Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Blue flashing lights illegal?
1,055 views
Skip to first unread message
Paul
Nov 17, 2011, 6:20:02 PM11/17/11
to
Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
Mark Goodge
Nov 18, 2011, 3:15:03 AM11/18/11
to
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:20:02 +0000, Paul put finger to keyboard and typed:
The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
As a general principle, flashing lights of any colour can only be used in
certain prescribed circumstances. These include lights used by the
emergency services (blue, red and green), indicators and hazard lights
(both amber). Only flashing amber lights are generally permitted to be used
by anyone, but even these are restricted to certain circumstances.
There is also an additional permission for flashing lights on bicycles used
solely as position lamps (ie, lights intended to make it easier for someone
else to see where you are). If used, these must be the same colour as
static position lamps - ie, white to the front, red to the rear. There is
no additional permission for flashing lights of any other colour.
Mark
--
Blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk
vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
As a general principle, flashing lights of any colour can only be used in
certain prescribed circumstances. These include lights used by the
emergency services (blue, red and green), indicators and hazard lights
(both amber). Only flashing amber lights are generally permitted to be used
by anyone, but even these are restricted to certain circumstances.
There is also an additional permission for flashing lights on bicycles used
solely as position lamps (ie, lights intended to make it easier for someone
else to see where you are). If used, these must be the same colour as
static position lamps - ie, white to the front, red to the rear. There is
no additional permission for flashing lights of any other colour.
Mark
--
Blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk
Graham Murray
Nov 18, 2011, 1:10:05 PM11/18/11
to
Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> writes:
> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
What about a pedestrian or horse rider? Would it make any difference
> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
whether the flashing is automatic or someone repeatedly pressing and
releasing a momentary switch.
Nightjar
Nov 18, 2011, 6:20:03 AM11/18/11
to
On 18/11/2011 08:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:20:02 +0000, Paul put finger to keyboard and typed:
>
>>
>> Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
>> the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
>>
>> I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
>> lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
>> use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
>>
>> My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
>> and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
>
> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes....
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:20:02 +0000, Paul put finger to keyboard and typed:
>
>>
>> Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
>> the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
>>
>> I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
>> lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
>> use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
>>
>> My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
>> and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
>
> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
.... or, indeed, anything that resembles a blue warning beacon, whether
in working condition or not.
Colin Bignell
Tim Boswell
Nov 18, 2011, 10:00:05 AM11/18/11
to
ever get into any trouble for it.
I keep a few flashing blue bicycle lights in the tool kit on my
motorcycle. If I break down, I attach one to my helmet and put it on
the floor a few feet behind the bike, and another to a hi vis vest
which I wear. The combination of blue lights and hi vis seems to make
traffic take a little more care when passing.
one_riff_brian
Nov 18, 2011, 12:25:02 PM11/18/11
to
On Nov 18, 8:15 am, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
wrote:
Illegal to fit blue lights, or only illegal to switch them on? I could
think of situations where someone would *want* their vehicle to be
pulled over.
wrote:
think of situations where someone would *want* their vehicle to be
pulled over.
Sam
Nov 18, 2011, 2:15:04 PM11/18/11
to
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 08:15:03 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all
> road vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing
> blue lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart)
> illegal unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
I've seen a number of novelty vehicles used for hen nights, etc. that
> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all
> road vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing
> blue lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart)
> illegal unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
have blue lights. e.g. pink fire engine or stretched police limo.
One vehicle I saw even had their blue lights flashing.
Sam
Nov 18, 2011, 2:20:02 PM11/18/11
to
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:20:02 +0000, Paul wrote:
> I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing lights
> on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to use them...
> but does the same law apply to bicycles?
A bicycle /is/ a vehicle.
> I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing lights
> on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to use them...
> but does the same law apply to bicycles?
Mark Goodge
Nov 18, 2011, 3:45:03 PM11/18/11
to
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:10:05 +0000, Graham Murray put finger to keyboard
and typed:
>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> writes:
>
>> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
>> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
>> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
>> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
>
>What about a pedestrian or horse rider?
The regulations only apply to vehicles. A pedestrian or horse is not a
vehicle, although a horse-drawn (or pedestrian-drawn) cart is.
> Would it make any difference
>whether the flashing is automatic or someone repeatedly pressing and
>releasing a momentary switch.
The regulations specifically refer to "a lamp which automatically emits a
flashing light". So repeatedly switching a lamp on and off manually would
not be covered.
However, while the prohibition on flashing lights only applies to lights
which are "fitted" to the vehicle (thus permitting a hand-held flashing
light), there is a more general prohibition on any light being "used" on a
vehicle which is capable of being moved while illuminated[1]. So you could
have a hand-held flashing blue light on a bicyle, provided you hold it
absolutely still (in relation to the bicycle itself) while in motion, and
manage to do so without any kind of attachment to the bicycle (which would
otherwise render it "fitted" and thus prohibited). And, to further make the
use of blue flashing lights illegal, there is a specific prohibition not
only on them even being fitted (let alone used) on any vehicle other than
an emergency vehicle, but also on anything which merely looks like one
whether capable of functioning or not.
[1] There are exceptions for things like retractable headlights and
old-fashioned direction indicators on stalks.
and typed:
>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> writes:
>
>> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
>> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
>> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
>> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
>
>What about a pedestrian or horse rider?
vehicle, although a horse-drawn (or pedestrian-drawn) cart is.
> Would it make any difference
>whether the flashing is automatic or someone repeatedly pressing and
>releasing a momentary switch.
flashing light". So repeatedly switching a lamp on and off manually would
not be covered.
However, while the prohibition on flashing lights only applies to lights
which are "fitted" to the vehicle (thus permitting a hand-held flashing
light), there is a more general prohibition on any light being "used" on a
vehicle which is capable of being moved while illuminated[1]. So you could
have a hand-held flashing blue light on a bicyle, provided you hold it
absolutely still (in relation to the bicycle itself) while in motion, and
manage to do so without any kind of attachment to the bicycle (which would
otherwise render it "fitted" and thus prohibited). And, to further make the
use of blue flashing lights illegal, there is a specific prohibition not
only on them even being fitted (let alone used) on any vehicle other than
an emergency vehicle, but also on anything which merely looks like one
whether capable of functioning or not.
[1] There are exceptions for things like retractable headlights and
old-fashioned direction indicators on stalks.
Mark Goodge
Nov 18, 2011, 3:50:02 PM11/18/11
to
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 17:25:02 +0000, one_riff_brian put finger to keyboard
prohibition extends to anything which looks like a flashing blue light,
whether it actually functions as one or not.
and typed:
>On Nov 18, 8:15 am, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:20:02 +0000, Paul put finger to keyboard and typed:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
>> >the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
>>
>> >I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
>> >lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
>> >use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
>>
>> >My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
>> >and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
>>
>> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
>> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
>> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
>> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
>>
>On Nov 18, 8:15 am, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:20:02 +0000, Paul put finger to keyboard and typed:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
>> >the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
>>
>> >I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
>> >lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
>> >use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
>>
>> >My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
>> >and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
>>
>> The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (as amended) apply to all road
>> vehicles, not just motor vehicles. So yes, that does make flashing blue
>> lights on a bicycle (or, for that matter, a horse-drawn cart) illegal
>> unless it is being used for emergency service purposes.
>>
>Illegal to fit blue lights, or only illegal to switch them on? I could
>think of situations where someone would *want* their vehicle to be
>pulled over.
Illegal to fit. And, as Colin Bignell has already pointed out, that
>think of situations where someone would *want* their vehicle to be
>pulled over.
prohibition extends to anything which looks like a flashing blue light,
whether it actually functions as one or not.
Mark Goodge
Nov 18, 2011, 3:50:02 PM11/18/11
to
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:15:04 +0000, Sam put finger to keyboard and typed:
Then they are breaking the law, and in danger of being prosecuted if
caught.
caught.
Nightjar
Nov 18, 2011, 3:55:02 PM11/18/11
to
is forbidden by the regulations.
Even Police cars that are being road tested by a civilian after a
service can sometimes be seen with a cover over the blue light.
Colin Bignell
Mark Goodge
Nov 18, 2011, 4:00:04 PM11/18/11
to
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:00:05 +0000, Tim Boswell put finger to keyboard and
typed:
That wouldn't be illegal, though, as you're not fitting them to a vehicle
or using them on a vehicle. At least, it wouldn't be a breach of the Road
Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 or, as far as I'm aware, any of the SIs
which amend it. It might possibly be a breach of some other law, such as
impersonating a police officer.
typed:
or using them on a vehicle. At least, it wouldn't be a breach of the Road
Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 or, as far as I'm aware, any of the SIs
which amend it. It might possibly be a breach of some other law, such as
impersonating a police officer.
Adam Funk
Nov 19, 2011, 11:50:09 AM11/19/11
to
On 2011-11-18, Mark Goodge wrote:
> As a general principle, flashing lights of any colour can only be used in
> certain prescribed circumstances. These include lights used by the
> emergency services (blue, red and green), indicators and hazard lights
> (both amber). Only flashing amber lights are generally permitted to be used
> by anyone, but even these are restricted to certain circumstances.
Is the use of "tow truck lights" based on speed?
> As a general principle, flashing lights of any colour can only be used in
> certain prescribed circumstances. These include lights used by the
> emergency services (blue, red and green), indicators and hazard lights
> (both amber). Only flashing amber lights are generally permitted to be used
> by anyone, but even these are restricted to certain circumstances.
> There is also an additional permission for flashing lights on bicycles used
> solely as position lamps (ie, lights intended to make it easier for someone
> else to see where you are). If used, these must be the same colour as
> static position lamps - ie, white to the front, red to the rear. There is
> no additional permission for flashing lights of any other colour.
UK, even though they could be considered kids' novelty lights?
http://urbanvelo.org/skully-skull-lights/
(I've only seen them in the UK with white & red LEDs --- maybe this is
why.)
Mark Goodge
Nov 19, 2011, 1:30:02 PM11/19/11
to
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 16:50:09 +0000, Adam Funk put finger to keyboard and
typed:
>On 2011-11-18, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> As a general principle, flashing lights of any colour can only be used in
>> certain prescribed circumstances. These include lights used by the
>> emergency services (blue, red and green), indicators and hazard lights
>> (both amber). Only flashing amber lights are generally permitted to be used
>> by anyone, but even these are restricted to certain circumstances.
>
>Is the use of "tow truck lights" based on speed?
I think so, yes.
Unfortunately, all of these rules are set by Statutory Instruments rather
than primary legislation, and legislation.gov.uk only carries SIs in their
original, unamended form. So the entry for the Road Vehicles Lighting
Regulations 1989 doesn't show, for example, the later amendment which
permits flashing position lamps on bicycles. To see that, you need to read
the SI which introduced it, the Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment)
Regulations 2005.
The 1989 regulations don't permit the use of a flashing amber light on a
moving vehicle except where it's actually compulsory - which is certain
slow-moving or over-sized vehicles. The optional use of flashing amber
lights on towing vehicles (and the use of hazard lights on the vehicle
being towed) was introduced later. But I don't know which SI it was, so,
without trawling through all of them, I can't look it up.
>> There is also an additional permission for flashing lights on bicycles used
>> solely as position lamps (ie, lights intended to make it easier for someone
>> else to see where you are). If used, these must be the same colour as
>> static position lamps - ie, white to the front, red to the rear. There is
>> no additional permission for flashing lights of any other colour.
>
>So the Skully lights with green & blue LEDs would be illegal in the
>UK, even though they could be considered kids' novelty lights?
Yes, although I suspect that users would be unlikely to be prosecuted.
>http://urbanvelo.org/skully-skull-lights/
>
>(I've only seen them in the UK with white & red LEDs --- maybe this is
>why.)
Possibly, as the supplier would be liable for supplying prohibited
equipment (ie, lights which are restricted to emergency services use), and
I suspect that a prosecution there would be more likely.
typed:
>On 2011-11-18, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> As a general principle, flashing lights of any colour can only be used in
>> certain prescribed circumstances. These include lights used by the
>> emergency services (blue, red and green), indicators and hazard lights
>> (both amber). Only flashing amber lights are generally permitted to be used
>> by anyone, but even these are restricted to certain circumstances.
>
>Is the use of "tow truck lights" based on speed?
Unfortunately, all of these rules are set by Statutory Instruments rather
than primary legislation, and legislation.gov.uk only carries SIs in their
original, unamended form. So the entry for the Road Vehicles Lighting
Regulations 1989 doesn't show, for example, the later amendment which
permits flashing position lamps on bicycles. To see that, you need to read
the SI which introduced it, the Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment)
Regulations 2005.
The 1989 regulations don't permit the use of a flashing amber light on a
moving vehicle except where it's actually compulsory - which is certain
slow-moving or over-sized vehicles. The optional use of flashing amber
lights on towing vehicles (and the use of hazard lights on the vehicle
being towed) was introduced later. But I don't know which SI it was, so,
without trawling through all of them, I can't look it up.
>> There is also an additional permission for flashing lights on bicycles used
>> solely as position lamps (ie, lights intended to make it easier for someone
>> else to see where you are). If used, these must be the same colour as
>> static position lamps - ie, white to the front, red to the rear. There is
>> no additional permission for flashing lights of any other colour.
>
>So the Skully lights with green & blue LEDs would be illegal in the
>UK, even though they could be considered kids' novelty lights?
>http://urbanvelo.org/skully-skull-lights/
>
>(I've only seen them in the UK with white & red LEDs --- maybe this is
>why.)
equipment (ie, lights which are restricted to emergency services use), and
I suspect that a prosecution there would be more likely.
Paul Cummins
Nov 19, 2011, 5:45:09 PM11/19/11
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk
(Mark Goodge) came up to me and whispered:
> Possibly, as the supplier would be liable for supplying
> prohibited equipment (ie, lights which are restricted to emergency
> services use), and I suspect that a prosecution there would be
> more likely.
I doubt it - there is a company in Brighton that sells pretty much every
emergency vehicle equipment you could ask for, and they have never been
prosecuted.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
(Mark Goodge) came up to me and whispered:
> Possibly, as the supplier would be liable for supplying
> prohibited equipment (ie, lights which are restricted to emergency
> services use), and I suspect that a prosecution there would be
> more likely.
emergency vehicle equipment you could ask for, and they have never been
prosecuted.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Alex Heney
Nov 20, 2011, 4:15:04 PM11/20/11
to
It has resulted in almost every occasion where one of the "rescue"
services vehicles is towing, they use their beacons. Which in turn
results in congestion as traffic coming up behind sees the flashing
lights, assumes it means something significantly slow-moving, and
pulls out way earlier than necessary.
IMO the original rules were correct, and amber beacons should only be
allowed where the vehicle or combination is either traveling
particularly slowly, or taking up more than one lane.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Martyn H
Nov 22, 2011, 5:50:02 PM11/22/11
to
used for the same purposes as motor vehicles can have them fitted ...
i.e. Police , Fire+Rescue , Ambulance Purposes, Coastguard and a few
more esoteric uses ...
Mr Benn
Nov 28, 2011, 10:45:02 AM11/28/11
to
"Paul" <pa...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:CoSdncyMffPTC1jT...@brightview.co.uk...
Have you asked him why he wants to use blue lights out of interest?
news:CoSdncyMffPTC1jT...@brightview.co.uk...
Message has been deleted
Mark Goodge
Nov 28, 2011, 5:10:04 PM11/28/11
to
On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
typed:
>On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:50:02 +0000, Martyn H wrote
>(in article
><0f23807d-2527-45e2...@n35g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>):
>A thought crossed my mind about this.
>
>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>and they were flashing.
>
>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>flashy.
Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
in any action.
typed:
>On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:50:02 +0000, Martyn H wrote
>(in article
><0f23807d-2527-45e2...@n35g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>):
>
>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>and they were flashing.
>
>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>flashy.
Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
in any action.
Adam Funk
Nov 28, 2011, 5:50:16 PM11/28/11
to
motorcyclists try to decorate high-vis jackets in such a way that they
don't quite count as "impersonation" but from a distance car drivers
are likely to think "cop" and prepare give them room.
Ben Harris
Nov 28, 2011, 7:10:04 PM11/28/11
to
In article <cb18d7h4rkgmd79ba...@news.markshouse.net>,
Regulations only seem to restrict lights fitted to vehicles, and I don't
think this one could be described as "fitted".
--
Ben Harris
Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
>typed:
>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
>typed:
>>A thought crossed my mind about this.
>>
>>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>>and they were flashing.
>>
>>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>>flashy.
>
>Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
>in any action.
On what basis do you think it's illegal? The Road Vehicles Lighting
>>
>>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>>and they were flashing.
>>
>>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>>flashy.
>
>Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
>in any action.
Regulations only seem to restrict lights fitted to vehicles, and I don't
think this one could be described as "fitted".
--
Ben Harris
Mark Goodge
Nov 29, 2011, 2:50:02 AM11/29/11
to
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:10:04 +0000, Ben Harris put finger to keyboard and
vehicle, yes. But there is also a more general prohibition on using moving
lights on a vehicle (section 12.1). A child's toy which is being waved
around is most definitely moving :-)
typed:
>In article <cb18d7h4rkgmd79ba...@news.markshouse.net>,
>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
>>typed:
>>>A thought crossed my mind about this.
>>>
>>>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>>>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>>>and they were flashing.
>>>
>>>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>>>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>>>flashy.
>>
>>Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
>>in any action.
>
>On what basis do you think it's illegal? The Road Vehicles Lighting
>Regulations only seem to restrict lights fitted to vehicles, and I don't
>think this one could be described as "fitted".
There's a specific prohibition on fitting non-approved flashing lights to a
>In article <cb18d7h4rkgmd79ba...@news.markshouse.net>,
>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
>>typed:
>>>A thought crossed my mind about this.
>>>
>>>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>>>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>>>and they were flashing.
>>>
>>>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>>>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>>>flashy.
>>
>>Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
>>in any action.
>
>On what basis do you think it's illegal? The Road Vehicles Lighting
>Regulations only seem to restrict lights fitted to vehicles, and I don't
>think this one could be described as "fitted".
vehicle, yes. But there is also a more general prohibition on using moving
lights on a vehicle (section 12.1). A child's toy which is being waved
around is most definitely moving :-)
Ben Harris
Nov 29, 2011, 6:25:02 AM11/29/11
to
In article <p639d7p5s6mk6lr74...@news.markshouse.net>,
lights (including unlit ones):
"12(1) Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause
or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or
equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which
is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while
the vehicle is in motion."
So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
toy _can_ be waved.
--
Ben Harris
Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:10:04 +0000, Ben Harris put finger to keyboard and
>typed:
>
>>In article <cb18d7h4rkgmd79ba...@news.markshouse.net>,
>>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
>>>typed:
>>>>A thought crossed my mind about this.
>>>>
>>>>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>>>>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>>>>and they were flashing.
>>>>
>>>>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>>>>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>>>>flashy.
>>>
>>>Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
>>>in any action.
>>
>>On what basis do you think it's illegal? The Road Vehicles Lighting
>>Regulations only seem to restrict lights fitted to vehicles, and I don't
>>think this one could be described as "fitted".
>
>There's a specific prohibition on fitting non-approved flashing lights to a
>vehicle, yes. But there is also a more general prohibition on using moving
>lights on a vehicle (section 12.1). A child's toy which is being waved
>around is most definitely moving :-)
Strictly, regulation 12(1) isn't about moving lights but about movable
>On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:10:04 +0000, Ben Harris put finger to keyboard and
>typed:
>
>>In article <cb18d7h4rkgmd79ba...@news.markshouse.net>,
>>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:45:02 +0000, Colin Harper put finger to keyboard and
>>>typed:
>>>>A thought crossed my mind about this.
>>>>
>>>>My 3YO son was playing with a toy in the back of the car the other night, it
>>>>was a magic wand thing, with bright LEDs on it, predominately red and blue,
>>>>and they were flashing.
>>>>
>>>>Is use of this childs toy [by the child, in the car, whilst moving at night]
>>>>liable to land the car driver in hot water? The LEDs are quite bright and
>>>>flashy.
>>>
>>>Technically, it's illegal. Realistically, it's extremely unlikely to result
>>>in any action.
>>
>>On what basis do you think it's illegal? The Road Vehicles Lighting
>>Regulations only seem to restrict lights fitted to vehicles, and I don't
>>think this one could be described as "fitted".
>
>There's a specific prohibition on fitting non-approved flashing lights to a
>vehicle, yes. But there is also a more general prohibition on using moving
>lights on a vehicle (section 12.1). A child's toy which is being waved
>around is most definitely moving :-)
lights (including unlit ones):
"12(1) Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause
or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or
equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which
is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while
the vehicle is in motion."
So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
toy _can_ be waved.
--
Ben Harris
Lordgnome
Nov 29, 2011, 6:15:03 AM11/29/11
to
>
> Probably to encourage safe overtaking? I've heard that some
> motorcyclists try to decorate high-vis jackets in such a way that they
> don't quite count as "impersonation" but from a distance car drivers
> are likely to think "cop" and prepare give them room.
large aerial at the back. Being a radio enthusiast, I also had one. This
along with the helmet and bike colour earned me a great deal of unintended
respect!
Les.
Roland Perry
Nov 29, 2011, 6:45:03 AM11/29/11
to
In message <jb2f94$p2l$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 11:25:02 on Tue,
29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
Also, I have a feeling that the map lights in my car can be swivelled,
also the rear view mirror (which is attached to the vehicle) is a
reflector [of sorts] and can swivel, as can the wing mirrors. And that's
before we look at headlights which swivel up and down to give a level
beam when the car is loaded (although perhaps they are approved as part
of the manufacturing process).
--
Roland Perry
29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>Strictly, regulation 12(1) isn't about moving lights but about movable
>lights (including unlit ones):
>
>"12(1) Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause
>or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or
>equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which
>is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while
>the vehicle is in motion."
>
>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>toy _can_ be waved.
The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>lights (including unlit ones):
>
>"12(1) Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause
>or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or
>equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which
>is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while
>the vehicle is in motion."
>
>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>toy _can_ be waved.
lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
Also, I have a feeling that the map lights in my car can be swivelled,
also the rear view mirror (which is attached to the vehicle) is a
reflector [of sorts] and can swivel, as can the wing mirrors. And that's
before we look at headlights which swivel up and down to give a level
beam when the car is loaded (although perhaps they are approved as part
of the manufacturing process).
--
Roland Perry
Ben Harris
Nov 29, 2011, 7:35:10 AM11/29/11
to
In article <Fg94aiWO...@perry.co.uk>,
of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
>Also, I have a feeling that the map lights in my car can be swivelled,
>also the rear view mirror (which is attached to the vehicle) is a
>reflector [of sorts] and can swivel, as can the wing mirrors. And that's
>before we look at headlights which swivel up and down to give a level
>beam when the car is loaded (although perhaps they are approved as part
>of the manufacturing process).
Regulation 12(2)(b) provides an exemption for self-levelling headlamps.
If you squint you might be able to say that the map lights are "work
lamps" ("a lamp used to illuminate a working area ...") and hence
exempted by regulation 12(2)(f).
There doesn't seem to be any definition of "reflector" in the
regulations, but I think in normal usage you wouldn't call a mirror used
to reflect an image a "reflector", so those aren't covered by
regulation 12 at all.
--
Ben Harris
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <jb2f94$p2l$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 11:25:02 on Tue,
>29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>>Strictly, regulation 12(1) isn't about moving lights but about movable
>>lights (including unlit ones):
>>
>>"12(1) Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause
>>or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or
>>equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which
>>is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while
>>the vehicle is in motion."
>>
>>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>>toy _can_ be waved.
>
>The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
I disagree. To be banned by this regulation, the lamp must be capable
>In message <jb2f94$p2l$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 11:25:02 on Tue,
>29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>>Strictly, regulation 12(1) isn't about moving lights but about movable
>>lights (including unlit ones):
>>
>>"12(1) Save as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall use, or cause
>>or permit to be used, on a road any vehicle to which, or to any load or
>>equipment of which, there is fitted a lamp, reflector or marking which
>>is capable of being moved by swivelling, deflecting or otherwise while
>>the vehicle is in motion."
>>
>>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>>toy _can_ be waved.
>
>The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
>Also, I have a feeling that the map lights in my car can be swivelled,
>also the rear view mirror (which is attached to the vehicle) is a
>reflector [of sorts] and can swivel, as can the wing mirrors. And that's
>before we look at headlights which swivel up and down to give a level
>beam when the car is loaded (although perhaps they are approved as part
>of the manufacturing process).
If you squint you might be able to say that the map lights are "work
lamps" ("a lamp used to illuminate a working area ...") and hence
exempted by regulation 12(2)(f).
There doesn't seem to be any definition of "reflector" in the
regulations, but I think in normal usage you wouldn't call a mirror used
to reflect an image a "reflector", so those aren't covered by
regulation 12 at all.
--
Ben Harris
Roland Perry
Nov 29, 2011, 7:00:05 AM11/29/11
to
In message <jb2ek2$oj3$1...@dont-email.me>, at 11:15:03 on Tue, 29 Nov
2011, Lordgnome <l...@nospam.null> remarked:
Long ago I had a white car with a similar aerial on the roof, which had
much the same effect. Indeed it may have been more convincing because it
*was* an ex police patrol car, but they had taken off all the
fluorescent stripes before disposing of it (I bought it from a dealer
who specialised in ex-fleet motors). On the other hand, it still had
some holes, so refitting an aerial was one way to keep the water out.
--
Roland Perry
2011, Lordgnome <l...@nospam.null> remarked:
much the same effect. Indeed it may have been more convincing because it
*was* an ex police patrol car, but they had taken off all the
fluorescent stripes before disposing of it (I bought it from a dealer
who specialised in ex-fleet motors). On the other hand, it still had
some holes, so refitting an aerial was one way to keep the water out.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nov 29, 2011, 11:50:02 AM11/29/11
to
In message <jb2jej$9fo$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 12:35:10 on Tue,
of light carried (not in a closed container) in the passenger
compartment. A lot of mobile phones have a torch facility built in
although other rules would ban the driver from operating such a torch
(if we are strict about the law that was supposed to be about making
calls when driving).
--
Roland Perry
29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>>>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>>>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>>>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>>>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>>>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>>>toy _can_ be waved.
>>
>>The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>>lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
>
>I disagree. To be banned by this regulation, the lamp must be capable
>of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
>boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
>Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
>immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
>think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
You've introduced some new rules there, but it still implicates any kind
>>>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>>>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>>>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>>>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>>>toy _can_ be waved.
>>
>>The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>>lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
>
>I disagree. To be banned by this regulation, the lamp must be capable
>of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
>boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
>Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
>immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
>think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
of light carried (not in a closed container) in the passenger
compartment. A lot of mobile phones have a torch facility built in
although other rules would ban the driver from operating such a torch
(if we are strict about the law that was supposed to be about making
calls when driving).
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
Nov 29, 2011, 12:50:04 PM11/29/11
to
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:35:10 +0000, Ben Harris put finger to keyboard and
typed:
That's my interpretation of it, too. But it's sufficiently unclear that it
probably requires case law to be certain.
typed:
probably requires case law to be certain.
Stuart A. Bronstein
Nov 29, 2011, 1:20:03 PM11/29/11
to
>>Ha - that reminded me of my early motorcycling days, when police
>>bikes had a large aerial at the back. Being a radio enthusiast,
>>I also had one. This along with the helmet and bike colour
>>earned me a great deal of unintended respect!
>
> Long ago I had a white car with a similar aerial on the roof,
> which had much the same effect. Indeed it may have been more
> convincing because it *was* an ex police patrol car, but they
> had taken off all the fluorescent stripes before disposing of it
> (I bought it from a dealer who specialised in ex-fleet motors).
> On the other hand, it still had some holes, so refitting an
> aerial was one way to keep the water out.
For some reason that reminds me of this old Marx Brothers bit:
>>bikes had a large aerial at the back. Being a radio enthusiast,
>>I also had one. This along with the helmet and bike colour
>>earned me a great deal of unintended respect!
>
> Long ago I had a white car with a similar aerial on the roof,
> which had much the same effect. Indeed it may have been more
> convincing because it *was* an ex police patrol car, but they
> had taken off all the fluorescent stripes before disposing of it
> (I bought it from a dealer who specialised in ex-fleet motors).
> On the other hand, it still had some holes, so refitting an
> aerial was one way to keep the water out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amJcJRqyEGQ
___
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com
Ben Harris
Dec 3, 2011, 1:35:02 PM12/3/11
to
In article <Z4x$cxE+rQ...@perry.co.uk>,
regulations so as to avoid it. Maybe you can find a better
interpretation?
--
Ben Harris
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <jb2jej$9fo$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 12:35:10 on Tue,
>29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>>>>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>>>>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>>>>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>>>>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>>>>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>>>>toy _can_ be waved.
>>>
>>>The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>>>lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
>>
>>I disagree. To be banned by this regulation, the lamp must be capable
>>of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
>>boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
>>Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
>>immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
>>think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
>
>You've introduced some new rules there, but it still implicates any kind
>of light carried (not in a closed container) in the passenger
>compartment.
Yes. It's obviously a silly result, but I find it hard to read the
>In message <jb2jej$9fo$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 12:35:10 on Tue,
>29 Nov 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>>>>So one could argue that (a) the toy is a load of the vehicle, (b) the
>>>>toy is fitted with a lamp, and (c) the toy (and hence the lamp) is
>>>>capable of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. Curiously, this
>>>>would appear to ban the carriage of the toy and child even if the toy is
>>>>turned off and the child well-behaved, since what matters is whether the
>>>>toy _can_ be waved.
>>>
>>>The child is a red herring, it would seem to ban carrying any kind of
>>>lamp in a car. But that can't be right!
>>
>>I disagree. To be banned by this regulation, the lamp must be capable
>>of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
>>boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
>>Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
>>immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
>>think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
>
>You've introduced some new rules there, but it still implicates any kind
>of light carried (not in a closed container) in the passenger
>compartment.
regulations so as to avoid it. Maybe you can find a better
interpretation?
--
Ben Harris
Tim Boswell
Dec 4, 2011, 4:15:03 AM12/4/11
to
On Nov 18, 9:00 pm, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
wrote:
True, but while it's technically an offence on a bicycle, I really
can't see the police showing much interest unless he's doing something
far more interesting at the same time.
wrote:
can't see the police showing much interest unless he's doing something
far more interesting at the same time.
Roland Perry
Dec 5, 2011, 5:40:03 AM12/5/11
to
In message <jbdpaj$o7o$1...@smaug.linux.pwf.cam.ac.uk>, at 18:35:02 on Sat,
3 Dec 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
my car's sunvisors yesterday, and immediately thought of this thread.
--
Roland Perry
3 Dec 2011, Ben Harris <bj...@cam.ac.uk> remarked:
>>>To be banned by this regulation, the lamp must be capable
>>>of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
>>>boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
>>>Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
>>>immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
>>>think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
>>
>>You've introduced some new rules there, but it still implicates any kind
>>of light carried (not in a closed container) in the passenger
>>compartment.
>
>Yes. It's obviously a silly result, but I find it hard to read the
>regulations so as to avoid it. Maybe you can find a better
>interpretation?
I couldn't help noticing a (movable) lamp above the vanity mirror inside
>>>of being moved while the vehicle is in motion. A torch carried in the
>>>boot (and out of reach of anyone in the car) wouldn't thus be banned.
>>>Neither would one that is "so ... masked that it is not capable of being
>>>immediately used or readily put to use" (regulation 4(4)(a)), which I
>>>think could cover a torch carried in a closed container.
>>
>>You've introduced some new rules there, but it still implicates any kind
>>of light carried (not in a closed container) in the passenger
>>compartment.
>
>Yes. It's obviously a silly result, but I find it hard to read the
>regulations so as to avoid it. Maybe you can find a better
>interpretation?
my car's sunvisors yesterday, and immediately thought of this thread.
--
Roland Perry
mch...@gmail.com
Apr 19, 2016, 5:04:43 PM4/19/16
to
I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
Rob Morley
Apr 20, 2016, 4:33:53 AM4/20/16
to
interest. It would be technically illegal if it was actually attached
to the bicycle (Construction and Use Regulations???) or if you appeared
to be impersonating a police officer (I don't think anyone expects the
police to wear flashing jackets).
Broadback
Apr 20, 2016, 4:34:56 AM4/20/16
to
On 19/04/2016 19:53, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>
I think not as I have seen lots of non emergency service vehicles with
> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>
blue lights. To my mind they should be made illegal.
Mark Goodge
Apr 20, 2016, 6:04:43 AM4/20/16
to
On Wed, 20 Apr 2016 02:36:17 +0100, Rob Morley <nos...@ntlworld.com> put
It's in the Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations 1989, as amended by various
other legislation.
There are two relevant prohibitions on flashing lights. The first is that
vehicles may not be fitted with flashing lights of any colour, other than
for certain defined purposes (such as indicators, hazard lights and
emergency service lights). Those purposes do now include the use of white
and red flashing lights on the front and rear of pedal cycles, but that
doesn't extend to the use of other colours.
The other prohibition is that blue flashing lights - or something that
looks like a blue flashing light, even if non-functional - may only be
fitted to vehicles used for the purposes of the emergency services. There's
a pretty long list of purposes which fall within the category of "emergency
services"; it's by no means just the main ones everybody knows about. But
if you were in one of those categories you'd know it, so if you have to ask
whether you're permitted to use a blue flashing light then the answer is
going to be "no" :-)
Fixed (non-flashing) lights have somewhat different rules. Broadly
speaking, any colour light can be shown to the side of a vehicle, any
colour *except* red can be shown to the front of a vehicle, but *only* red
may be shown to the rear of a vehicle apart from certain other colours in
certain defined circumstances (such as reversing lights, warning lights and
lights used to illuminate things like number plates and route indicators on
buses). None of those exceptions to the "red only to the rear" rule
includes any blue light. So you cannot show a blue fixed light to the rear
of a vehicle.
However, all of these rules only apply to lights fitted to the vehicle
itself. So, as a cyclist (or, for that matter, a pedestrian), you can light
yourself up like a Christmas tree if you want and you aren't breaking any
of these laws.
Using blue flashing lights, though, may fall foul of the laws against
impersonating a police officer. It isn't necessary to wear a police uniform
or carry any specific item of police equipment, all that's necessary is to
carry out "any act calculated falsely to suggest" that you are a police
officer. And having blue flashing lights on a cycle, even if not actually
attached to the cycle (and hence not illegal under the lighting
regulations) could easily fall foul of that. The rationale used by the
prosecution would go something like this:
a) Everyone associates blue flashing lights with the police,
b) If your use of flashing lights was intended solely for visibility,
you would choose a more appropriate colour (because blue isn't actually
the best for that anyway),
c) Therefore, your use of blue must be at least partly in order to cause
others to think that you may be a member of the police, and
d) All that's necessary for the offence is to deliberately suggest that you
are a member of the police, it doesn't need to be a successful or even
particularly plausible deception.
In practice, it's very unlikely that anyone would be prosecuted for this,
but it's the sort of thing that the police would take an interest in
if/when they have one of their regular crackdowns on law-breaking cyclists
in an area. It's also possibly more likely to draw their attention to you,
so if you're in the habit of doing the various other illegal things that
cyclists are often accused of doing - such as cycling on the pavement,
jumping red lights and going the wrong way up one-way streets - then having
bue flashing lights on while you do it will increase your chances of being
stopped. So, all in all, I wouldn't advise wearing them.
Mark
--
Insert random witticism here
http://www.markgoodge.com
finger to keyboard and typed:
other legislation.
There are two relevant prohibitions on flashing lights. The first is that
vehicles may not be fitted with flashing lights of any colour, other than
for certain defined purposes (such as indicators, hazard lights and
emergency service lights). Those purposes do now include the use of white
and red flashing lights on the front and rear of pedal cycles, but that
doesn't extend to the use of other colours.
The other prohibition is that blue flashing lights - or something that
looks like a blue flashing light, even if non-functional - may only be
fitted to vehicles used for the purposes of the emergency services. There's
a pretty long list of purposes which fall within the category of "emergency
services"; it's by no means just the main ones everybody knows about. But
if you were in one of those categories you'd know it, so if you have to ask
whether you're permitted to use a blue flashing light then the answer is
going to be "no" :-)
Fixed (non-flashing) lights have somewhat different rules. Broadly
speaking, any colour light can be shown to the side of a vehicle, any
colour *except* red can be shown to the front of a vehicle, but *only* red
may be shown to the rear of a vehicle apart from certain other colours in
certain defined circumstances (such as reversing lights, warning lights and
lights used to illuminate things like number plates and route indicators on
buses). None of those exceptions to the "red only to the rear" rule
includes any blue light. So you cannot show a blue fixed light to the rear
of a vehicle.
However, all of these rules only apply to lights fitted to the vehicle
itself. So, as a cyclist (or, for that matter, a pedestrian), you can light
yourself up like a Christmas tree if you want and you aren't breaking any
of these laws.
Using blue flashing lights, though, may fall foul of the laws against
impersonating a police officer. It isn't necessary to wear a police uniform
or carry any specific item of police equipment, all that's necessary is to
carry out "any act calculated falsely to suggest" that you are a police
officer. And having blue flashing lights on a cycle, even if not actually
attached to the cycle (and hence not illegal under the lighting
regulations) could easily fall foul of that. The rationale used by the
prosecution would go something like this:
a) Everyone associates blue flashing lights with the police,
b) If your use of flashing lights was intended solely for visibility,
you would choose a more appropriate colour (because blue isn't actually
the best for that anyway),
c) Therefore, your use of blue must be at least partly in order to cause
others to think that you may be a member of the police, and
d) All that's necessary for the offence is to deliberately suggest that you
are a member of the police, it doesn't need to be a successful or even
particularly plausible deception.
In practice, it's very unlikely that anyone would be prosecuted for this,
but it's the sort of thing that the police would take an interest in
if/when they have one of their regular crackdowns on law-breaking cyclists
in an area. It's also possibly more likely to draw their attention to you,
so if you're in the habit of doing the various other illegal things that
cyclists are often accused of doing - such as cycling on the pavement,
jumping red lights and going the wrong way up one-way streets - then having
bue flashing lights on while you do it will increase your chances of being
stopped. So, all in all, I wouldn't advise wearing them.
Mark
--
Insert random witticism here
http://www.markgoodge.com
Davey
Apr 20, 2016, 6:50:20 AM4/20/16
to
Michigan Lake. The event was known for alcohol-fuelled party-goers
speeding around and creating waves, which was illegal and dangerous,
especially after dark. The boat we were on had a white riding light at
the stern, as it should have had, and we had thin blue plastic cups for
drinks. I upended one of the cups over the riding light, and stood in
front of it. When a speeding boat came along, I stepped aside, so that
the blue lighted cup was now visible. Most boats were seen to suddenly
slow down to a crawl.
I doubt that the local police would have been very impressed, but at
least it made the lake safer.
--
Davey.
Roland Perry
Apr 20, 2016, 8:13:43 AM4/20/16
to
In message <8737qg8...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 11:48:53 on Wed, 20
Apr 2016, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
>
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4304955/impersonating.html
"That followed his arrest while driving home from Aberdeen's Tiger Tiger
club dressed in full uniform. He said he had been forced to flee the bar
fully clothed after being threatened by an angry boyfriend."
I wonder if normally he drives home naked?
--
Roland Perry
Apr 2016, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
>>
>> d) All that's necessary for the offence is to deliberately suggest that you
>> are a member of the police, it doesn't need to be a successful or even
>> particularly plausible deception.
>
>See the "Sgt Eros" case for an example...
>> d) All that's necessary for the offence is to deliberately suggest that you
>> are a member of the police, it doesn't need to be a successful or even
>> particularly plausible deception.
>
>
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4304955/impersonating.html
"That followed his arrest while driving home from Aberdeen's Tiger Tiger
club dressed in full uniform. He said he had been forced to flee the bar
fully clothed after being threatened by an angry boyfriend."
I wonder if normally he drives home naked?
--
Roland Perry
Syd Rumpo
Apr 20, 2016, 9:04:10 AM4/20/16
to
On 20/04/2016 11:21, Davey wrote:
<snip>
yellow with a blue top step at the front. It always makes me look twice.
Cheers
--
Syd
<snip>
>
> Once in the US, we were invited to a July 4th evening party out on a
> Michigan Lake. The event was known for alcohol-fuelled party-goers
> speeding around and creating waves, which was illegal and dangerous,
> especially after dark. The boat we were on had a white riding light at
> the stern, as it should have had, and we had thin blue plastic cups for
> drinks. I upended one of the cups over the riding light, and stood in
> front of it. When a speeding boat came along, I stepped aside, so that
> the blue lighted cup was now visible. Most boats were seen to suddenly
> slow down to a crawl.
> I doubt that the local police would have been very impressed, but at
> least it made the lake safer.
I've noticed that builders often have a step ladder on a roof rack,
> Once in the US, we were invited to a July 4th evening party out on a
> Michigan Lake. The event was known for alcohol-fuelled party-goers
> speeding around and creating waves, which was illegal and dangerous,
> especially after dark. The boat we were on had a white riding light at
> the stern, as it should have had, and we had thin blue plastic cups for
> drinks. I upended one of the cups over the riding light, and stood in
> front of it. When a speeding boat came along, I stepped aside, so that
> the blue lighted cup was now visible. Most boats were seen to suddenly
> slow down to a crawl.
> I doubt that the local police would have been very impressed, but at
> least it made the lake safer.
yellow with a blue top step at the front. It always makes me look twice.
Cheers
--
Syd
GB
Apr 20, 2016, 9:05:47 AM4/20/16
to
On 20/04/2016 11:48, August West wrote:
held in police custody for 39 hours even though I had, and still have,
no convictions."
Presumably, the Police's way of trying to get him to change his act. It
would have cost around £170 (rather than the £170k they have actually
spent) to buy him a new uniform - say a fireman's outfit.
>
> The entity calling itself Mark Goodge wrote:
>>
>> d) All that's necessary for the offence is to deliberately suggest that you
>> are a member of the police, it doesn't need to be a successful or even
>> particularly plausible deception.
>
> The entity calling itself Mark Goodge wrote:
>>
>> d) All that's necessary for the offence is to deliberately suggest that you
>> are a member of the police, it doesn't need to be a successful or even
>> particularly plausible deception.
>
> See the "Sgt Eros" case for an example...
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4304955/impersonating.html
>
He said: "In relation to the case which was thrown out on Friday, I was
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4304955/impersonating.html
>
held in police custody for 39 hours even though I had, and still have,
no convictions."
Presumably, the Police's way of trying to get him to change his act. It
would have cost around £170 (rather than the £170k they have actually
spent) to buy him a new uniform - say a fireman's outfit.
Adam Funk
Apr 20, 2016, 10:31:40 AM4/20/16
to
you that it was badly written. :-)
Graham Murray
Apr 20, 2016, 11:14:04 AM4/20/16
to
Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> writes:
> Using blue flashing lights, though, may fall foul of the laws against
> impersonating a police officer. It isn't necessary to wear a police uniform
> or carry any specific item of police equipment, all that's necessary is to
> carry out "any act calculated falsely to suggest" that you are a police
> officer. And having blue flashing lights on a cycle, even if not actually
> attached to the cycle (and hence not illegal under the lighting
> regulations) could easily fall foul of that. The rationale used by the
> prosecution would go something like this:
>
> a) Everyone associates blue flashing lights with the police,
And with Ambulances and Fire Engines. So is it not just as likely that
> Using blue flashing lights, though, may fall foul of the laws against
> impersonating a police officer. It isn't necessary to wear a police uniform
> or carry any specific item of police equipment, all that's necessary is to
> carry out "any act calculated falsely to suggest" that you are a police
> officer. And having blue flashing lights on a cycle, even if not actually
> attached to the cycle (and hence not illegal under the lighting
> regulations) could easily fall foul of that. The rationale used by the
> prosecution would go something like this:
>
> a) Everyone associates blue flashing lights with the police,
"the man on the Clapham Omnibus" would associate a cyclist or pedestrian
showing a flashing blue light with a paramedic (first responder) as with
a police officer?
Mark Goodge
Apr 20, 2016, 11:41:23 AM4/20/16
to
On Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:23:26 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> put
Yes, the phrase they were unsuccessfully groping for there was "in full
costume". Although, of course, that may have been his error, and the
newspaper was merely reporting it.
finger to keyboard and typed:
costume". Although, of course, that may have been his error, and the
newspaper was merely reporting it.
Adam Funk
Apr 20, 2016, 2:04:15 PM4/20/16
to
On 2016-04-20, Mark Goodge wrote:
> In practice, it's very unlikely that anyone would be prosecuted for this,
> but it's the sort of thing that the police would take an interest in
> if/when they have one of their regular crackdowns on law-breaking cyclists
> in an area. It's also possibly more likely to draw their attention to you,
> so if you're in the habit of doing the various other illegal things that
> cyclists are often accused of doing - such as cycling on the pavement,
> jumping red lights and going the wrong way up one-way streets - then having
> bue flashing lights on while you do it will increase your chances of being
> stopped. So, all in all, I wouldn't advise wearing them.
You seem to have the impression that cyclists who do "various other
> In practice, it's very unlikely that anyone would be prosecuted for this,
> but it's the sort of thing that the police would take an interest in
> if/when they have one of their regular crackdowns on law-breaking cyclists
> in an area. It's also possibly more likely to draw their attention to you,
> so if you're in the habit of doing the various other illegal things that
> cyclists are often accused of doing - such as cycling on the pavement,
> jumping red lights and going the wrong way up one-way streets - then having
> bue flashing lights on while you do it will increase your chances of being
> stopped. So, all in all, I wouldn't advise wearing them.
illegal things" are likely to be imitating police; I get the
impression that the two subsets of cyclists are disjoint. (Not that
I'm condoning it, but the ones who want to make people briefly thing
"cop" are interested in getting drivers to behave the way they ought
to anyway, i.e., legally & safely.)
Mark Goodge
Apr 20, 2016, 2:05:29 PM4/20/16
to
On Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:16:25 +0100, Graham Murray <news...@gmurray.org.uk>
That would, undoubtedly, be the defence argument. The prosecution would
probably counter that by the assertion that the only benefit to the cyclist
from using blue flashing lights would be if the intent was to make other
people think they may be a police officer, as people don't generally tend
to drive more carefully around paramedics on cycles.
put finger to keyboard and typed:
probably counter that by the assertion that the only benefit to the cyclist
from using blue flashing lights would be if the intent was to make other
people think they may be a police officer, as people don't generally tend
to drive more carefully around paramedics on cycles.
Tosspot
Apr 20, 2016, 5:26:45 PM4/20/16
to
http://www.highvisibility.uk.com/?route=product/product&product_id=81
As it seems clear to *me* they are intended to give the impression of these;
https://www.police-supplies.co.uk/aprons-tabards/hi-vis-class-2-tabard
Paul Rudin
Apr 21, 2016, 3:08:14 AM4/21/16
to
Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> writes:
> or carry any specific item of police equipment, all that's necessary is to
> carry out "any act calculated falsely to suggest" that you are a police
> officer...
> or carry any specific item of police equipment, all that's necessary is to
> carry out "any act calculated falsely to suggest" that you are a police
"calculated..." rather suggests that there has to be an intention proved...
Ian Jackson
Apr 21, 2016, 6:11:20 AM4/21/16
to
In message <gM2dnZvyqP9rSIrK...@giganews.com>, Tosspot
<Frank...@gmail.com> writes
>
>I always wondered about the legality of these Polite Think Bike Waistcoats
POLITE NOTICE
NO PARKING
signs used to be fairly common.
>
--
Ian
<Frank...@gmail.com> writes
>
>I always wondered about the legality of these Polite Think Bike Waistcoats
NO PARKING
signs used to be fairly common.
>
--
Ian
Roland Perry
Apr 21, 2016, 6:42:27 AM4/21/16
to
In message <zPOLKxHQ...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk>, at 10:55:28 on Thu, 21
Apr 2016, Ian Jackson <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>POLITE NOTICE
> NO PARKING
>signs used to be fairly common.
Is there an offence of impersonating police signage?
--
Roland Perry
Apr 2016, Ian Jackson <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>POLITE NOTICE
> NO PARKING
>signs used to be fairly common.
--
Roland Perry
Adam Funk
Apr 21, 2016, 9:15:17 AM4/21/16
to
On 2016-04-20, Mark Goodge wrote:
previous sentence (a lot of people have been taught to try to avoid
that kind of repetition in writing); the 2nd possibility is also
likely, because of "He said..." in the dodgy sentence.
I'm going to pass on "groping" in a discussion about a stripper,
though.
Davey
Apr 21, 2016, 9:26:32 AM4/21/16
to
control traffic, a damaged Police 'No Parking' cone was left behind,
presumably no longer required. It stayed on the grass verge until
we took it in about a month ago, to remove an unsightly piece of litter.
Since the Police didn't take it away to dispose of it, and clearly
don't want it, can I now use it?
--
Davey.
Adam Funk
Apr 21, 2016, 9:31:01 AM4/21/16
to
On 2016-04-20, Tosspot wrote:
> I always wondered about the legality of these Polite Think Bike Waistcoats
>
> http://www.highvisibility.uk.com/?route=product/product&product_id=81
>
> As it seems clear to *me* they are intended to give the impression of these;
>
> https://www.police-supplies.co.uk/aprons-tabards/hi-vis-class-2-tabard
The first link has police "testimonials" near the bottom to the effect
> I always wondered about the legality of these Polite Think Bike Waistcoats
>
> http://www.highvisibility.uk.com/?route=product/product&product_id=81
>
> As it seems clear to *me* they are intended to give the impression of these;
>
> https://www.police-supplies.co.uk/aprons-tabards/hi-vis-class-2-tabard
that they are legal.
Is it illegal to supply goods that facilitate impersonating a police
officer?
Roland Perry
Apr 21, 2016, 9:39:34 AM4/21/16
to
In message <nfajm6$836$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:17:06 on Thu, 21 Apr
2016, Davey <da...@example.invalid> remarked:
dissuade people from parking legally, but obstructing his drive (in the
absence, I assume, of there being one of those "obstructing a dropped
kerb is an offence" zones).
--
Roland Perry
2016, Davey <da...@example.invalid> remarked:
>> Is there an offence of impersonating police signage?
>
>After the last Remembrance Day Celebration, for which the Police
>control traffic, a damaged Police 'No Parking' cone was left behind,
>presumably no longer required. It stayed on the grass verge until
>we took it in about a month ago, to remove an unsightly piece of litter.
>Since the Police didn't take it away to dispose of it, and clearly
>don't want it, can I now use it?
There's a chap who lives near me who routinely uses such a cone to
>
>After the last Remembrance Day Celebration, for which the Police
>control traffic, a damaged Police 'No Parking' cone was left behind,
>presumably no longer required. It stayed on the grass verge until
>we took it in about a month ago, to remove an unsightly piece of litter.
>Since the Police didn't take it away to dispose of it, and clearly
>don't want it, can I now use it?
dissuade people from parking legally, but obstructing his drive (in the
absence, I assume, of there being one of those "obstructing a dropped
kerb is an offence" zones).
--
Roland Perry
Adam Funk
Apr 21, 2016, 11:00:25 AM4/21/16
to
Tosspot
Apr 21, 2016, 12:32:21 PM4/21/16
to
the uniforms are made somewhere and may be purchased. As for insignias
of rank etc, that may be getting more interesting.
polygonum
Apr 23, 2016, 6:45:29 AM4/23/16
to
On 19/04/2016 19:53, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>
A recumbent cyclist in my area of the country has used lines of orange
>
and blue LEDs to make his vehicle highly visible. They are not blinding,
don't flash, and work extremely well. I doubt anyone would associate
that blue light with police.
I struggle to believe that flashing of any sort or colour would actually
improve safety.
--
Rod
Roland Perry
Apr 23, 2016, 7:12:01 AM4/23/16
to
In message <do11dh...@mid.individual.net>, at 11:34:25 on Sat, 23
Apr 2016, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:
One of the reasons for flashing is that it increases battery life.
Therefore you will be safer with lights that still have some battery
left, than ones where the battery is flat.
--
Roland Perry
Apr 2016, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:
Therefore you will be safer with lights that still have some battery
left, than ones where the battery is flat.
--
Roland Perry
Tosspot
Apr 23, 2016, 5:46:45 PM4/23/16
to
polygonum
Apr 23, 2016, 5:48:03 PM4/23/16
to
powerful argument than it might once have been. Readily available
rechargeable batteries (such as Eneloop) and the most efficient LEDs
combine to output huge numbers of lumens for many hours.
Someone I know regularly cycles for an hour or so each way between home
and work - with very powerful lights. They last both ways and can
recharge before the next journey.
The "where was that light" effect of flashing seems much more of a
safety issue.
--
Rod
polygonum
Apr 23, 2016, 7:29:11 PM4/23/16
to
On 23/04/2016 15:01, Tosspot wrote:
> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines seem to use them for a reason.
Ambulances, police cars and fire engines use them in conjunction with
> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines seem to use them for a reason.
conventional lighting. Their use is to highlight a particular issue
which is out of the ordinary.
A cyclist using a flashing light tends to appear for a moment, then
disappear for several moments. Even if a constant light is also used, in
my experience, the brightness of that tends to be much lower. Hence the
dominant light is the flash.
And I rather doubt they use them to increase battery life.
--
Rod
Roger Hayter
Apr 23, 2016, 7:29:19 PM4/23/16
to
two positions close to the centre of the vehicle. So positional
information is never lost. And they are never the only, nor even the
brightest, lights on the vehicle.
--
Roger Hayter
Rob Morley
Apr 23, 2016, 8:45:04 PM4/23/16
to
On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 11:34:25 +0100
polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
> I struggle to believe that flashing of any sort or colour would
> actually improve safety.
A flashing light gets attention from other road users, in the same way
polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
> I struggle to believe that flashing of any sort or colour would
> actually improve safety.
that a sabre toothed tiger sneaking up in the periphery of our vision
gets attention. Pair it with a steady light, so that once you're
noticed you may be located more easily.
Roland Perry
Apr 24, 2016, 5:55:52 AM4/24/16
to
In message <do20p6...@mid.individual.net>, at 20:29:41 on Sat, 23
everyone buys into it. My bike has a pair of cheap lights, which have a
flashing mode, and all they are powered by is a pair of dry cells.
(The chances of me actually using the bike after dark are negligible.)
>Someone I know regularly cycles for an hour or so each way between home
>and work - with very powerful lights. They last both ways and can
>recharge before the next journey.
>
>The "where was that light" effect of flashing seems much more of a
>safety issue.
That's because they flash too slowly.
--
Roland Perry
>> One of the reasons for flashing is that it increases battery life.
>> Therefore you will be safer with lights that still have some battery
>> left, than ones where the battery is flat.
>
>Given the progress in battery and LED technologies, that seems a less
>powerful argument than it might once have been. Readily available
>rechargeable batteries (such as Eneloop) and the most efficient LEDs
>combine to output huge numbers of lumens for many hours.
Yes, the technology has improved in the last couple of years, but not
>> Therefore you will be safer with lights that still have some battery
>> left, than ones where the battery is flat.
>
>Given the progress in battery and LED technologies, that seems a less
>powerful argument than it might once have been. Readily available
>rechargeable batteries (such as Eneloop) and the most efficient LEDs
>combine to output huge numbers of lumens for many hours.
everyone buys into it. My bike has a pair of cheap lights, which have a
flashing mode, and all they are powered by is a pair of dry cells.
(The chances of me actually using the bike after dark are negligible.)
>Someone I know regularly cycles for an hour or so each way between home
>and work - with very powerful lights. They last both ways and can
>recharge before the next journey.
>
>The "where was that light" effect of flashing seems much more of a
>safety issue.
--
Roland Perry
Paul Rudin
Apr 24, 2016, 5:57:14 AM4/24/16
to
polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> writes:
> On 23/04/2016 15:01, Tosspot wrote:
>> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines seem to use them for a reason.
>
> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines use them in conjunction with
> conventional lighting. Their use is to highlight a particular issue which is
> out of the ordinary.
>
> A cyclist using a flashing light tends to appear for a moment, then disappear
> for several moments. Even if a constant light is also used, in my experience,
> the brightness of that tends to be much lower. Hence the dominant light is the
> flash.
It's generally thought that flashing lights make you more noticable, but
> On 23/04/2016 15:01, Tosspot wrote:
>> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines seem to use them for a reason.
>
> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines use them in conjunction with
> conventional lighting. Their use is to highlight a particular issue which is
> out of the ordinary.
>
> A cyclist using a flashing light tends to appear for a moment, then disappear
> for several moments. Even if a constant light is also used, in my experience,
> the brightness of that tends to be much lower. Hence the dominant light is the
> flash.
steady lights are better for speed/distance estimation.
In urban situations you seldom need lights to be seen because there's
plenty of ambient light and you can be seen anyway - so flashing lights
might be best.
> And I rather doubt they use them to increase battery life.
motor vehicle you don't really care because the battery is constantly
recharged whilst the vehicle is in motion.
Tosspot
Apr 24, 2016, 5:57:39 AM4/24/16
to
(some amendment or other to Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations) it's a
bit of a mute point.
A quick google didn't actually reveal any studies for strobing lights,
but some drivers do seem unable to localise them. Imo, in these days of
LiPo batteries and very efficient LEDs, the power case doesn't really
hold. However, a blinking red light says bike in what is a sea of red
lights these days.
Now, I really don't like strobing brake lights, not for any reason than
there are anooying!
Davey
Apr 24, 2016, 6:18:17 AM4/24/16
to
On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 10:30:01 +0200
Tosspot <Frank...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A quick google didn't actually reveal any studies for strobing
> lights, but some drivers do seem unable to localise them.
I have found one particular bike's lights harder than others to
Tosspot <Frank...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A quick google didn't actually reveal any studies for strobing
> lights, but some drivers do seem unable to localise them.
identify where it is, and my wife has the same experience, so it might
be to do with the rate of flashing, this one being faster than most.
--
Davey.
Roland Perry
Apr 24, 2016, 6:36:38 AM4/24/16
to
In message <GuOdnYaOgPuUGYHK...@giganews.com>, at 10:30:01
on Sun, 24 Apr 2016, Tosspot <Frank...@gmail.com> remarked:
>Imo, in these days of LiPo batteries and very efficient LEDs, the power
>case doesn't really hold.
Unless you make the use of such technology compulsory, it's irrelevant
that it exists, especially if there's a large installed base of older
technology.
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 24 Apr 2016, Tosspot <Frank...@gmail.com> remarked:
>Imo, in these days of LiPo batteries and very efficient LEDs, the power
>case doesn't really hold.
that it exists, especially if there's a large installed base of older
technology.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Apr 24, 2016, 6:42:16 AM4/24/16
to
In message <8637qb3...@rudin.co.uk>, at 08:35:42 on Sun, 24 Apr
2016, Paul Rudin <paul....@rudin.co.uk> remarked:
>> And I rather doubt they use them to increase battery life.
>
>Not battery life - but available charge on the current journey. In a
>motor vehicle you don't really care because the battery is constantly
>recharged whilst the vehicle is in motion.
That's the second person in a week who has taken my use of the
expression "battery life" to mean the number of charge/recharge cycles,
rather than how long each charge lasts. Have I missed some other popular
expression for the latter emerging?
Here's Apple's take on the situation:
"Battery life" is the amount of time your device runs before it
needs to be recharged. "Battery lifespan" is the amount of time
your battery lasts until it needs to be replaced.
http://www.apple.com/uk/batteries/maximizing-performance/
ps The batteries in my cycle lamps aren't rechargeable.
--
Roland Perry
2016, Paul Rudin <paul....@rudin.co.uk> remarked:
>> And I rather doubt they use them to increase battery life.
>
>Not battery life - but available charge on the current journey. In a
>motor vehicle you don't really care because the battery is constantly
>recharged whilst the vehicle is in motion.
expression "battery life" to mean the number of charge/recharge cycles,
rather than how long each charge lasts. Have I missed some other popular
expression for the latter emerging?
Here's Apple's take on the situation:
"Battery life" is the amount of time your device runs before it
needs to be recharged. "Battery lifespan" is the amount of time
your battery lasts until it needs to be replaced.
http://www.apple.com/uk/batteries/maximizing-performance/
ps The batteries in my cycle lamps aren't rechargeable.
--
Roland Perry
Andy Burns
Apr 24, 2016, 3:29:39 PM4/24/16
to
Roger Hayter wrote:
> Tosspot wrote:
strobes too, I find those to be *too* bright because at night they mask
the vehicle's indicators so I can't see whether it is trying to turn
across traffic ...
> Tosspot wrote:
>
>> polygonum wrote:
>>
>>> I struggle to believe that flashing of any sort or colour would actually
>>> improve safety.
>>
>> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines seem to use them for a reason.
>
> Nowadays they don't seem to flash on and off, but to alternate between
> two positions close to the centre of the vehicle. So positional
> information is never lost. And they are never the only, nor even the
> brightest, lights on the vehicle.
As well as flashing blue lights, ambulances tend to have flashing white
>> polygonum wrote:
>>
>>> I struggle to believe that flashing of any sort or colour would actually
>>> improve safety.
>>
>> Ambulances, police cars and fire engines seem to use them for a reason.
>
> Nowadays they don't seem to flash on and off, but to alternate between
> two positions close to the centre of the vehicle. So positional
> information is never lost. And they are never the only, nor even the
> brightest, lights on the vehicle.
strobes too, I find those to be *too* bright because at night they mask
the vehicle's indicators so I can't see whether it is trying to turn
across traffic ...
Tosspot
Apr 24, 2016, 3:30:12 PM4/24/16
to
light[1], but the sample is in western European countries. Makes me
wonder when they will replace filament bulbs in cars. They are getting
more common.
[1] Yesyes, insert gags here!
polygonum
Apr 24, 2016, 5:07:47 PM4/24/16
to
existing vehicles?
I doubt that would ever happen. But it might come about that there are
reasonably-priced replacements that are based on LEDs but very
compatible with many vehicles designed for filament lamps.
Replace in new vehicles? I don't know of a single filament lamp on my car.
--
Rod
the Omrud
Apr 25, 2016, 1:50:33 PM4/25/16
to
makes driving in France rather exciting, as one is required by law to
carry a set of spare bulbs.
--
David
Adam Funk
Apr 26, 2016, 9:30:18 AM4/26/16
to
"CRIME SCENE" tape & some similar things; the catalogue clearly stated
that those items were for sale to authorized police purchasers only.
polygonum
Apr 26, 2016, 1:11:54 PM4/26/16
to
sort of shape? - Which many LEDs will not have. So there cannot be any
spare bulbs.
bulb (n.)
1560s, "an onion," from Middle French bulbe (15c.), from Latin
bulbus "bulb, bulbous root, onion," from Greek bolbos "plant with round
swelling on underground stem." Expanded by 1800 to "swelling in a glass
tube" (thermometer bulb, light bulb, etc.).
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=bulb
Of course, I'd have to check how the French legal requirement is a worded.
--
Rod
polygonum
Apr 26, 2016, 1:14:20 PM4/26/16
to
On 26/04/2016 14:23, Adam Funk wrote:
> A few years ago I saw a catalogue of signs, tapes, &c., including
> "CRIME SCENE" tape & some similar things; the catalogue clearly stated
> that those items were for sale to authorized police purchasers only.
Surely the makers of police dramas must get through miles of such tape
> A few years ago I saw a catalogue of signs, tapes, &c., including
> "CRIME SCENE" tape & some similar things; the catalogue clearly stated
> that those items were for sale to authorized police purchasers only.
every year? You would expect them to buy it in the same way as the
police rather than having to manufacture their own props. Perhaps they
waive that condition for prop departments?
--
Rod
Roland Perry
Apr 26, 2016, 1:32:55 PM4/26/16
to
In message <do9lv6...@mid.individual.net>, at 18:14:15 on Tue, 26
Or they could "borrow" it off the police forces, for a substantial fee,
the same way they borrow all the police cars you see on TV.
--
Roland Perry
Apr 2016, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> remarked:
the same way they borrow all the police cars you see on TV.
--
Roland Perry
Rob Morley
Apr 26, 2016, 1:37:12 PM4/26/16
to
Ian Jackson
Apr 26, 2016, 2:13:20 PM4/26/16
to
In article <kn64vcx...@news.ducksburg.com>,
That the catalogue indicates this doesn't mean that that is a legal
requirement. To speculate wildly:
Perhaps the statement in the catalogue is simply to discourage, and
the suppliers will in fact sell to anyone (or at least, take no steps
to check who their customer is).
Perhaps the suppliers prefer not to supply to people who are probably
trying to impersonate police because such dodgby people are poor
customers (trouble with credit cards; send goods back after use; argue
the toss; whatever).
Perhaps the suppliers have been pressured or paid by police to make
that statement.
or some combination of the above. I'm sure others can think of
more explanations.
--
Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
requirement. To speculate wildly:
Perhaps the statement in the catalogue is simply to discourage, and
the suppliers will in fact sell to anyone (or at least, take no steps
to check who their customer is).
Perhaps the suppliers prefer not to supply to people who are probably
trying to impersonate police because such dodgby people are poor
customers (trouble with credit cards; send goods back after use; argue
the toss; whatever).
Perhaps the suppliers have been pressured or paid by police to make
that statement.
or some combination of the above. I'm sure others can think of
more explanations.
--
Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Rob Morley
Apr 26, 2016, 3:07:24 PM4/26/16
to
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:11:39 +0100
polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
> In a legalistically pedantic mode, doesn't a bulb have to have a
> certain sort of shape? - Which many LEDs will not have. So there
> cannot be any spare bulbs.
>
I think you'd have to consider the definition of "electric light bulb"
polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> wrote:
> In a legalistically pedantic mode, doesn't a bulb have to have a
> certain sort of shape? - Which many LEDs will not have. So there
> cannot be any spare bulbs.
>
rather than just "bulb".
Adam Funk
Apr 26, 2016, 4:15:18 PM4/26/16
to
know what that is) & its technical meaning. The ordinary word for
"light bulb" in French is "ampoule" (Québecois "globe", IIRC), but
(for comparison) the correct term for "(light) bulb" in English is
"lamp".
zaax If you message is not archive it does not cou
Apr 26, 2016, 4:53:08 PM4/26/16
to
On Thursday, 17 November 2011 23:20:02 UTC, Paul wrote:
> Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
> the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
>
> I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
> lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
> use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
>
> My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
> and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
ebay has tonnes of uniform including Police
> Ok here's an unusual question a friend of mine wants to know
> the answer to which I'm someone here will know.
>
> I know theres some restriction in law about putting blue flashing
> lights on vehicles because only emergency services are allowed to
> use them... but does the same law apply to bicycles?
>
> My friend wants to put a blue flashing light on his bicycle
> and wants to know if this is any law will make it illegal.
ebay has tonnes of uniform including Police
Roland Perry
Apr 27, 2016, 4:17:41 AM4/27/16
to
In message <01d8c197-43b0-42b1...@googlegroups.com>, at
11:22:43 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016, zaax If you message is not archive it does
not cou <zaa...@gmail.com> remarked:
>ebay has tonnes of uniform including Police
So does my local antiques emporium (there's a whole room full), but they
are not the current style.
--
Roland Perry
11:22:43 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016, zaax If you message is not archive it does
not cou <zaa...@gmail.com> remarked:
>ebay has tonnes of uniform including Police
are not the current style.
--
Roland Perry
tzimn...@hotmail.com
Aug 30, 2017, 2:31:16 PM8/30/17
to
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 10:04:43 PM UTC+1, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official emergency vehicle is illegal. The police will unlikely bother you for having a blue flashing light on either a pedal cycle or a horse because most would rather nobody drives into you because who has to come and clean up that dead body after a car has smeared it across the road? The police. The only issue with having blue flashing lights on your cycle is that you do leave yourself open to get bother from the police and even the courts. It's unlikely but still you shouldn't use blue flashing lights unless you are prepared to stand infront of a judge and tell him that you would rather be in his court alive because some drivers slowed down when passing you, rather than in some coffin six feet under. Any fine or punishment would be a reward compared to death.
> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
Tim Watts
Aug 31, 2017, 5:35:12 AM8/31/17
to
Imagine if every horse and cyclist had them and they looked like
emergency vehicle lights? Eventually, people would think "oh, another
cyclist" and not be prepared to give way etc.
newshound
Aug 31, 2017, 7:22:29 AM8/31/17
to
glorified torch worn by a horse or bike rider, and having something
large with bright flashing strobes coming up behind you.
That said, I am somewhat conflicted over hi-vis tabards bearing the
traditional police chequer pattern, and the word "Polite".
It might be nice to have a convention which designates that the rider is
using a recording device.
There is little doubt that mis-identification of a police officer
focusses the mind of most drivers.
Andy Leighton
Aug 31, 2017, 12:53:14 PM8/31/17
to
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT), tzimn...@hotmail.com <tzimn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 10:04:43 PM UTC+1, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it
> with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>
> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official
> emergency vehicle is illegal.
Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 10:04:43 PM UTC+1, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it
> with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>
> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official
> emergency vehicle is illegal.
--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
David
Aug 31, 2017, 4:21:43 PM8/31/17
to
Nostalgia?
Bank Holiday week?
Cheers
Dave R
--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Peter Johnson
Sep 1, 2017, 7:41:52 PM9/1/17
to
On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:53:10 -0500, Andy Leighton
<an...@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT), tzimn...@hotmail.com <tzimn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 10:04:43 PM UTC+1, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it
>> with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>>
>> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official
>> emergency vehicle is illegal.
>
>Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
Don't suppose he has two-tone horns going either.
<an...@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT), tzimn...@hotmail.com <tzimn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 10:04:43 PM UTC+1, mch...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I was recently bought a hi-vis cycling belt that has a blue LED strip built into it
>> with continuous and flashing modes. Is it illegal to use it on a bicycle in either mode?
>>
>> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official
>> emergency vehicle is illegal.
>
>Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
Roland Perry
Sep 2, 2017, 3:39:45 PM9/2/17
to
In message <v3cjqcpcjip4ijrao...@4ax.com>, at 20:10:21 on
Fri, 1 Sep 2017, Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official
>>> emergency vehicle is illegal.
>>
>>Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
>
>Don't suppose he has two-tone horns going either.
Crikey, that's a blast from the past. Haven't heard an emergency vehicle
with those for yonks. Round here they are mainly "warblers".
--
Roland Perry
Fri, 1 Sep 2017, Peter Johnson <pe...@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:
>>> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other than an official
>>> emergency vehicle is illegal.
>>
>>Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
>
>Don't suppose he has two-tone horns going either.
with those for yonks. Round here they are mainly "warblers".
--
Roland Perry
Tosspot
Sep 3, 2017, 4:29:35 AM9/3/17
to
change?
Roland Perry
Sep 3, 2017, 5:16:27 AM9/3/17
to
In message <jbadnUNXM7r0IDbE...@giganews.com>, at 10:29:29
on Sun, 3 Sep 2017, Tosspot <Frank...@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other
>>>>>than an official emergency vehicle is illegal.
>>>>
>>>> Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
>>>
>>> Don't suppose he has two-tone horns going either.
>>
>> Crikey, that's a blast from the past. Haven't heard an emergency vehicle
>> with those for yonks. Round here they are mainly "warblers".
>
>That's a good point. What happened to them? Was it another EU
>mandated change?
They just weren't loud enough for the modern hermetically sealed,
in-car-entertainment, selfishly-driven modern car to give way.
Then you've got the "stealth warblers", I had one of those a few cars
behind me yesterday, lots of noise but no obvious emergency vehicle or
flashing lights.
When it did get into the gap between myself and the car behind, it
transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can only
describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the radiator
grill.
We were miles from anywhere, out in the fens, so I have no idea where he
was in such a hurry to get to.
--
Roland Perry
on Sun, 3 Sep 2017, Tosspot <Frank...@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Legally speaking, blue flashing lights on any road vehicle other
>>>>>than an official emergency vehicle is illegal.
>>>>
>>>> Yep but the PP has the blue flashers on his clothing not his vehicle.
>>>
>>> Don't suppose he has two-tone horns going either.
>>
>> Crikey, that's a blast from the past. Haven't heard an emergency vehicle
>> with those for yonks. Round here they are mainly "warblers".
>
>That's a good point. What happened to them? Was it another EU
>mandated change?
in-car-entertainment, selfishly-driven modern car to give way.
Then you've got the "stealth warblers", I had one of those a few cars
behind me yesterday, lots of noise but no obvious emergency vehicle or
flashing lights.
When it did get into the gap between myself and the car behind, it
transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can only
describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the radiator
grill.
We were miles from anywhere, out in the fens, so I have no idea where he
was in such a hurry to get to.
--
Roland Perry
Davey
Sep 3, 2017, 8:38:07 AM9/3/17
to
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 09:52:47 +0100
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> When it did get into the gap between myself and the car behind, it
> transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can
> only describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the
> radiator grill.
>
> We were miles from anywhere, out in the fens, so I have no idea where
> he was in such a hurry to get to.
Probably following up a report of foreign-looking folk, speaking East
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> When it did get into the gap between myself and the car behind, it
> transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can
> only describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the
> radiator grill.
>
> We were miles from anywhere, out in the fens, so I have no idea where
> he was in such a hurry to get to.
European-sounding languages. Our local East Anglian Tesco's always has
them, usually several males and one female; they buy beer and crisps,
maybe a sandwich, then they pile into old Transit or VW vans and drive
off. I don't think they're going to a fishing competition, somehow.
They never seem to go to the Morrison's next door, for some reason.
--
Davey.
Davey
Sep 3, 2017, 8:38:38 AM9/3/17
to
> When it did get into the gap between myself and the car behind, it
> transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can
> only describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the
> radiator grill.
A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia, would
> transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can
> only describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the
> radiator grill.
you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After all, we are
advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car which is not
clearly identified as such, but to drive to the nearest Police Station
(Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and 'phone to confirm that they
are real, so as to prevent abduction by pretend Police.
So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear evidence of being
real Police, would you be at fault if you did not acknowledge its
Police-ness?
--
Davey.
newshound
Sep 3, 2017, 10:47:25 AM9/3/17
to
Occupants may also have been in uniform.
Roland Perry
Sep 3, 2017, 2:46:55 PM9/3/17
to
In message <fbudnSIqlqhClDHE...@brightview.co.uk>, at
14:55:44 on Sun, 3 Sep 2017, newshound <news...@stevejqr.plus.com>
remarked:
If they aren't trying to stop you, it's not clear there's an offence of
ignoring them, although it's public spirited to let them pass. (But not
if doing so involves breaking any traffic laws).
--
Roland Perry
14:55:44 on Sun, 3 Sep 2017, newshound <news...@stevejqr.plus.com>
remarked:
>>> When it did get into the gap between myself and the car behind, it
>>> transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can
>>> only describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the
>>> radiator grill.
>> A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia,
>>would
>> you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After all, we are
>> advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car which is not
>> clearly identified as such, but to drive to the nearest Police Station
>> (Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and 'phone to confirm that they
>> are real, so as to prevent abduction by pretend Police.
>> So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear evidence of being
>> real Police, would you be at fault if you did not acknowledge its
>> Police-ness?
>>
>Doesn't warble tone and flashing blue strobes say Police to you?
>Occupants may also have been in uniform.
You can't see who is in the car, let alone what they might be wearing.
>>> transpired to be a completely unmarked grey Volvo, with what I can
>>> only describe as a couple of xmas-tree lights strobing behind the
>>> radiator grill.
>> A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia,
>>would
>> you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After all, we are
>> advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car which is not
>> clearly identified as such, but to drive to the nearest Police Station
>> (Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and 'phone to confirm that they
>> are real, so as to prevent abduction by pretend Police.
>> So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear evidence of being
>> real Police, would you be at fault if you did not acknowledge its
>> Police-ness?
>>
>Doesn't warble tone and flashing blue strobes say Police to you?
>Occupants may also have been in uniform.
If they aren't trying to stop you, it's not clear there's an offence of
ignoring them, although it's public spirited to let them pass. (But not
if doing so involves breaking any traffic laws).
--
Roland Perry
Davey
Sep 3, 2017, 2:47:27 PM9/3/17
to
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:55:44 +0100
newshound <news...@stevejqr.plus.com> wrote:
> > A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia,
> > would you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After
> > all, we are advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car
> > which is not clearly identified as such, but to drive to the
> > nearest Police Station (Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and
> > 'phone to confirm that they are real, so as to prevent abduction by
> > pretend Police.
> >
> > So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear evidence of being
> > real Police, would you be at fault if you did not acknowledge its
> > Police-ness?
> >
> Doesn't warble tone and flashing blue strobes say Police to you?
> Occupants may also have been in uniform.
Tones and lights: Such incomplete marks are what we are told to be wary
newshound <news...@stevejqr.plus.com> wrote:
> > A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia,
> > would you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After
> > all, we are advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car
> > which is not clearly identified as such, but to drive to the
> > nearest Police Station (Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and
> > 'phone to confirm that they are real, so as to prevent abduction by
> > pretend Police.
> >
> > So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear evidence of being
> > real Police, would you be at fault if you did not acknowledge its
> > Police-ness?
> >
> Doesn't warble tone and flashing blue strobes say Police to you?
> Occupants may also have been in uniform.
of, as they don't comprise a full set of 'Blues and Twos'. 'Christmas
Tree Lights', quote.
No mention was made of uniform in Roland's post.
--
Davey.
Davey
Sep 4, 2017, 4:56:34 AM9/4/17
to
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 19:00:15 +0100
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia,
> >>would
> >> you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After all, we
> >> are advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car which is
> >> not clearly identified as such, but to drive to the nearest Police
> >> Station (Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and 'phone to
> >> confirm that they are real, so as to prevent abduction by pretend
> >> Police. So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear
> >> evidence of being real Police, would you be at fault if you did
> >> not acknowledge its Police-ness?
> >>
> >Doesn't warble tone and flashing blue strobes say Police to you?
> >Occupants may also have been in uniform.
>
> You can't see who is in the car, let alone what they might be wearing.
>
> If they aren't trying to stop you, it's not clear there's an offence
> of ignoring them, although it's public spirited to let them pass.
> (But not if doing so involves breaking any traffic laws).
Let's make this more finite. If it was apparently a real Police car, and
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> A thought on that: With such little recognisable Police insignia,
> >>would
> >> you be expected to assume that it was a Police car? After all, we
> >> are advised here to not stop for a so-called Police car which is
> >> not clearly identified as such, but to drive to the nearest Police
> >> Station (Hah!!) or lock the doors and windows and 'phone to
> >> confirm that they are real, so as to prevent abduction by pretend
> >> Police. So with your Volvo, which was not displaying clear
> >> evidence of being real Police, would you be at fault if you did
> >> not acknowledge its Police-ness?
> >>
> >Doesn't warble tone and flashing blue strobes say Police to you?
> >Occupants may also have been in uniform.
>
> You can't see who is in the car, let alone what they might be wearing.
>
> If they aren't trying to stop you, it's not clear there's an offence
> of ignoring them, although it's public spirited to let them pass.
> (But not if doing so involves breaking any traffic laws).
it was clearly indicating that it wanted you to stop, is it an offence
to not stop? That must be considered in view of the Police advice to not
stop IF the identity of the car/occupying Policemen is not clear, and to
drive to the nearest Police Station, which may be 30 minutes or more
away, (if you happen to know where it is).
The afore-mentioned Volvo, had it been apparently trying to stop Roland,
would have been questionable.
In East Anglia, we have lots of Police Stations that now have no desks,
only occupants and cars.
--
Davey.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages