Presenter Jeremy Vine is caught doing TRIPLE the speed limit - Polidicks

[B]Broadcaster Jeremy Vine has been stopped by police in London's Hyde Park for speeding on his bicycle. [/B] The BBC Radio 2 presenter said he had been caught travelling at 16mph in a 5mph zone. 'Every morning when I leave the house, my wife says farewell in the manner of Japanese women who waved off pilot husbands in World War II. 'If nothing else, cycling in a major British city reminds you to make a will and tell your mum you love her. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-30130715[/url] [url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2842277/Vine-stopped-speeding-bike.html[/url]

Is this REALLY a problem over there?

I don't think bicycles can actually speed. He was probably just stopped to make him aware of it.

[QUOTE=pentium;46534061]Is this REALLY a problem over there?[/QUOTE] I read your post thinking you were being an fool and thought he was in like, a car or something. and then I read the article and realized that you were totally right WHAT is this harming? maybe I'm just being ignorant but surely this isn't a problem :v:

Speeding on the bicycle? What a fucking joke.

Seriously? Bicycle speed limits? Are there limits for how fast you're allowed to walk as well?

Three words: bring back hanging

He was cycling through a park, hitting an old woman at 16mph would hurt

[QUOTE=paul simon;46534093]Seriously? Bicycle speed limits? Are there limits for how fast you're allowed to walk as well?[/QUOTE] If cycling where people walk it makes sense. 5mph is fucking slow though.

16mph on a bicycle is not the same danger as 16mph in a car. The momentum is so much less you won't even get hurt if you're a pedestrain. You can RUN 15mph, better start scanning people going on runs [QUOTE=matt.ant;46534098]He was cycling through a park, hitting an old woman at 16mph would hurt[/QUOTE] Just don't hit the grandma? Cyclists have eyes and can look forward

I had to re-read the title because I thought it said Jeremy Clarkson. [highlight](User was banned for this post (""i read the title as" do not contribute to the thread" - Orkel))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;46534188]I had to re-read the title because I thought it said Jeremy Clarkson.[/QUOTE] Clarkson on a bike? Now THAT would be a scandal.

Now that's a headline perfect for SH.

[QUOTE=Memobot;46534079]I don't think bicycles can actually speed. He was probably just stopped to make him aware of it.[/QUOTE] Bicycles are...or at least should be...held to the same rules cars are held to. And that includes speed limits.

[QUOTE=TestECull;46534290]Bicycles are...or at least should be...held to the same rules cars are held to. And that includes speed limits.[/QUOTE] [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_States]In the US, they (mostly) are.[/URL] This happened in the UK, so the laws could vary.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;46534090]Speeding on the bicycle? What a fucking joke.[/QUOTE] The UK is just a nanny state now.

Do bicycles even have speedometers on them?

[QUOTE=TestECull;46534290]Bicycles are...or at least should be...held to the same rules cars are held to. And that includes speed limits.[/QUOTE] I see disagree ratings. Anyone have an elaboration?

[QUOTE=kiloy;46534445]Do bicycles even have speedometers on them?[/QUOTE] Have you never seen a bicycle? There are speedometer addons, but they never come built in.

[QUOTE=kiloy;46534445]Do bicycles even have speedometers on them?[/QUOTE] They're aftermarket addons. It shouldn't be that hard to regulate your speed on one, though. If the limit's low enough for the average cyclist to be able to exceed it it won't be difficult, and in the scenario in the OP it's painfully easy. A jogging pace. Not difficult at all.

[QUOTE=Propane Addict;46534248]Clarkson on a bike? Now THAT would be a scandal.[/QUOTE] rocket bike [t]http://gadling.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/0,,359723,00.jpg[/t] Presenter Jeremy Clarkson is caught doing SIX TIMES the speed limit

[QUOTE=LegndNikko;46534476]I see disagree ratings. Anyone have an elaboration?[/QUOTE] I'd say they're disagreeing because I'm the one that posed the argument rather than the argument itself.

[QUOTE=matt.ant;46534098]He was cycling through a park, hitting an old woman at 16mph would hurt[/QUOTE] I can see how that would be a problem then, the warning now makes sense I'd have stopped him too

[QUOTE=tek022;46534379][URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_States]In the US, they (mostly) are.[/URL] This happened in the UK, so the laws could vary.[/QUOTE] Yea they "are", but I see people on bikes blowing stop signs, running red lights, and never get stopped. It's even worse when you share the road with bikes and they do this.

Hyde Park can be very dense with pedestrians at times so yes he was going too fast.

[QUOTE=MachiniOs;46534663]Hyde Park can be very dense with pedestrians at times so yes he was going too fast.[/QUOTE] 5mph is literally walking speed. If you're gonna impose that kinda limit, might as well just not allow bikes.

I wish cyclists would get up to the speed limit when on roads. Or at least not cycle on them (when there's no cycle lane) so they don't piss everyone else off.

[QUOTE=Flapadar;46534725]I wish cyclists would get up to the speed limit when on roads. Or at least not cycle on them (when there's no cycle lane) so they don't piss everyone else off.[/QUOTE] What, do you know how hard that would be? Tour-de-France athletes only do an average of 20mph

[QUOTE=matt.ant;46534783]What, do you know how hard that would be?[/QUOTE] Easier than going under 10mph up a hill causing traffic problems when there's a perfectly good empty pavement right next to them. It makes no sense having cyclists use the road unless there's a cycle lane - they'll cause much less disruption to pedestrians than they would to cars; and there's less danger to everyone involved if they are on the pavement rather than the road too. Cyclists on pavements: Pros: Less danger to cyclist, no disruption to traffic, minimal chance of fatal collision. Cons: Irresponsible use may result in collision with pedestrian. Cyclists on roads: Pros: Pedestrians unlikely to be injured. Cons: Cyclist more likely to be injured. Higher chance of fatal collision. Increased chance of collision due to frustrated drivers taking risks overtaking. Traffic disruption.

[QUOTE=Flapadar;46534803]Easier than going under 10mph up a hill causing traffic problems when there's a perfectly good empty pavement right next to them. It makes no sense having cyclists use the road unless there's a cycle lane - they'll cause much less disruption to pedestrians than they would to cars; and there's less danger to everyone involved if they are on the pavement rather than the road too.[/QUOTE] I use the pavement when going uphill because I'm slow and stop a lot so I'll give you that, but it's actually illegal to cycle on the pavement in some countries and it's generally frowned upon here