DRTFA but I think you'll find that to be insurance company more than nanny state. Gotta do what you can to keep them rates down.

How many times have we had threads about cyclists where farkers whine about them not being proficient on the road?

Make your farking mind up.

LaChanz: DRTFA but I think you'll find that to be insurance company more than nanny state. Gotta do what you can to keep them rates down.

That's right, but it would have been ignored by the admins if it didn't say "Nanny State", or perhaps they tagged the "Nanny State" onto the end again.

Either way it's just farking embarrasing, I hope there is a severe backlash against this kind of crap soon, where suddenly it becomes "the done thing" to fall off a ladder, break your leg, and laugh about it because you're a chump. Or ride a bike and die but not have your family sue.

Slaxl: Or ride a bike and die but not have your family sue.

That's only going to happen when juries and judges stop giving out huge amounts of money to the survivors of folks who auto-darwinate themselves. Because as long as a lawyer is getting a third of that money, there's going to be one driving his Lexus right behind the ambulance.

/Then maybe they'll stop putting the instructions and warning labels on ladders, too. Who the hell needs instructions for a ladder?

I don't see how the Nanny State is striking again. No one's saying he isn't free to ride a bike without the course. He just can't go on patrol without having taken the course. It seems perfectly reasonable to me.

OTOH, there's a difference between riding a bike as a civilian and riding a bike as a cop on a beat, just like there's a difference between driving a car to work and patrolling in a squad car. Don't they have special driving schools for cops over there? I'm pretty sure cops get some special driving training in a lot of jurisdictions here in the US, so why shouldn't there be a bicycle equivalent?

Ringthane: OTOH, there's a difference between riding a bike as a civilian and riding a bike as a cop on a beat, just like there's a difference between driving a car to work and patrolling in a squad car. Don't they have special driving schools for cops over there? I'm pretty sure cops get some special driving training in a lot of jurisdictions here in the US, so why shouldn't there be a bicycle equivalent?

What's the difference? One is carrying and gun and the other isn't? this might be the single had most retarded statement/comparison of the day.

It's because these proficiency courses have worked so well with cops and guns in the past...

Stop green-lighting Daily Fail articles, it's on par with The National Enquirer.

I've done a few courses but I still have trouble reverse parking my bicycle.

Agrees with the system.

I don't agree with it. but put it like this....the cop crashes his bike on patrol and what happens? he sues the department because they didn't properly train him on how to ride a bike. That's how retarded the US and the nanny state have gotten.

Kind of like that idiot with the ladder yesterday...if you're 72 and don't know how to climb a ladder you have failed at life.

ihatedumbpeople: I don't agree with it. but put it like this....the cop crashes his bike on patrol and what happens? he sues the department because they didn't properly train him on how to ride a bike. That's how retarded the US and the nanny state have gotten.

Kind of like that idiot with the ladder yesterday...if you're 72 and don't know how to climb a ladder you have failed at life.

This. The problem is not the Nanny State, it's the litigation culture.

redmid17

What's the difference? One is carrying and gun and the other isn't?

Actually, I would think that the difference is that one's a government official and one, well, isn't.

I go out in my car and I get into an accident, or I ride my bike out into the street and cause one and I'm going to be responsible for it. There's no one else to blame, I've done it.

A cop goes out in his squad car and get into an accident, or rides his bike--while on patrol--into the street and causes an accident and now the police department is responsible.

I don't see how that's boggling your mind.

Didn't RTFA. No need. Cops are required to pass special training and demonstrate profisciency in order to operate any cop equipment, including bikes. End.

I'm curious as to how long it is taking for him to take the course. Is there a long delay or has he only been waiting a couple of weeks?

If he walks a beat, do they have an official training course to see if he is a proficient walker? Do they critique his gate like a physical therapist? "Officer Barker, you're pronating on your left foot."

He'll probably catch more criminals on the bus anyway, at least they're convienently gathered in one place for him.

Actually here in PA you have to complete a course as well. The reason is you are carrying a duty belt and have to be properly conditioned. Also there are technical skills to learn. Going down steps isn't always as easy as it sounds or looks.

/Mountain biker
/PORCer (www.porcmtbclub.org)

When I was young I planned to build a hot dog stand on wheels and tow it downtown with my bicycle. These days the most you can do is ride without a helmet - and even then, you get in trouble. Let kids be kids, damnit.

When I worked for the university police as student security patrol during college, both the student security and the regular cops had to complete a police bike training course; a lot of exercises like riding up and down stairs slowly w/o falling off and other urban-type skills unique to police riding.

FakePlasticAlex: redmid17

What's the difference? One is carrying and gun and the other isn't?

Actually, I would think that the difference is that one's a government official and one, well, isn't.

I go out in my car and I get into an accident, or I ride my bike out into the street and cause one and I'm going to be responsible for it. There's no one else to blame, I've done it.

A cop goes out in his squad car and get into an accident, or rides his bike--while on patrol--into the street and causes an accident and now the police department is responsible.

I don't see how that's boggling your mind.

No, it boggles my mind that the court would actually find it pertinent that he hadn't been trained on how to ride a bike.

mgf: When I worked for the university police as student security patrol during college, both the student security and the regular cops had to complete a police bike training course; a lot of exercises like riding up and down stairs slowly w/o falling off and other urban-type skills unique to police riding.

What University? Just curious.

redmid17: What's the difference?

It's got a cop motor, a 440 cubic inch plant, it's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters so it'll run good on regular gas.

/or something like that

Who cares? As long as he's not going near any ladders, he'll be fine. But the moment he steps on a ladder, the real danger kicks in.

Did he take the safety course to learn how to ride the bus?

Egads! *facepalms* don't they have anything better to do with their lives and citizen's tax money? They should start giving parents courses on how to be a good one, instead of suing eachother left and right over silly things such as not being properly trained to use a bike, ladder, staircase and what have you.

redmid17: No, it boggles my mind that the court would actually find it pertinent that he hadn't been trained on how to ride a bike.

They probably wouldn't but an insurance company would.

It's only an accident of history that bikes were invented before the Nanny State invented the idea "nobody can do anything without government permission." Otherwise, nobody would be allowed to ride a bike without a license, which you can't get until age 16.

Had aspirin been invented after the formation of the FDA, it would be prescription-only and you'd need a $200 doctor visit to get a prescription for ten pills.

redmid17: What's the difference? One is carrying and gun and the other isn't? this might be the single had most retarded statement/comparison of the day.

Civvies don't have to chase down fleeing suspects. I'm assuming they learn some neat tricks to safely take someone down from a bike, and how to deal with going down stairs etc.

Bike cops are your traditional cyclists like cops in cars are your typical drivers.

Mind you, I've seen a cop rear end another car at a cross walk. His partner got out laughing his ass off, and the driver just held his face in his hands in shame. Made my day.

ihatedumbpeople: That's how retarded the US and the nanny state have gotten.



First - You're either lacking in reading comprehension skills or you're a lazyass that can't be bothered to read the article...

Second - It's not in the USA...it's Britian.

redmid17: Ringthane: OTOH, there's a difference between riding a bike as a civilian and riding a bike as a cop on a beat, just like there's a difference between driving a car to work and patrolling in a squad car. Don't they have special driving schools for cops over there? I'm pretty sure cops get some special driving training in a lot of jurisdictions here in the US, so why shouldn't there be a bicycle equivalent?

What's the difference? One is carrying and gun and the other isn't? this might be the single had most retarded statement/comparison of the day.

Always a sign of a high IQ to publicly pass judgment on another person and simultaneously display one's absolute ignorance. In case you didn't get that I'm addressing you, redmid, allow me to simplify: you are a moran.

That statement was a perfect comparison. Driving to get to work requires one set of skills; driving during a high speed pursuit, or having to complete a pit maneuver to stop a moving car requires a completely different set of skills.

Riding a bike for fun or exercise is one thing. Riding a bike while carrying a service belt, with a gun or two, radio, nightstick, and ammo pouches is another. Not to mention having to learn how to ride up and down stairs while chasing a fleeing suspect, learning how to take down a fleeing suspect from a moving bicycle without injuring yourself or others, or shooting from a moving bicycle without injurying yourself or others (beside your intended target).

Police bike training courses cover a lot of skills that a normal rider (not even highly skilled mountain bikers) will EVER have to deal with. You seriously don't understand that?

Riding a bike for fun or exercise is one thing. Riding a bike while carrying a service belt, with a gun or two, radio, nightstick, and ammo pouches is another.

What about riding a bike while wearing a heavy backpack, carrying library books in your front basket and wearing a water bottle on your waist? I repeatedly did that, starting around age eight.

Lose the idea that the world can be made perfectly safe if the government would just require enough training courses and licenses. You can't make the world perfectly safe, but you can destroy a lot of freedom in the attempt.

every farkin police precinct i've known of requires officers to go through a training course before hitting patrol on two wheels. what the fark is the problem? take the course, pass it, and shut the fark up.

/can't believe this made headlines
//ridiculous

Goddess of Atheism: Riding a bike for fun or exercise is one thing. Riding a bike while carrying a service belt, with a gun or two, radio, nightstick, and ammo pouches is another.

What about riding a bike while wearing a heavy backpack, carrying library books in your front basket and wearing a water bottle on your waist? I repeatedly did that, starting around age eight.

Lose the idea that the world can be made perfectly safe if the government would just require enough training courses and licenses. You can't make the world perfectly safe, but you can destroy a lot of freedom in the attempt.

(quiet, reflective facepalm......looks up toward the clouds, in awe at the complete idiocy of the person babbling in his general direction)

OK, Goddess. Let's go slowly. First, was it your job to chase suspected criminals on that bike with the daisy basket and tassled handlebars, in order to ensure public safety, or law and order, or the rights of a victim, all while possibly having to draw your weapon and aim at that fleeing suspect, or contemplate possibly having to tackle that fleeing suspect from your moving bicycle? Over terrain that included going up and down steps or curbs, through crowds, under low or over high barriers - at a high rate of speed? Without causing injury to yourself or bystanders?

No. All you were doing was pedaling your happy, daydreaming of rainbows and puppies ass from A to B. Oh MY! You actually WORE a backpack!?!?! How did you EVER learn to do that?!?! I'm incredibly impressed.

Second, this isn't an issue of a nanny-state government trying to "save the world" by requiring licenses and safety classes, Cheech. It's about a government entity requiring it's EMPLOYEE to be sufficiently trained to complete a long list of complex physical skills before they put that EMPLOYEE on a piece of equipment, with a gun, out in public that could cause serious injury or death to that EMPLOYEE or worse, an innocent bystander.

They're not trying to take away any rights or freedoms, princess. So go sit in a dark, quiet closet, breath into a paper bag for several minutes, and quit hyperventilating.

Robkellyj, how long did this guy ride his bike with neither license nor problems? Over 20 years? And now they decide he retroactively needs special training? Nothing's broken here, so nothing needs fixing. Leave well enough alone.

I have been through a LEBA course and its not all about riding the bike, its about using the bike as a defensive weapon, using the bike as an apprehension device, and mainly gaining some training to keep yourself and others safe while patrolling on a bike.

/DRTFA
//not a cop

I came in for the Jim Dangle pics and leave satisfied.

robkellyj I understand your point about gun-safety for police cyclists. It`s definitely an excellent reason for requiring a training course.

But this is the UK.

The cops don`t carry guns.

Taking bike course makes sense. Actually, it would make sense for all cyclists riding on streets.

What is ridiculous is that he now has to take the bus between villages.

Swantum Leap: mgf: When I worked for the university police as student security patrol during college, both the student security and the regular cops had to complete a police bike training course; a lot of exercises like riding up and down stairs slowly w/o falling off and other urban-type skills unique to police riding.

What University? Just curious.



Illinois

jepzilla: robkellyj I understand your point about gun-safety for police cyclists. It`s definitely an excellent reason for requiring a training course.

But this is the UK.

The cops don`t carry guns.

I'm certainly not an expert on your country (although I am an admirer), but I DO know that some cops in the UK carry guns. You wouldn't have a very effective police force if they didn't. But that is neither here nor there (and, I don't know if ANY bike cops there carry).

What I am very sure about is that even if they don't carry guns, they still have to undergo training that will teach them how to do things that ordinary cyclists will never do: apprehend a fleeing suspect FROM a moving cycle, and chase fleeing suspects over very difficult terrain (as said over and over - up and down stairs, over and under obstacles, through dense crowds - all at a high rate of speed). Also, as the other poster mentioned, using the bike as a defensive, and possibly offensive, weapon. Not every fleeing suspect lays down, rolls on their belly, and meekly puts their hands behind their backs when an officer yells "stop."

Seriously, you seem pretty rational. You HAVE to be able to see that police on bikes need to do very different things than an average cycler, and as such, they need to learn how to properly do them. Hence, training.

I've been able to ride a bike since about 5, and I took the course when I was about, hmmm, I think 27. And I learned a TON of things that I never knew I could do on a bike, or never even thought about. And it could have been REALLY bad if I waited to think about how to tackle a running man until the point that I actually needed to do it. It is simply not a nanny-state issue.

And Goddess, either you just are not good at getting OR communicating a point, or you are stupid. I'm betting on the former, but not getting my hopes up.

Helios1182: Taking bike course makes sense. Actually, it would make sense for all cyclists riding on streets.

What is ridiculous is that he now has to take the bus between villages.

Yeah, I probably should have RTFA, but one point to consider is that if he is travelling between his home and work village in uniform, even when he is not "on the clock" he is still likely "on duty," i.e., expected to give aid or rescue, or arrest a criminal. So, no bike riding until properly trained. At least, that's how it would be in the U.S..

Question for the Brits: in the U.S., certified LEO's carry their weapons even when off-duty, and still have full law enforcement powers, and generally are expected to respond to any emergency situation. Is it the same in the U.K.? Or when your cops are "off," are they considered normal citizens?

Slaxl: That's right, but it would have been ignored by the admins if it didn't say "Nanny State", or perhaps they tagged the "Nanny State" onto the end again.

I'm considering putting myself through the painful process of reading the Daily Mail's website on a daily basis just so I can be the first to submit these lame "nanny state" bullshiat articles. It's the only way I can think of to stop them getting greenlit. Bit extreme, but I'm willing to take one for the team if it makes Fark a better place.

Goddess of Atheism: ok, I stand corrected. I just visited your blog, and not only are you apparently pretty intelligent (but I question the second half of your moniker), but you are very good at communicating your point. I'm actually impressed by your blog.

But damn, you are one pissed off woman. You really got banned from GOOGLE for LIFE? How do you even DO that? Anyhow, I apolgize for questioning your intellect. But I also really hope you learn how to relax. Not EVERYTHING any government does is 100% detestable, and I am a confirmed libertarian. You may claim to be, but it's pretty apparent that somewhere along the way you took a turn toward anarchist.

And piss on your ex - that really was a crappy thing for him to do.

Police officer has been told he cannot ride a bicycle on police patrols until he has passed a training course. Nanny State Fear-driven society trying to protect themselves from litigous idiots and the bloodsucking parasites they have on speed-dial strike again

I fixed the headline for you, subby. Though I admit that doesn't have quite the same ring to it...

Lamune_Baba: Police officer has been told he cannot ride a bicycle on police patrols until he has passed a training course. Nanny State Fear-driven society trying to protect themselves from litigous idiots and the bloodsucking parasites they have on speed-dial strike again

I fixed the headline for you, subby. Though I admit that doesn't have quite the same ring to it...

Awwww..... sounds like somebody couldn't score high enough on the LSAT to get into law school. Or is it just that your pissed 'cause you can't afford a lawyer?

Just like many other things, some lawyers are good and some are bad. But they are necessary.

To those who love to quote the Shakespeare line "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" (see above), let me point out that it is a Dick that says it. Literally.

http://www.online-literature.com/shakespeare/henryVI2/14/

I'd also like to remind you that in Pakistan it is the lawyers who led and are still leading the fight against the military government of President Musharraf.

While none of us may like all the laws of our land and may indeed think that they are too numerous and too restrictive, let us remember that lawyers may be the only thing keeping us from something far worse. A country without lawyers is a tyranny.

Bronto Saurus: To those who love to quote the Shakespeare line "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" (see above), let me point out that it is a Dick that says it. Literally.

And that quote is VERY often (almost always) used completely out of context - it was made during a discussion on how to overthrow the country from within. To do that, "first, kill all the lawyers." When used properly, a very apt quote indeed.