David Cameron’s brush with the law
Written by Mark Pack on 21st March 2008 – 2:02 pmHere’s a sample of what David Cameron has said before:
David Cameron will unveil plans tomorrow for a new “three strikes and you’re out” rule (January 2008)
For persistent offenders, the public deserve a break from their behaviour (April 2006)
Now here’s the thing. Can you guess who was caught cycling through a red light and without a helmet in 2007? And was then caught again cycling through a red light, with an eye-witness reporting “instead of apologising, his whole attitude was one of arrogance”? And then we have today’s news, complete with photos:
The Tory boss was spotted flouting the law by cycling the wrong way in a one-way street, through red lights and the wrong side of a bollard on his 30-minute trip to work.
Hapless Cameron was breaking the rules within minutes of leaving his Notting Hill home in West London for Westminster.
He sailed past a large red no entry sign even Mr Magoo would have noticed. Another clue was the huge arrows on the road pointing which way traffic should go.
Next to be ignored was a keep left beacon in the Mall. He veered off to the right…no change there then. Cam also hurtled over a toucan crossing, for cyclists and pedestrians, while the signal was red.
Three strikes anyone?
Persistent offending that the legal system has failed to tackle perhaps?
I’m sure Mr Cameron will use this very best and latest of examples next time he speaks out against persistent offenders or rule breakers not being properly punished or the ills of modern society where people think they can get away with anything…
Hat-tip: Paul Walter for today’s story.
Posted in Opposition watch
21st March 2008 at 2:39 pm
This article is very petty. Persistent offenders damage communities and make people’s lives living hell. A lady I went to school with committed suicide because of the torture ASBO kids were putting her through. It’s not something to laugh about.
21st March 2008 at 3:21 pm
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
21st March 2008 at 3:33 pm
Jon: Yes and cyclists misbehaving by repeatedly flouting traffic signs and lights, and riding the wrong way down one way streets damage doddery old individuals like me and my wife. That David Cameron needs a good clip round the lughole with a walking stick or zimmerframe. He’s a silly arse if I ever saw one.
21st March 2008 at 3:53 pm
I’m no defender of Cameron but is it an offence not to wear a cycle helmet? If so it’s news to me.
21st March 2008 at 4:08 pm
Proof beyond doubt that Cameron is a Thatcherite.
Has listened to Norman Tebbit’s advice about “Getting on his bike” and he is obviously a member of the “No Turning Back” group.
21st March 2008 at 4:25 pm
“…is it an offence not to wear a cycle helmet?”
I believe not and neither should it be. Cycling ‘offences’ like these are barely offences at all. A much larger issue is the dangers cyclists face daily from dangerous driving of cars, vans et cetera.
21st March 2008 at 5:06 pm
As a regular cyclist Camerons actions disgust me. Every time I argue for better provision and safety measures that would make it safer for my children to be on the roads I get the “you lot just ignore the rules you are as bad as anyone else” response thrown back at me.
For someone like him who should be a role model to be filmed doing this is a disgrace. As I understand it failure to stop at a red light is a motoring offence be you on a bike, a car or a 10 tonne Truck.
Put simply the Tory party leader should be prosecuted as a warning to others to obey road traffic instructions
21st March 2008 at 5:11 pm
Imagine if Jeremy Clarkson saw Cameron, thought “Ah, I’ll run over one of those cyclists who threatens my bollocks Thatcherite principles and insecure little ego” and ran him over, without realising he’d just hit and killed his fellow bigoted toff.
21st March 2008 at 7:57 pm
I was crashed into by a cyclist who’d gone straight through a red light in Prince of Wales Road not very long ago. She then shouted at me! And it bloody hurt.
There seems to be a bit of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” going on with cyclists. I hate gas guzzling motorists as much as the next man, and support much lower speed limits in urban areas - this does not however mean that cyclists aren’t endangering themselves and other road users on a daily basis by their utter disregard for the law.
I watch cyclists run the lights in front of moving buses on the junction at the end of my road almost every day. Obviously the threat of imminent death isn’t enough deterrent, so we need to do something else. Throw the book at Cameron and make an example of him.
21st March 2008 at 9:16 pm
Cycling without a helmet is arguably safer than cycling with one, and certainly not against the law.
Stopping a bike a foot or two in front of the stop line at lights is often good practice to make sure drivers see you (most cycle accidents happen at junctions - positioning yourself to be visible to other road users is important).
I don’t know about the other offences, but the story sounds a bit overblown to me. How many MPs, if secretly followed by a journalist, wouldn’t commit a single traffic offence? No speeding or illegal U-turns?
I don’t think that cyclists should break the law, but when I see roads, and even cycle facilities, designed in such a way as to make it difficult to cycle safely and legally, I start to think that there’s a responsibility on both sides.
22nd March 2008 at 8:30 pm
Iain, stopping two foot ahead of the line is fine by me as long as it isn’t impeding pedestrians. Pulling out into the path of a moving number 38 bus isn’t.
23rd March 2008 at 9:38 am
Eastender; I should think not! No excuse for dangerous behaviour by cyclists any more than any other road users.
Sadly the concentration on “you must follow the rules, regardless of how sensible they are in a given situation” at the expense of “be a good citizen, be aware of others around you and how your actions affect them” is one of the less positive trends of modern times.
23rd March 2008 at 11:13 am
Old Etonians like Cameron consider that the law applies only to the peasants.
If he doesn’t wear a helmet and gets brain damage, then that is his lookout. The rationale behind the compulsory wearing of helmets and seatbelts is not to protect people from themselves but to keep down the insurance bill, and I am all for it.
Jon @ 1 seems to forget that Cameron was once an “ASBO kid” himself, when he was a member of the Bullingdon Club. Except that it has always been perfectly OK for toffs to get drunk and throw up all over the place. It’s only wrong if working-class kids do it.
23rd March 2008 at 12:08 pm
Sesenco: The rational behind compulsory wearing of seatbelts and bike helmets is to save lives, but unfortunately (in the case of cycle helmets and arguably seatbelts too) it doesn’t work.
For a start, far fewer people cycle where helmets have been made compulsory. Since cyclists tend to live longer and be healthier than non-cyclists, reducing the number of cyclists is a tad counter-productive.
Secondly, there’s some evidence that drivers take more risks when cyclists are wearing helmets (e.g. drive closer).
And in the event of a crash happening, there are fairly few accidents where a cycle helmet helps (and may be some where wearing a helmet results in you being more badly injured than if you hadn’t worn one).
But if you do want to cut accidents by making the wearing of protection compulsory, you should start by making elderly pedestrians wear helmets and padding: they’re more at risk than cyclists.