Jump to content

UK Law clarification: "They're illegal to ride in public"


Tom

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SuperSport said:

Don't you love it when it's up to the officers opinion or mood, instead of actual laws.

Love it ? I rely on it, as does everyone who rides in countries where EUC's are not yet allowed. Thank goodness they have got the discretion to just ignore me and do something more productive, which, fortunately, is what most of them do over here !

Edited by Cerbera
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Paddylaz said:

It's even trickier here in London as all the 'Royal Parks' including the one I ride in have their very own sort of legal system.

You ride in a Royal Park?:shock2:  I will google Royal Park immediately sire.High class British orchestra playing

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, steve454 said:

Very interesting, the Royals gave some of their land to general use,

Actually, quite the opposite. Legally speaking the Queen owns ALL property in the country. Including our houses. But this is deep within ancient unenforceable, unused law. The same sections in the old scrolls along with being allowed entry into all taverns if you have a goat in need of food......

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Paddylaz said:

the Queen owns ALL property in the country. Including our houses. But this is deep within ancient unenforceable, unused law. The same sections in the old scrolls along with being allowed entry into all taverns if you have a goat in need of food....

Of course that is unenforceable, but it gives a certain feeling of unity.  That is one of the things I have always liked about Great Britain.

A goat in need of food?  And you can get in to any tavern just by having a goat on a leash and saying that?:huh:  Sorry, I don't understand your vernacular.  Does the goat get a beer?  Ohh, I get it, you tell your wife that you have to get some food for the goat, and there's a pub there.  Sorry, goat, I will get you something to eat, but I'm a little thirsty right now. 

Ohh?, maybe now I get it. You have a goat, that pays for a good night out.:wacko:  So you would need two goats a weekend.:smartass:  Darn it, I ran out of goats.:pooping:

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Paddylaz said:

Actually, quite the opposite. Legally speaking the Queen owns ALL property in the country. Including our houses. But this is deep within ancient unenforceable, unused law. The same sections in the old scrolls along with being allowed entry into all taverns if you have a goat in need of food......

Ancient stone relics in the UK like Hadrian's wall (122 AD)from the time when Roman's marked the farthest reaches of their empire, are so unique to the UK as historic references to authorities in the past.

https://www.google.com/search?q=hadrians+wall&client=ms-android-sprint-mvno-us&prmd=mivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq04nC-MLRAhVF0xoKHWAfDUgQ_AUICCgC

In the US, aside from occasional ancient structures (such as Pueblo cliff dwellings) found on native Indian lands, history starts with places like Jamestown (1606) in the colonial period.

From time to time I've read about ancient burial grounds found in London where victims of the Black Plague are buried. I've read that the cause of the Black Plague was born by rats in central Asia that were brought along the ancient silk road from China by Mongols in and around 1347

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_migration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Bob Eisenman said:

Ancient stone relics in the UK like Hadrian's wall (122 AD)from the time when Roman's marked the farthest reaches of their empire, are so unique to the UK as historic references to authorities in the past.

I still don't believe that, no matter how many times it's been written.

What I do believe is that England was in India, Hong Kong, Canada, and the United States of America Eagle making that sound that they make

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Bob Eisenman said:

I've read that the cause of the Black Plague was born by rats in central Asia that were brought along the ancient silk road from China by Mongols in and around 1347

I've never believed that either, what I think happened was a population explosion, due to the first big city being there, and all the dirt and filth cleaned out the weak ones. 

So, you are blaming the Chinese?  Oh, sorry, the Mongols.

Lucky rats, but  being a little of a rat myself, I would try to help my host in whatever way I could, and ensure a food supply.  I wonder if the rats feel like cows, and want to be eaten, but we disrespect them  and say they are too small too eat?

One rat would feed one human for a day:ph34r: 

I have never eaten one, but I have eaten a tree rat (squirrel)  Sorry, this should go to the food post:shock2:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paddylaz said:

Actually, quite the opposite. Legally speaking the Queen owns ALL property in the country. Including our houses. But this is deep within ancient unenforceable, unused law. The same sections in the old scrolls along with being allowed entry into all taverns if you have a goat in need of food......

Enjoy your Guinness, and have one on me:P

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steve454 said:

I still don't believe that, no matter how many times it's been written.

What I do believe is that England was in India, Hong Kong, Canada, and the United States of America Eagle making that sound that they make

I'm not sure what you mean. Hadrian's wall is very real. The Mongol empire and invasions westward into Europe was vast. The Mongol's are reported to have taken a security role in Silk Road goods transit before the Mongol empire fell apart:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

From an epidemiology point of view the rat born parasite, now traced to a region in central Asia, was the cause of the Black Plague at a time when the cause was not clearly understood and the consequences of contracting the disease were grim and devastating.

Mongol_Empire_map.gif

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Bob Eisenman said:

I've read that the cause of the Black Plague was born by rats in central Asia that were brought along the ancient silk road from China by Mongols in and around 1347

Yes. That's is how Aliexpress shipped things in those days. One of the dodgy resellers no doubt. ?

@Bob Eisenman your plague spreading map, looks uncomfortably like the new China railroad map.  Am I a bit early to report on the " new plague from the east"?

Edited by Smoother
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem will be when everyone has them. Imagine oxford street on Friday night! I have written to the deptof transport and they inform me that developments in driverless intelligent vehicles are being monitored and laws will be refined as things change. So if a Segway could avoid crushing old ladies feet by itself there shouldnt be any reason to keep the illegal status.  Single wheel vehicles are not mentioned at all and so are not classed as motor vehicles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/01/2017 at 11:02 AM, WeeJ said:

i think they key is to ride responsibly, not putting yourself or others in danger, then police etc are more likely to be understanding and allow you to continue on your journey.  

Yes I totally agree. If you are riding safely and with obvious consideration for other people and traffic I think (or at least hope!) that is the most reasonably defensible way of doing something that is, incorrectly, illegal. If you present yourself to the authorities, or even court as an ambassador for future personal transport technology who is merely demonstrating to the world at large how these machines can be ridden safely and considerately in normal daily life, for the purposes of showing lawmakers why a ban isn't necessary or fair, I don't see why they have any reason to come down hard on you.

I'm not keen to test that theory in court, but it is what I'd rely on to save me to whatever degree, should it come to that.

Edited by Cerbera
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jonno Raab said:

The problem will be when everyone has them. Imagine oxford street on Friday night! I have written to the deptof transport and they inform me that developments in driverless intelligent vehicles are being monitored and laws will be refined as things change. So if a Segway could avoid crushing old ladies feet by itself there shouldnt be any reason to keep the illegal status.  Single wheel vehicles are not mentioned at all and so are not classed as motor vehicles.

As somebody who has wheeled the length of Oxford street I can confirm that there is little fun to be had riding there. It is maximum difficult to navigate huge crowds of slowly and erratically moving people - if they were all on wheels there would be crashes everywhere. Nope - some areas should remain wheel free and Oxford Street is one of them :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cerbera said:

As somebody who has wheeled the length of Oxford street I can confirm that there is little fun to be had riding there. It is maximum difficult to navigate huge crowds of slowly and erratically moving people - if they were all on wheels there would be crashes everywhere. Nope - some areas should remain wheel free and Oxford Street is one of them :)

 

So is it better to persevere or use a trolley handle and walk?  I can imagine causing laddered tights and bruised ankles with the handle.  At least if you tower above people they are more likely to move aside a bit.  DId anyone give you hassle?  I just had a guy  cross into the opposite lane in his car and pretend he was going to drive straight into me as I crossed a road.  He must have been offended by his not understanding what he was looking at. I was tempted to chuck my wheel through his windscreen.

Studies have shown that people are actually good at not crashing into each other in crowds which is why there are very few feet stomped on despite people window shopping. I'm tall so I'm more scared of someone taking my eyeball out with an umbrella but even with waving ferrules there are surprisingly few incidents. I guess if all people were very experienced at using their chosen method of self ballancing transport to the standard where the device has become an extension of their body., things might not be so bad. 

I do sometimes think that I am on the first step of evolving into a Dalek tho. 

 

I had a reply from the dept of transport informing me that one wheeled vehicles are not allowed on the road or pavement . I'll publish it on here later.  It doesn't quote the relevant rule to justify the statement so I might ask for further clarification 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Jonno Raab said:

So is it better to persevere or use a trolley handle and walk?

In this instance I'd go with the second option - it'll be like you are walking along with a powered suitcase.

38 minutes ago, Jonno Raab said:

Studies have shown that people are actually good at not crashing into each other in crowds which is why there are very few feet stomped on despite people window shopping

I would suspect that those studies just don't apply to pedestrians vs people on wheels. We move faster than they do, and they are looking at their phones :/

38 minutes ago, Jonno Raab said:

 At least if you tower above people they are more likely to move aside a bit.  DId anyone give you hassle?

Well i did it about 3 years ago when I was doing my Airwheel challenges. I didn't get stopped on Oxford St (whereas I did wheeling Waterloo station main concourse in rush hour!), but it was a singularly unrewarding experience. I only stayed on the wheel for the whole length of it because I was doing it as a wheely challenge at the time. I'd never do it for fun, because there isn't any - it's too hard to be enjoyable, and it's surprisingly tiring to have to maintain such high and constant levels of vigilance, awareness and utter concentration for so long.

People do move for you if they are coming towards you (and they look up from their phones in time), but they are not the problem. the problem is all the people you must overtake who can't see you until you are on top of them. In nearly every other roadway in the country you can just choose the path of least resistance and plan route changes to avoid crowd hotspots, but on our busiest street there is simply nowhere to go that isn't rammed with people going at all sorts of speeds in all sorts of directions. Maximum frustration all round - for me it really was the antithesis of enjoyable riding.

Edited by Cerbera
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting story/debate, especially as the same law RE: cycling on the pavement in the UK also applies to Electric Unicycles!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38688256 -  Police in one London borough have said they will not prosecute cyclists who ride on the pavement, but is the decision a good move for safety and will it be adopted in other parts of the country?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/10/2015 at 3:16 PM, MrBump said:

The issue with "hoverboards" is that a couple of dicks rode them, got in the media, and now all the dicks want them.

Let's hope we do not run into the same issue with EUCs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/10/2015 at 9:10 AM, robca said:

EUCs, fun as they are, don't mix either with pedestrians nor bicycles, so you are introducing yet another kind of traffic (same for skateboards).

In my experience EUCs mix just fine with pedestrians and with bicycles, depending on which speed they are operated at. 

On 08/12/2015 at 9:55 PM, Bat said:

So you claim EUCs emits CO2? Hahahaha

The definition of zero emission vehicle is that the vehicle doesn't emit any CO2 or other gases (even worse CO, NOx etc.).

Sure, if you add a "directly" in front of "emit", EUCs are zero emission. It might be a common definition, but it's hardly a very relevant one. 

Quote

Maybe Tesla Model S is not a zero emission vehicle, too?

Not in my books, but see above. Calling them zero emission suggests that a 200kW 2 ton vehicle is without relevant environmental side effects due to emissions. I guess it's no news for you as well that it isn't.

Edited by Mono
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...