GARDA CARS WITH BICYCLES ATTACHED TO REAR

miller50841

Why don't Garda cars have bycycles attached to the rear as they do in the U.S

There would be great benefits if there were like:

Catching criminals that run,
Catching others on bikes,
Catching the ones that use lanes and that to get away that a car won't make it up as they are too narrow.

There needs to be a huge change here as to how the streets are policed.

cuppa

As far as i know they don't even have enough cars at the moment.

TheBody

Somebody would prob rob the bike off the back of the car :pac:

miller50841

TheBody wrote: »

Somebody would prob rob the bike off the back of the car :pac:

Thats true would really have to attach a big dog to it also

POGAN

There enough problems getting cars, bike rake would be out of the question

eoinkildare

How far away would the criminal be before you parked up the car, got out, unlocked the bike and then got your helmet, gloves etc on and eventually cycled after him/her?

Ridiculous

Terrontress

You could start off with 4 bikes and 5 Gardai. Drop them off in 4 various locations then have them patrol that area. At the end of the shift they can cycle back or else the Garda car can head out and put the bikes on the car.

miller50841

eoinkildare wrote: »

How far away would the criminal be before you parked up the car, got out, unlocked the bike and then got your helmet, gloves etc on and eventually cycled after him/her?

Ridiculous

How so?

If it works in the U.S why not here who says you have to have gloves or a lock on it there are such things as quick release locks.
Sure cops don't wear seatbelts all the time so what would be wrong not having the helmet.

All is needed is a special team to crack down on crime and I mean a team of cops that are not afraid to do their job.

Its RIDICULOUS seeing criminals getting away

kirving

A bike on the boot lid with a remote unlock mechanism could be a good idea in certain circumstances. Bringing bikes to a concert, or the park would be an example. Maybe also when searching an area. However, in a chase, all the criminal has to do is jump a wall, or run down an alleyway and the bike will be a hindrance rather than a help.

miller50841

cuppa wrote: »

As far as i know they don't even have enough cars at the moment.

True

BaronVon

miller50841 wrote: »

There needs to be a huge change here as to how the streets are policed.

alan.shatter@oireachtas.ie

Delancey

Use a van to move bikes - why bother with a bike rack ?

Potential-Monke

Terrontress wrote: »

You could start off with 4 bikes and 5 Gardai. Drop them off in 4 various locations then have them patrol that area. At the end of the shift they can cycle back or else the Garda car can head out and put the bikes on the car.

Most community policing units in the cities are mountain bike trained (yes, there's training, like how to be knocked off the bike safely and how to use it in defence). Where i am, if they can go on the bike they do. No need for a car, they cycle to and from the station, and frighten the crap out of people stopped at traffic lights while on mobile phones.

@miller50841: any Garda who goes onto a mountain bike without a helmet would not be covered if something happened and there was a head injury. As for seatbelts, they are recommended but not necessary due to the nature of the job (always wear mine regardless). You don't need to take off your helmet to get off the bike.

Locust

miller50841 wrote: »

Why don't Garda cars have bycycles attached to the rear as they do in the U.S

I've never heard of such a thing.

To be honest with you it sounds impractical and ridiculous. As someone pointed out, if..... IF, the criminal ran from the car one would have to - get out dawn bike gear (helmet, high viz gear) lock the car and go after them. Not gonna happen.

Even if it 'works in the US' it wouldn't catch on here. Impractical and its a different society and policing situation here. Anyways 9 times out of 10 the car is sufficient in pursuing someone even if they go through a narrow laneway etc. Never mind leaving the car and getting on a bike.

There is immensely more to 'policing' than chasing people that run from the police.

Why bother having the bikes attached to a car when you can have members driving the car and other members riding the bikes from the station? Oh wait, we already do that!

goldie fish

miller50841 wrote: »

How so?

If it works in the U.S why not here who says you have to have gloves or a lock on it there are such things as quick release locks.
Sure cops don't wear seatbelts all the time so what would be wrong not having the helmet.

All is needed is a special team to crack down on crime and I mean a team of cops that are not afraid to do their job.

Its RIDICULOUS seeing criminals getting away

Where in the US does it work?

Iwannahurl

Locust wrote: »

I've never heard of such a thing.

To be honest with you it sounds impractical and ridiculous. As someone pointed out, if..... IF, the criminal ran from the car one would have to - get out dawn bike gear (helmet, high viz gear) lock the car and go after them. Not gonna happen.

Even if it 'works in the US' it wouldn't catch on here. Impractical and its a different society and policing situation here. Anyways 9 times out of 10 the car is sufficient in pursuing someone even if they go through a narrow laneway etc. Never mind leaving the car and getting on a bike.

There is immensely more to 'policing' than chasing people that run from the police.

Salt Lake City Police Department.

Iwannahurl

eoinkildare wrote: »

How far away would the criminal be before you parked up the car, got out, unlocked the bike and then got your helmet, gloves etc on and eventually cycled after him/her?

Ridiculous

Why the need for extra special gear on a bike? The view among regular commuter cyclists is that their ordinary clothing is sufficient, so would the same not be applicable to Gardai?

Potential-Monke wrote: »

@miller50841: any Garda who goes onto a mountain bike without a helmet would not be covered if something happened and there was a head injury. As for seatbelts, they are recommended but not necessary due to the nature of the job (always wear mine regardless). You don't need to take off your helmet to get off the bike.

What about Gardai in patrol cars, and who also have to leave their vehicle at times to enter potentially hazardous situations? They generally don't wear helmets, AFAIK. Among the general public there are far more head injuries associated with travelling in a car and engaging in risky activities. Cyclists are not disproportionately represented among the head injured population.

Kevin Irving wrote: »

However, in a chase, all the criminal has to do is jump a wall, or run down an alleyway and the bike will be a hindrance rather than a help.

Presumably the same applies to cars and vans?

Bikes probably have greater mobility, inasmuch as they can access certain areas where motorised vehicles can't go. Also, in such situations cycling is much faster than running.

However, you do have a point there about the bad guys jumping walls. In my neck of the woods, a large number of alleyways have been closed off in certain neighbourhoods, because of anti-social behaviour reportedly. As a result, Gardai on 'mountain' bikes can no longer patrol those alleyways and permeate easily between estates, as they could previously. A few dedicated Gardai have persisted, I have heard, even to the point of hauling their bikes over the walls. The ne'er-do-wells just jump over, of course...

miller50841

goldie fish wrote: »

Where in the US does it work?

All you have to do is watch cops they do be on that lots.

And as others said bike would be quicker then running

Locust

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Salt Lake City Police Department...

Thats the first time i've ever seen one on the rear of a police car. I honestly don't think this would be worth the time. I wouldn't want one on the back of mine. Looks like more hassle and obstructs the rear view. Is this seriously standard practice in Salt Lake City PD?

Perhaps they would just use them to drop police cyclists off in an area of the city? Open to correction but I doubt they patrol like this for the whole shift. More likely they just deploy cyclists and pick them up if they arrest someone. (The fact that there are five or more patrol cars there, that photo more than likely is outside a police station/or coffee shop ha)

And yes of course you must wear a helmet when cycling! What kind of message would that send out to people if Gardai went around on bikes without the right gear on. They are supposed to lead by example.

Policing is a lot more than just chasing bad guys... A car, supported by bike patrols and/or beat patrols is generally sufficient - unless you are chasing Jason Bourne.

Saruman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Salt Lake City Police Department.

Salt lake city... ah that explains a lot.

Iwannahurl

Locust wrote: »

And yes of course you must wear a helmet when cycling! What kind of message would that send out to people if Gardai went around on bikes without the right gear on.

They are supposed to lead by example.

Indeed they are!

On the specific detail of cycle helmets for Gardai on bikes, there is no law in this country (and in many others) requiring their use.

In any case, it could be argued -- as it has with seat belts for example -- that Gardai are exempted.

My personal view is that Gardai would be giving the best possible example by being seen regularly on bikes. When the Community Guards first appeared on their 'mountain' bikes I was very impressed, and in my experience they are seen in a very positive light by the community at large.

Here are a couple of Dutch police officers on bikes.

Iwannahurl

Saruman wrote: »

Salt lake city... ah that explains a lot.

Kansas
http://www.kansascyclist.com/news/2009/02/lawrence-may-add-bike-racks-to-police-cars/

LAPD
http://www.the5thfloor.co.uk/2012/03/19/wolfpack-marathon-crash-race-police-car/

Daytona Beach, Florida
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10-42adam/6793085599/

Tampa, Florida
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/18/2900399/tampa-police-buys-200-bikes-for.html

Washington DC (not regular police, though)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/freddy/6975918/

Somewhere in the US
http://www.myspace.com/rtbmx/photos/47567666

Washington (where they can't spell 'pedal' !!)
http://www.dcmilitary.com/article/20120706/NEWS07/707069991/to-peddle-protect-and-serve

Locust

I agree with you and cannot say enough about the effectiveness of police out and about on bikes. But having one on the back of the car... I can't see it working, it just wouldn't really be any use from an operational point of view.

I doubt Garda management would give the okay for guards to go out without bike helmets. You only have to watch a few safety videos, or be at the scene of a traffic collision between a bike and pedestrian and you'll never go out without a helmet.

The seatbelt exemption is slightly different as its in law, also there's the larger safety argument that a prisoner in the back of the car has the option of strangling you with your own seat belt, sounds silly but it has been attempted a few times. I would imagine bike helmets will always be mandatory, from a health & safety point of view as to be covered, there's no getting around that.

Increasing members who are trained in the mountain bike courses should be a priority. Especially with fewer cars around, increasing numbers on bikes are the way to go.

Atlantis50

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Kansas
http://www.kansascyclist.com/news/2009/02/lawrence-may-add-bike-racks-to-police-cars/

LAPD
http://www.the5thfloor.co.uk/2012/03/19/wolfpack-marathon-crash-race-police-car/

Daytona Beach, Florida
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10-42adam/6793085599/

Tampa, Florida
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/18/2900399/tampa-police-buys-200-bikes-for.html

Washington DC (not regular police, though)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/freddy/6975918/

Somewhere in the US
http://www.myspace.com/rtbmx/photos/47567666

^^

All only to transport the bikes. It would be totally daft to expect the officers in a foot chase situation to stop the car, dismount the bike, and start cycling after the alleged criminal.

I don't see the point of the thread:

- Gardai already use bikes for patrol.
- Those bikes are transported by vans.

What's the need for bike racks?

Iwannahurl

Locust wrote: »

I agree with you and cannot say enough about the effectiveness of police out and about on bikes. But having one on the back of the car... I can't see it working, it just wouldn't really be any use from an operational point of view.

I doubt Garda management would give the okay for guards to go out without bike helmets. You only have to watch a few safety videos, or be at the scene of a traffic collision between a bike and pedestrian and you'll never go out without a helmet.

The seatbelt exemption is slightly different as its in law, also there's the larger safety argument that a prisoner in the back of the car has the option of strangling you with your own seat belt, sounds silly but it has been attempted a few times. I would imagine bike helmets will always be mandatory, from a health & safety point of view as to be covered, there's no getting around that.

Increasing members who are trained in the mountain bike courses should be a priority. Especially with fewer cars around, increasing numbers on bikes are the way to go.

I think the idea of the bike racks is to expand police mobility in certain situations.

By the way, cycle helmet straps have caused strangulation!

Somewhat OT, what happens in those cyclist/pedestrian collisions?

sheesh

I know someone who is a guard and they told me that they have a bike in the back of the van for chasing people says its great craic apparently he used it alot.

Pappa Charlie

Following a US model isnt always the correct thing to do, they have shotguns in their cars as well. Put a person on the bike and put a person in the car as it makes common sence, a person in a car with a bike strapped to it is a waste of a bike. A policeman on a bike with a car parked up is a waste of a car. We'll soon be lucky to have any of the three, bike, car or police!

Terrontress

I suppose AGS have a duty of care toward their members and to send them out without helmets might be fine until someone suffers a head injury.

The thing with bikes is that it is all dependent on where they're being used. If a Garda is chasing a scum, Garda on a bike, scum on foot and the scum runs on to a beach, the Garda will find it tough to continue. Scum is chased by horseback Garda on the beach no problem but if he then negotiates a busy road then the horse is impractical but the bike would help.

To my mind the best deployment of bicycles is in small areas with heavy traffic or physical road barriers. The speed of getting to a fixed point rather than the ability to chase someone using a different method of getting about.

Potential-Monke

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Why the need for extra special gear on a bike? The view among regular commuter cyclists is that their ordinary clothing is sufficient, so would the same not be applicable to Gardai?

It's basic protection against injuries which are more likely to occur to a Garda on a bike as they are an high visibility target. It also protects the state from claims against injuries which could have been avoided was safety gear worn. It would be the first question asked by a review board/barrister: "Were you wearing safety gear?".

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What about Gardai in patrol cars, and who also have to leave their vehicle at times to enter potentially hazardous situations? They generally don't wear helmets, AFAIK. Among the general public there are far more head injuries associated with travelling in a car and engaging in risky activities. Cyclists are not disproportionately represented among the head injured population.

We have helmets for public order situations, but your point is moot, the helmet is not for protection against assaults, etc, it's for protection against falling or being knocked off the bike.

Iwannahurl

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

Following a US model isnt always the correct thing to do, they have shotguns in their cars as well. Put a person on the bike and put a person in the car as it makes common sence, a person in a car with a bike strapped to it is a waste of a bike. A policeman on a bike with a car parked up is a waste of a car. We'll soon be lucky to have any of the three, bike, car or police!

Shotgun versus bike is not a fair comparison. Bikes are much more dangerous apparently -- only joking!

Seriously though, why not take the best of what other police forces do? See the Dutch example earlier.

Don't Garda officers get out of their cars? Are police officers on foot, having left their car, a waste also?

The point of the bike rack, as I see it, is that it expands mobility: the police officers now have a choice of three modes of travel.

In our current economic circumstances, public services have to make the best use of limited resources. Bikes are comparatively very cheap, highly mobile and ridiculously energy efficient to boot (no fuel bills).

Hooch

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The point of the bike rack, as I see it, is that it expands mobility: the police officers now have a choice of three modes of travel.

In our current economic circumstances, public services have to make the best use of limited resources. Bikes are comparatively very cheap, highly mobile and ridiculously energy efficient to boot (no fuel bills).

It doesn't expand anything. A patrol car is just that, to patrol and respond to calls. In the present climate if that car driver is on a mountain bike with the car parked up there is no one to go to the call.

We already use Mountain Bikes in AGS....and not just in community policing. every Garda district has at least one bike and has members trained and equipped to ride them. Most members that have the course done LOVE to be detailed to it. I know I did.

Im trying to work out are you trolling the forum or genuinely interested. I don't think its the latter to be honest.....

Iwannahurl

Potential-Monke wrote: »

It's basic protection against injuries which are more likely to occur to a Garda on a bike as they are an high visibility target. It also protects the state from claims against injuries which could have been avoided was safety gear worn. It would be the first question asked by a review board/barrister: "Were you wearing safety gear?".

We have helmets for public order situations, but your point is moot, the helmet is not for protection against assaults, etc, it's for protection against falling or being knocked off the bike.

Are Gardai statistically more likely to suffer injuries when on bikes (a) because being on a bike is more dangerous than being in a car or on foot and (b) because being on a bike exposes a Garda to greater risk of assault than if on foot?

The situation among the general public is that far more car occupants are injured than cyclists, so if Health & Safety/review board/barrister concerns are paramount it's surprising that Gardai are not required to wear protective gear in cars and vans.

This situation would appear to mirror that of mandatory helmet use among the general public: rather than being an aid to greater use of bicycles for very good reasons of mobility etc, helmets appear to be primarily a deterrent to the use of bikes, as well as being mainly a device to provide cover against claims of various types.

That's a pity, IMO. Again I would cite the earlier Dutch example: they seem to feel no need for such protection, yet their bikes and skulls are broadly the same as ours.

Pappa Charlie

Why not put a hitch on patrol cars an attach horseboxes with horses in them in case theres a cross country chase or maybe a jet ski in case they take to the water, What delayed you Garda Bond?

CramCycle

Potential-Monke wrote: »

@miller50841: any Garda who goes onto a mountain bike without a helmet would not be covered if something happened and there was a head injury. As for seatbelts, they are recommended but not necessary due to the nature of the job (always wear mine regardless). You don't need to take off your helmet to get off the bike.

Does that mean they are not covered for increased risk of rotational spinal injury, as for not taking a helmet off, try running in a bike helmet, you may not think it but it will impair you quite alot due to weight and overheating IMO.
As for the nature of the job, I imagine they are more necessary but possibly more prohibitive in the execution of their duties.

Locust wrote: »

And yes of course you must wear a helmet when cycling! What kind of message would that send out to people if Gardai went around on bikes without the right gear on. They are supposed to lead by example.

Its not a legal requirement and time and time again studies have shown no net reduction in injury due to a lack of helmets but in several cases there is proof of strangulation of children and increased risk or rotational spinal injury due to increased weight.
The message it would send out is that in general cycling is safe, the truth of the matter before anyone gets in a huff is that it is safer than most other modes of transport in Ireland.

Terrontress wrote: »

I suppose AGS have a duty of care toward their members and to send them out without helmets might be fine until someone suffers a head injury.

See above.
Back OT, I was just disagreeing with some of the points made.
There are instances it could be beneficial and instances it won't be, until a study of those who run away from the AGS while in a car and the extrapolation by those members of AGS who believe they had a better chance if they had a bike there to assist them, the entire argument is flawed, are there any stats on how it works in the US? I can see specific instances it will catch someone and others where it won't but then again, I would trust members of AGS to make the decision of which is the right way to pursue the person fleeing ie foot/bike/car. The best question at this point is will it hinder a car in a pursuit?
Personally, over 100meters, I could pull a bike off a car and catch an average runner quicker than I could catch them after the head-start of waiting for me to get out of the car but that is a personal inference and one every Garda, given the option, will have to make for themselves.

Zambia

Has anyone asked the Question how many foot pursuits are Gardai engaging in per year?

Eru

Zambia wrote: »

Has anyone asked the Question how many foot pursuits are Gardai engaging in per year?

**** me theres enough bloody time wasted by Gardai to satisfy the stat nuts as it is!

unichall

Here is a novel idea, when driving a patrol car and a criminal makes a run for it somewhere where a car can't go, instead of getting out and getting a bike off the car to follow him why not just run? Just like the criminal because that's what happens now.

First time i seen the bikes on the back of the car was in Vegas, we asked the cops about it and he said the station wasnt very close to the strip so it was easier to transport the bikes there and then patrol the area, it wasn't specially to apprehend fleeing criminals. In Ireland we are lucky enough that in most urban areas mostly everywhere is within cycling distance of the local station so no need to transport bikes.

Finally could you imagine the stick the gardai would receive parking cars up and not having them in use while they cycle, this is why the cars are on the go 24/7 and the bike lads look afyrr themselves.

It simply isn't needed here in Ireland

CramCycle

Eru wrote: »

**** me theres enough bloody time wasted by Gardai to satisfy the stat nuts as it is!

I know they are not fun but in the long run, stats tell us what is happening in the long run rather than a few anecdotes, they give us an idea where we should and should not focus resources.
You are right, the Gardai have loads to do and IMO they do a great job with the little they have and anything that can help them influence their resources in the right direction in the long run can only be welcomed.

Iwannahurl

Eru wrote: »

**** me theres enough bloody time wasted by Gardai to satisfy the stat nuts as it is!

There's a well-known saying in management: you can't manage what you don't measure.

The OP pointed out that the car-bike combo seemed to be common enough in the US. I hope they're not just doing it for the optics, and that they are motivated by the operational effectiveness of this approach to policing.

irishrgr

We have bikes in our department, as do many US agencies and, as was accurately pointed out above, the car/bike rack is simply used to transport the bikes to the relevant bike patrol location. Some of the lads can cycle from the central police station to their assigned beat. Others use the car to get to the patrol district. We don't park the car and use the bike to chase....just run like the criminals.

The bikes are great for large concert venues, parks, festivals just like the Gardai use them for. Here you have to take an approved police bike course, its five days long and you learn basic maintenance, pursuit techniques, take downs, defensive tactics and basics of patrol. Not qualified myself but have several mates who are, they like it. Breaks the routine up from sitting in the car, although when it's 40 plus degress celsius it is probbaly not as much fun, especially wearing a vest.

A

CramCycle

irishrgr wrote: »

, although when it's 40 plus degress celsius it is probbaly not as much fun, especially wearing a vest.

Can't imagine a car is much fun either in that heat, in fact living maybe an issue after a prolonged period of time*

Science Nazi is on the prowl

*humidity dependent

Eru

CramCycle wrote: »

I know they are not fun but in the long run, stats tell us what is happening in the long run rather than a few anecdotes, they give us an idea where we should and should not focus resources.

In my experience stats can and are manipulated to suit whatever agenda they are being collected for.

Historically I would suggest AGS has fallen victim to that more than most with our pay be compared to private security, our sick days being compared to office staff working 9 to 5 monday - friday in air conditioned rooms and lets not forget all those 'leave days' we are now getting according to a certain absolute rag of a paper.

CramCycle

Eru wrote: »

In my experience stats can and are manipulated to suit whatever agenda they are being collected for.

and finally the masses realise why having a randomer whose only job is to get re-elected in charge of decisions that affect the whole country is a bad decision. Stats can and are a great tool for the development of mankind, unfortunately, they are only shown for what they are in the eyes of an impartial or unbiased observer.

Historically I would suggest AGS has fallen victim to that more than most with our pay be compared to private security, our sick days being compared to office staff working 9 to 5 monday - friday in air conditioned rooms and lets not forget all those 'leave days' we are now getting according to a certain absolute rag of a paper.

Historically I'd say whatever either the media or politicians need for a scape goat has fallen victim to it. I have the utmost respect for AGS, regardless of what some rags write about. Comparing the pay of a garda to a member of a private security firm in Ireland is ridiculous, it doesn't even make sense when you compare the jobs in detail. It is an insult to our intelligence and our country when the pay of those who protect us, be they the gardai, the fire service, lifeguards, the medical service etc. get a bashing. I am all for scrutiny, its needed for a fair and balanced world, but there are times when I don't get where we went wrong when unjustified bashing of the type you've mentioned goes on.

Anyway back on topic once more, is there any benefit to garda bicycles on the back of cars as described, I can see the need for it in certain situations but can it be justified within the current budget and more importantly, would it be justifiable if the current budget wasn't an obstacale?

Potential-Monke

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Are Gardai statistically more likely to suffer injuries when on bikes (a) because being on a bike is more dangerous than being in a car or on foot and (b) because being on a bike exposes a Garda to greater risk of assault than if on foot?

I don't have any statistics to hand, so i can't answer that. But, there is a far higher proportion of members in cars than on mountain bikes so i don't think the comparison would be fair. And, in my opinion, yes, a member on a bike is at greater risk than a member in a car. A car can stop alot of projectiles, whereas on a bike you're exposed. Again, my opinion.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The situation among the general public is that far more car occupants are injured than cyclists, so if Health & Safety/review board/barrister concerns are paramount it's surprising that Gardai are not required to wear protective gear in cars and vans.

Again, a far higher proportion of people are in cars than on bikes. And what protective gear do you think members should wear in a car? Racing suits and helmets? That could be counter-productive. We are asked to wear seatbelts, and most of the patrol cars should have airbags (if they're working is another matter!). Only official drivers can drive at speed, so they've been trained for that. What more is needed?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

This situation would appear to mirror that of mandatory helmet use among the general public: rather than being an aid to greater use of bicycles for very good reasons of mobility etc, helmets appear to be primarily a deterrent to the use of bikes, as well as being mainly a device to provide cover against claims of various types.

I was against helmets on bikes when i was younger, they were heavy and a burden, but the ones nowadays weigh next to nothing, so i can't see what disadvantage they have aside from increased heat retention (again, lots of them combat that with the style). And even if they off little protection, it's still better than your head hitting a solid object without one.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That's a pity, IMO. Again I would cite the earlier Dutch example: they seem to feel no need for such protection, yet their bikes and skulls are broadly the same as ours.

I don't know the public perception to the dutch police, but maybe they don't have to fear the scum as much as we might have to. Speculation, of course.

CramCycle wrote: »

Does that mean they are not covered for increased risk of rotational spinal injury, as for not taking a helmet off, try running in a bike helmet, you may not think it but it will impair you quite alot due to weight and overheating IMO.
As for the nature of the job, I imagine they are more necessary but possibly more prohibitive in the execution of their duties.

Is anyone on a bike covered from that? The bike course is hard, and has alot of learning and techniques in it. I'm sure, but cannot confirm as i haven't received the training myself, that the safety part of the course would cover the usual injuries and how to avoid them. As for running with the helmet on, if there is a need it shouldn't be for long. It's rare for a foot chase to go on for too long, and the Garda also has to be mindful that they left the bike unoccupied, they're not cheap and an easy target for a passing criminal. Also, as i said above, the helmets nowadays weigh next to nothing, i know mine has very little weight and it wasn't cheap.

CramCycle wrote: »

Its not a legal requirement and time and time again studies have shown no net reduction in injury due to a lack of helmets but in several cases there is proof of strangulation of children and increased risk or rotational spinal injury due to increased weight.
The message it would send out is that in general cycling is safe, the truth of the matter before anyone gets in a huff is that it is safer than most other modes of transport in Ireland.

Again, i would wait to see what would happen if there was a sudden high surge of cyclists around, cities would not be able for them as neither would the drivers, all too often we hear of close calls, this would turn into accidents and more.

The final point i want to make is that in alot of country division hq's there aren't enough members to have alot of bike members around. The car crew could be non-stop call to call for the 10 hour shifts, and the journey could be a 10 minute car drive away. If those members were on bikes they wouldn't get half the calls done and would not be much good in an emergency if they were on the other side of the city. They also have their benefits though.

CramCycle

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Is anyone on a bike covered from that?

I think you missed my point that it was insinuated that they were not insured on their bikes if they were not wearing their helmets, which seems odd and somewhat nonsensical IMO as its not required by law, they are covered while not wearing a seatbelt in a garda car if it is deemed necessary by the garda at the time in the pursuit if their duties.

The bike course is hard, and has alot of learning and techniques in it. I'm sure, but cannot confirm as i haven't received the training myself, that the safety part of the course would cover the usual injuries and how to avoid them.

From the little I have seen of it, it looks very good.

As for running with the helmet on, if there is a need it shouldn't be for long. It's rare for a foot chase to go on for too long, and the Garda also has to be mindful that they left the bike unoccupied, they're not cheap and an easy target for a passing criminal. Also, as i said above, the helmets nowadays weigh next to nothing, i know mine has very little weight and it wasn't cheap.

Its not the weight that gets you while running, its cumbersome and quite tiring, I've done it and unless you've done it is hard to explain the annoyance, inconvenience and impediment caused by wearing a helmet whilst running.

Again, i would wait to see what would happen if there was a sudden high surge of cyclists around, cities would not be able for them as neither would the drivers, all too often we hear of close calls, this would turn into accidents and more.

Current thinking is that a surge in cyclists would be beneficial to the safety of cyclist, other road users would come to see it as part of everyday road use and take that into account while driving that they have a high chance of meeting a cyclist, giving more time in situations where they could be temporarily slowed down, learning to give more space as required by law.

The car crew could be non-stop call to call for the 10 hour shifts, and the journey could be a 10 minute car drive away. If those members were on bikes they wouldn't get half the calls done and would not be much good in an emergency if they were on the other side of the city. They also have their benefits though.

I don't think the OP was to have Gardai move en masse to bicycles, more to have them available to those units on patrol in cars for a variety of situations. For example, if their was a traffic jam that made it near impossible for even an emergency vehicle to get through (while rare it does happen), it could be parked, distance and time permitting and cover the distance by bike. As for on the other side of the city, again, they are in a car but if you are referring to having more on bikes, there would be presumable more patrols closer to the scene, hell if its the far side of the city, there is probably a station closer to the scene.

Potential-Monke

CramCycle wrote: »

I think you missed my point that it was insinuated that they were not insured on their bikes if they were not wearing their helmets, which seems odd and somewhat nonsensical IMO as its not required by law, they are covered while not wearing a seatbelt in a garda car if it is deemed necessary by the garda at the time in the pursuit if their duties.

It's not required by law, but it's an internal health and safety issue. It's like the stab vests, not required by law, but if you're not wearing one and you get stabbed it's more or less on your own head. The gear is provided, and if you don't utilise it then it's your own fault.

CramCycle wrote: »

Its not the weight that gets you while running, its cumbersome and quite tiring, I've done it and unless you've done it is hard to explain the annoyance, inconvenience and impediment caused by wearing a helmet whilst running.

Again, the little bit of running that would be done wouldn't be a factor. I know where you're coming from, but the Garda has to be more or less 100% sure that they will catch the person quick enough if they abandon the bike, they won't be running very much if at all.

CramCycle wrote: »

Current thinking is that a surge in cyclists would be beneficial to the safety of cyclist, other road users would come to see it as part of everyday road use and take that into account while driving that they have a high chance of meeting a cyclist, giving more time in situations where they could be temporarily slowed down, learning to give more space as required by law.

Eventually, yes, but initially there would be a surge in accidents. Plus, alot of cities are not built for or capable of having proper cycle lanes. Like bus lanes, people outside of Dublin when they were first introduced to outside Dublin cities did not know how to use them and it lead to accidents. Now, everyone knows what the story is. Time will tell and all that.

CramCycle wrote: »

I don't think the OP was to have Gardai move en masse to bicycles, more to have them available to those units on patrol in cars for a variety of situations. For example, if their was a traffic jam that made it near impossible for even an emergency vehicle to get through (while rare it does happen), it could be parked, distance and time permitting and cover the distance by bike. As for on the other side of the city, again, they are in a car but if you are referring to having more on bikes, there would be presumable more patrols closer to the scene, hell if its the far side of the city, there is probably a station closer to the scene.

Again, depending on the district, it would be beneficial to some, but take Waterford as an example. There is 1 station to cover the entire city, half way out the Dunmore Road, a large bit out the Cork Road, and some days even further due to the smaller stations having no-one working (Passage East, Dunmore East and Ferrybank. I know you can say "Don't use the bikes in those situations", but the reality is there aren't the numbers for it even outside those situations. I would love to see more mountain bike patrols in the estates, it's great visibility policing, but the numbers are not there. Also Limerick, 3 stations for the ENTIRE city, one of which is only part-time. It's all a numbers game, we need more to put into operation what the public wants, yet Minister Shathead has his head up his arse and can't see this.

All in all, it would be great to be able to utilise bikes on the back of patrol cars, but realistically in alot of divisons/districts it's currently unfeasible. Maybe in the future (i heard rumors of SegWays for Dublin City!!).

CramCycle

Potential-Monke wrote: »

It's not required by law, but it's an internal health and safety issue. It's like the stab vests, not required by law, but if you're not wearing one and you get stabbed it's more or less on your own head. The gear is provided, and if you don't utilise it then it's your own fault.

But why would it affect the Gardas insurance if he jumped on a bike in a rush and didn't put on a helmet, or even just didn't bother putting on a helmet at all? The truth of the matter is that if there is an accident while on the bike it is statistically unlikely to be anything the helmet could have helped allay the symptoms/injuries of unless of course the garda has a low speed fall and somehow doesn't manage to get his hand up to protect his head (natural reflex)

Again, the little bit of running that would be done wouldn't be a factor. I know where you're coming from, but the Garda has to be more or less 100% sure that they will catch the person quick enough if they abandon the bike, they won't be running very much if at all.

Fair point, preferrably if the landscape provides for it you wouldn't dismount your bike until you had your hands on the runner, some very good videos on the UK police and their tactics on youtube, and there was similar talk about such maneuvers by the AGS at a demonstration although they did not want to go into to much detail.

Eventually, yes, but initially there would be a surge in accidents. Plus, alot of cities are not built for or capable of having proper cycle lanes.

Why would there be a surge in accidents? Why do you need cycle lanes? In fact studies from the US show that an increase in the number of cycle lanes increases the number of accidents at junctions quite significantly due to the lack of clear priority to any road user and the fact that they place a cyclist out of the expected road position that an atypical driver (and by atypical I mean those who actually pay attention and obey the law, so it excludes those who pay no attention whatsoever) will view before completing a maneuver.

Again, depending on the district, it would be beneficial to some, but take Waterford as an example. There is 1 station to cover the entire city, half way out the Dunmore Road, a large bit out the Cork Road, and some days even further due to the smaller stations having no-one working (Passage East, Dunmore East and Ferrybank. I know you can say "Don't use the bikes in those situations", but the reality is there aren't the numbers for it even outside those situations. I would love to see more mountain bike patrols in the estates, it's great visibility policing, but the numbers are not there. Also Limerick, 3 stations for the ENTIRE city, one of which is only part-time. It's all a numbers game, we need more to put into operation what the public wants, yet Minister Shathead has his head up his arse and can't see this.

A little OT IMO, surely the answer to the OP is that there is no money /thread, I was just trying to debate the possible positives and negatives of bringing the initial idea into practice. In all honesty, in a country like Ireland there are few scenarios IMO that it would be beneficial but I am not talking about parking the car and cycling around leaving the car all day, I thought the OPs suggestion was to have a bike on the back for a situation where it may or may not be needed eg suspect runs down narrow passage that by the time a garda pulls up he won't get there on foot but one could jump out, grab the bike and take after him while the driver follows round to the suspected exit point, I realise it would be rare and in terms of budgetary constraints could not be justified but if the money was there, do you think it would be worth it?

All in all, it would be great to be able to utilise bikes on the back of patrol cars, but realistically in alot of divisons/districts it's currently unfeasible. Maybe in the future (i heard rumors of SegWays for Dublin City!!).

I heard that rumour ages ago, possibly paid for by local businesses to improve Gardai visibility in the city centre, I think it was Andrew Montague (not sure TBH) who made the suggestion, but in terms of visibility and approachability, I think on foot (more approachable) and bikes (more adaptable to road conditions) makes more sense.

Locust

CramCycle wrote: »

...I was just trying to debate the possible positives and negatives of bringing the initial idea into practice. ...do you think it would be worth it?....

To just have on the back of the car? in case someone runs down an alley? Nope, no way - the negatives far outweigh the positives.

More guards on bikes - yes absolutely needed in a lot of areas.
I think this thread has run its course?

CramCycle

Locust wrote: »

To just have on the back of the car? in case someone runs down an alley? Nope, no way - the negatives far outweigh the positives.

More guards on bikes - yes absolutely needed in a lot of areas.
I think this thread has run its course?

It probably has, I think if the funding was there it would be a great as a way of delivery and pick up to estates, keep up visibility in a wide area (although a van would make more sense) but yes, in terms of the original idea/reasoning, for the few and far between times it maybe useful, you couldn't possibly justify the expense.

Sunnyisland

Locust wrote: »

To just have on the back of the car? in case someone runs down an alley? Nope, no way - the negatives far outweigh the positives.

More guards on bikes - yes absolutely needed in a lot of areas.
I think this thread has run its course?

Should that not be cycled its course