Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Mar 04, 2015 8:54 pm  

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

If only the police officers had done what they should have done, opened the gate and let him cycle through as always, no big deal and no security risk (when compared to letting cars through far less a risk in fact).
So if they had done their job like they were supposed to (instead of being F@@king plebs) none of this would have happened.
It's like this on the roads all the time, one rule for one lot and a different rule for others when they feel like applying them and if they can be bothered to even know the law.

So, despite Mitchell and all other relevant personnel being told not to exit or enter via the main gates, it was the rozzers' fault that he decided to take no heed of the instructions?

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:34 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

So, despite Mitchell and all other relevant personnel being told not to exit or enter via the main gates, it was the rozzers' fault that he decided to take no heed of the instructions?

'Relevant'? Whom does that refer to exactly, you mean pedestrians, well as a bicycle is a vehicle in law he had every right to use the main gates to exit as a cyclist..i.e. he wasn't walking, or as it seems you are suggesting because he was on a biycle he should be treated differently to other MPs exiting by car or motorcycle which would present a far higher risk or can you not grasp that (as indeed the police can't)
As I said, one rule for one lot and another rule for the others..
He had indeed being allowed to exit the main gates on his bicycle in the past, the allegation that they continued to allow him to do so because he might bully the police officers is just laughable.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:59 pm  

You do know different vehicles have different restrictions and rules placed on them don't you? Both in law and by organisations on private or public property.

You know why? Because a bike is different to a car.

If you don't believe me try taking your car on the train.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:34 pm  

I tried to take my car on a train once and ended up in France ... never again!

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:45 pm  

Stand-Offish wrote:

I tried to take my car on a train once and ended up in France ... never again!

Exactly. Wouldn't have happened if you'd been on a bike.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Mar 04, 2015 11:35 pm  

Him wrote:

You do know different vehicles have different restrictions and rules placed on them don't you? Both in law and by organisations on private or public property.

You know why? Because a bike is different to a car.

If you don't believe me try taking your car on the train.

Well a train isn't the highway is it smart mouth nor is private property so your arguement is invalid. There are different restrictions of course (cycles aren't allowed on motorways for instance) but none that apply in law in this case, on the road/highway in question Mitchell was perfectly entitled to use his vehicle and egress via the main gates as other wheeled vehicles are, that he chose to use a bicycle makes jack all difference except to people like you and the police involved.
You obviously have a beef because I didn't think you were this obtuse or ignorant of the law/rules.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Thu Mar 05, 2015 7:14 am  

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

Well a train isn't the highway is it smart mouth nor is private property so your arguement is invalid. There are different restrictions of course (cycles aren't allowed on motorways for instance) but none that apply in law in this case, on the road/highway in question Mitchell was perfectly entitled to use his vehicle and egress via the main gates as other wheeled vehicles are, that he chose to use a bicycle makes jack all difference except to people like you and the police involved.
You obviously have a beef because I didn't think you were this obtuse or ignorant of the law/rules.

Its a fairly well established principle and point of law that ALL road users (including pedestrians) must obey the instructions of a police officer when using the public highways, that much is absolute.

So, your point was ?

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:38 am  

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

Well a train isn't the highway is it smart mouth nor is private property so your arguement is invalid. There are different restrictions of course (cycles aren't allowed on motorways for instance) but none that apply in law in this case, on the road/highway in question Mitchell was perfectly entitled to use his vehicle and egress via the main gates as other wheeled vehicles are, that he chose to use a bicycle makes jack all difference except to people like you and the police involved.
You obviously have a beef because I didn't think you were this obtuse or ignorant of the law/rules.

As the police are pretty much in charge of who goes in an out of Downing Street, that's a pretty important difference.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:29 am  

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

Well a train isn't the highway is it smart mouth nor is private property so your arguement is invalid. There are different restrictions of course (cycles aren't allowed on motorways for instance) but none that apply in law in this case, on the road/highway in question Mitchell was perfectly entitled to use his vehicle and egress via the main gates as other wheeled vehicles are, that he chose to use a bicycle makes jack all difference except to people like you and the police involved.
You obviously have a beef because I didn't think you were this obtuse or ignorant of the law/rules.

Yeah I just hate cyclists. I hate them. They're all just so cycly and flourescent.

I'm suprised someone with such a certain and comprehensive knowledge of ballistics, the physics in rugby league impacts and the law of the road would forget a couple of basic issues in this case. Firstly, as Jerry pointed out, he was given an instruction by a police officer. And secondly Downing Street isnt a public road. You try taking your bike through the main gate. I'm pretty sure you'll get stopped by the police. But that's probably just because they hate cyclists too? Right?

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:58 am  

Him wrote:

And secondly Downing Street isnt a public road. You try taking your bike through the main gate. I'm pretty sure you'll get stopped by the police. But that's probably just because they hate cyclists too? Right?

I actually looked that up and surprisingly it is a public road under the domain of the Westminster Council, albeit one that is controlled by some vague reference to anti-terrorism in the same way the the police could temporarily shut down any old road that they fancy using such one-size-fits-all permissions. The buildings along the street are a designated site under Police Act so they have full control over them, but not the road itself, presumably because the PM wants the council to come and sweep it regularly rather than have to do it himself.

Still doesn't detract from the fact that any reasonable person would comply with an order given by a police officer at any time on any public highway unless that person is being particularly obtuse, arrogant and/or stupid.