RiderSite.com - Motorcycle Forums

Check out the bail conditions - this creates a worrying precedent.

http://www.leeds-solicitors.com/bikers.html

Bit more here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12730242

If local authorities keep up with this anti-biker stance that most seem to be employing, they're going to have a right game on their hands dealing with the thousands that flout these nonsense laws.

People need to start reading up on Common Law and Lawful Rebellion. But please be warned, a lot of it you will not like one bit..

http://www.bbc5.tv/eyeplayer/

I recommend this book

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Freedom-More-Th ... 360&sr=8-8

A lot will see this as being some sort of made up right wing bollocks.. But it really isn't. From the moment our parents signed the Birth Certificate, we become employees of the United Kingdom Corporation. Free? Na.. They let us think that so we behave ourselves and do as we're told like good slaves.

Am i missing something here?

how can an acompanying group of people be held responsible for another persons death while on a road? surely not all 5 people were involved in the collision, so how they can even be held remotely responsibe unless actually physically in the accident, is beyond me.

am guessing they felt the need to blame someone, and bikers are easier to blame.

so the game is now

never ride in a group?

having been pulled over by police as I turned up at a junction ten minutes after a fracas between a biker and a car driver am not at all surprised.

Fekked if I'm driving in an Army convoy ever again then!

Something is gnawing at the back of my mind about a previous discussion about joint responsibility some time back and being advised not to ride in groups. Seem to recall a Scottish connection. FKs.



Al strikes again!

I remember it being talked about it on RS years back when there used to be rideouts from Boxhill and the like, that kinda era. Cant remember the conversation much tho' but i think it was all tied in with a discussion on AIM and stuff like that...?

I suppose it could have been related to the 2006 case that he was talking about in the link.

I know this has been discussed in the past on one or other of the forums I frequent (and again recently on Coventry Bikers) .... but I can't remember which one.

Frankly, it's crazy.

yes it is crazy

i would suspect that assorted legal types are poised to challenge the legality of this....

Well I surely hope they are! Not much point in paying subs to MAG or BMF if they don't challenge this.

As for organised rideouts - our club has within the rules a bit about rideouts and being responsible for oneself etc, we also hand copies out at rideouts. Probably as worthless as the 'Motor Sport is dangerous' signs but still..... - we also have public liability insurance, and a risk assessment!

You can't help feeling it's all part of an orchestrated campaign to 'ban' or prevent people from riding bikes, via the back door - I know people got killed, but people get killed in car accidents too.


In fact I'm acutely reminded of a local RTC (road traffic collision) where a young bloke with no licence or insurance was driving acar he wasn't entitled to drive, WHILE he was banned for an earlier offence, and awaiting court for a repeat offence... ran into and killed a cyclist in a local village. He got a driving ban and a community service order. Apparently if a cyclist has no lights it's ok for a known criminal to kill him. (as long as the criminal's not on a motorbike)

What action if any was taken against the car driver ?

As I said - a driving ban and community service. Since a previous driving ban had failed to stop him driving on two known occasions you really wonder.......

I forgot to mention, when he was banned the first time they couldn't take his licence away - he'd never had one!