for the cyclist than anyone else who might "get involved"

Lumen wrote: »

Anyway, the car analogy doesn't quite work. Apart from the fact that cars cause massively more damage when they crash,

Trucks cause more damage in a crash then a car does, the amount of damage a vehicle causes in a crash is no defence either.

"I was on a bike, if I hit a pensioner because I had no control over the bike at least she would have been better off then if she had been hit by a car!

faceman

I dont really see what the issue is. The OP was cycling along a main road with no hands. Its dangerous regardless of what level of cycler you are. No amount of pro cycling is going to stop someone walking out in front of you or another road user making an unpredictable manoeuvre in your direction. How the garda dealt with it after pulling the OP in is a different issues altogether

Riding a unicycle cant be compared with riding a bike for the purpose of commuting.

Raam

Sleipnir wrote: »

Come on, you might be able to slightly affect the direction of the bike by shifting your body weight, but you couldn't call it "steering"!

It's very easy to steer a bike with body weight.

Húrin

Raam wrote: »

It's very easy to steer a bike with body weight.

I would speculate that the law veers on the side of caution and does not allow for this fact.

Raam

faceman wrote: »

I dont really see what the issue is. The OP was cycling along a main road with no hands. Its dangerous regardless of what level of cycler you are. No amount of pro cycling is going to stop someone walking out in front of you or another road user making an unpredictable manoeuvre in your direction. How the garda dealt with it after pulling the OP in is a different issues altogether

Riding a unicycle cant be compared with riding a bike for the purpose of commuting.

That's were common sense comes into it. Don't do it when there are people walking close to you or other traffic right beside you. Unless of course you are in the middle of the bunch... doing 40... and you can't find that bloody gel in your pocket

Caroline_ie

Raam wrote: »

It's very easy to steer a bike with body weight.

I heard there was a certain cyclist with a Willier who can't do it though ..

Raam

Raam wrote: »

Unless of course you are in the middle of the bunch... doing 40... and you can't find that bloody gel in your pocket

I'd just like to point out that I haven't reached that level of comfort with it yet.

petethedrummer

Lumen wrote: »

you can't steer a car with your body weight.

but you can with your knees.

I hope this thread turns into a series of ifs and buts and hypothetical scenarios.

MarkR

Sleipnir wrote: »

You didn't "voluntarily pull over", you complied with the directions of a Garda, which you have to do under the law. You also need to co-operate and give genuine details so I don't see how you can argue that because of all that, he could have been more reasonable?

"Hey, I could have kept going or given you false details but I didn't so you really should let me off."
"Yeah, you're right. Thanks so much for co-operating"

If a driver hit a cyclist because he didn't have his hands on the wheel because he was "stretching his back" you'd all be up in arms.

Does the "I'm a professional driver" thing work when a trucker does something wrong on the road?

How about "I'm late for an appointment"?

You fool! Can you put two and two together? He was cycling with no hands. Professional cyclist. He's clearly a stunt cyclist or works in a circus. Silly Gardai.

Raam

petethedrummer wrote: »

but you can with your knees.

I hope this thread turns into a series of ifs and buts and hypothetical scenarios.

IF it does then it will probably be about helmets or how bad car drivers are.

Lumen

Sleipnir wrote: »

Come on, you might be able to slightly affect the direction of the bike by shifting your body weight, but you couldn't call it "steering"!

I can't steer with no hands. You might be able to, or not. The OP may be able to, I have no idea. I wasn't there to judge.

Sleipnir wrote: »

Cycling with no hands is inherently dangerous, more so for the cyclist than anyone else who might "get involved"

Few things are inherently dangerous. A number of things are perfectly safe when done properly but are made illegal in an attempt to reduce risk across a large population of stupid people.

Chips Lovell

Raam wrote: »

Unless of course you are in the middle of the bunch... doing 40... and you can't find that bloody gel in your pocket

Or want to fire a well aimed bidon at the back of some miscreant's head

Chips Lovell

Caroline_ie wrote: »

I heard there was a certain cyclist with a Willier who can't do it though ..

Guilty as charged

Harpz

€50 fine for no back reflector straight off.

(As an aside Ninja cycling can cost you €220 if they decide to prosecute. €50 front reflector, €50 back reflector and €60 for front and rear light)...from memory. fairly sure its accurate. someone else can pull up the S.I.

otherwise from the road traffic act of 1968 i'd say he was within the letter of the law. Not that I condone his pulling you over.

(6) A member of the Garda Síochána may test any pedal cycle and, for the purpose of carrying out the test, may do all such things and make all such requirements in relation to the cycle as are reasonably necessary.

[GA] (7) For the purposes of subsection (6) of this section and without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred thereby, a member of the Garda Síochána may—

[GA] ( a ) drive any pedal cycle for a reasonable time and distance,

[GA] ( b ) require any person in charge of a pedal cycle to drive it or cause it to be driven for a reasonable time and distance in such a direction as the member directs.

[GA] (8) Where a member of the Garda Síochána has, consequent upon having tested under this section a pedal cycle, reasonable grounds for believing that it has a dangerous defect, he may—

[GA] ( a ) instruct the person in charge of the cycle that it is not to be driven in a public place until the defect is remedied,

[GA] ( b ) require such person to submit the cycle for a further test at a specified, time and place.
[GA]
[GA] (16) ( a ) A person who, in a case in which an instruction under subsection (8) of this section that a cycle is not to be driven in a public place until a defect is remedied has been given or in which he is aware that such an instruction has been given, so drives it or causes or permits it to be so driven before the defect is remedied shall be guilty of an offence.

[GA] ( b ) Where a person is charged with an offence under this subsection, it shall be a good defence for him to show that, at the time the instruction was given, the cycle had not a dangerous defect.

[GA] (17) ( a ) A person who, in a case in which a requirement under subsection (8) of this section has been made on him, contravenes the requirement shall be guilty of an offence.

[GA] ( b ) Where a person is charged with an offence under this subsection, it shall be a good defence for him to show that, at the time the requirement was made, the cycle had not a dangerous defect.

[GA] (18) Where a requirement is made under subsection (3), (4), (5) or (8) of this section—

[GA] ( a ) the person required shall have the right to be present at the examination and, if he exercises this right—

[GA] (i) he shall be afforded an opportunity of observing the examination,

[GA] (ii) he shall have the further right to bring with him to the examination another person selected by him and, if he exercises this right, the person accompanying him shall also be afforded an opportunity of observing the examination,

[GA] ( b ) if he does not exercise his right to be present at the examination, he shall have the right to be represented at it by another person selected by him and, if he exercises this right, the person representing him shall be afforded an opportunity of observing the examination.

[GA] In this subsection "examination" includes "test".



loads of interesting things there http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1961/en/act/pub/0024/sec0020.html#zza24y1961s20
including a special provision for making it illegal to hold onto a friends car for going up hills.

Lumen

Harpz, that's an interesting quote but I don't see how cycling with no hands has anything to do with dangerous defects unless the handlebars are missing.

blorg

UnderpantsGnome wrote: »

What would happen if you hit a tiny pebble? Would the bike carry on or be sent flying into a ditch? Or are the roads in Ireland so impeccable that this isn't an issue?

Not condoning cycling with no hands but the technical reality is that, no, the bike will continue going in a straight line even if you hit "a tiny pebble", indeed it will continue in a straight line over large potholes and speed ramps too for that matter. The only sort of thing that could get you would be some sort of rut like a tram track that grabs your front wheel. Steering on a bike is fundamentally about balance, you don't really steer with the handlebars above very slow speeds.

Colmhayden76

Here's a question,

What if the op was on his unicycle at the time?

delop

Come off it guys...

On boards.ie ppl are consentingly complaining that the Gardai are not doing their job, but when one of them nails one of us, actually doing his job, its a different story, cries of why me! its not fair!

I feel for the Gardai (even though Ive got a few lumps from them) when they look around them, everyone is breaking the law, somehow, where to start...

Chips Lovell

Every time I see that bit of legislation about members of the force "driving a pedal cycle" I think of the The Third Policeman.

jimmycrackcorm

So how does this hands-free cycling work if someone steps out in front of you and you need to suddenly pull the brakes?

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Caroline_ie

blorg

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

So how does this hands-free cycling work if someone steps out in front of you and you need to suddenly pull the brakes?

Yes, something like that happening is the issue with no hands cycling, and I have no issue with the OP being pulled over. Just pointing out that the "hit a road imperfection = crash" is a fallacy, the bike will just continue over almost anything. Even more than the brakes, you _would_ need hands on the bars to perform a evasive manoeuvre involving a quick change of direction.

Raam

el tonto wrote: »

Or want to fire a well aimed bidon at the back of some miscreant's head

This technique can also be employed outside the environs of the bunch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4XxCZagAjk

Raam

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

So how does this hands-free cycling work if someone steps out in front of you and you need to suddenly pull the brakes?

I clarified this one earlier. You don't do it when people are walking nearby.

rottenhat

blorg wrote: »

Not condoning cycling with no hands but the technical reality is that, no, the bike will continue going in a straight line even if you hit "a tiny pebble", indeed it will continue in a straight line over large potholes...

Lets not descend into pure fantasy here. A bike may continue straight under those circumstances - in general a bicycle moving at speed is fairly stable and wants to continue in a straight line. However depending on the situation, hitting a stone or the lip of a pothole can turn the wheel and unless you have your hands on the bars, you are likely to fall. I have done this, I have seen other people do this.

It is at the very least a violation of the rules of the road not to be in full control of a vehicle. In the case of a car, that means two hands on the wheel (hence the mobile phone regulation), in the case of a bike that means hands on the bars.

The guards in front of embassies and similar locations are, I would say, very bored and will be looking for something to help pass the time, such as pulling cyclists over for various infractions. In times past when I was a less responsible fellow and routinely cycled without lights, I was regularly pulled by the guard outside the Department of Foreign Affairs.

In this situation, you can't do much more than say 'it's a fair cop' and respectfully submit to the usual five or ten minute lecture. Unless you provoke the guard, you will never hear back about it - boring as they find standing outside government buildings, they find filling out the paperwork and spending time in court over minor offenses even more tedious.

Much as I like reading this forum, I think there is a vein of cyclist tribalism that tends to blind people to bad behaviour on the part of cyclists. We generally assume the worst of drivers but are too lenient to our fellow cyclists.

kenmc

I'd imagine that if he's minding the embassy he's not allowed to leave his post, in case the baddies get inside, so if he takes the matter any further he's going to have a lot of explaining to do to his supervisors.

Donny5

kenmc wrote: »

I'd imagine that if he's minding the embassy he's not allowed to leave his post, in case the baddies get inside, so if he takes the matter any further he's going to have a lot of explaining to do to his supervisors.

I don't think he's like the Mountie in Due South. He's allowed saunter around a bit.

ceegee

Raam wrote: »

I clarified this one earlier. You don't do it when people are walking nearby.

I somehow doubt theres any road in Dublin city where the above applies at 5pm

Raam

ceegee wrote: »

I somehow doubt theres any road in Dublin city where the above applies at 5pm

There's plenty