You're not wrong, inconsistency is a big issue.

Don’t know what you’re on about there was no danger the police didn’t have to overtake the cyclist again which is another hazard can’t see anything wrong.

@@thomasreed49 Overtaking a cycle isn't hazardous unless you do it wrong...

@@QiuEnnan But they were overtaken encounter traffic lights they take the front again then you have to overtake them again. We have them do this when there is a cycle path but for whatever mad reason they choose not to use it.

yes he could have done that and the nice officers would have helped him to reach that itch up his back with his elbow

It’s left turn only. Straight ahead is a bus lane. Indicators not necessary.

The first line , not the box, should be regarded as the stop line. You should approach a traffic lights at a speed that enables you to stop before the line if the lights turn red. Would it be ok to be half a cars length over a normal (non box) stop line because you were traveling too fast?

@@stevethomas2559 >You should approach a traffic lights at a speed that enables you to stop before the line if the lights turn red. I know i'm late to this but you need to think this through. The first line is the stop line. But the second one is as well. Take a junction without an ASL. When the light changes to amber, if you are far enough back to be able to stop safely before the line you must stop, if you cannot safely stop before the line, you may continue through on amber. Now in situation of a junction with an ASL, that creates an area where depending on the timing of the lights it's entirely possible that the light changes to amber at that awkward moment where it's not possible to stop before the first stop line, but you are able to stop before the second stop line. This doesn't have to be related to going too fast, if anything it happens far more in the reverse situation where you are travelling slowly, so when the light changes as you are already crossing the first line, you can easily stop before the second. The law in this situation requires you to stop before the second stop line. To continue would be an offence.

>they have to have their prity lights on to do this. I maybe misunderstanding your comment, but for clarify, a police officer does NOT need to be operating emergency equipment to use their exemptions. This is because there are situations where they want to use their exemptions without tipping their hand, or or example in an unmarked vehicle where they don't yet want to reveal their presence. There may be individual force policy regarding this, but legally no emergency equipment needs to be activated for their exemptions to apply.

And then they'd just try to retaliate. Much better to phone the local nick and complain to their inspector.

Challenged through their own reporting channels, no need to bother anyone. If you want to engage directly, you go for it.

Colchester.

@@makecyclingsafeagain6575 I didn't recognize it at all, Essex is ace, I'm from Essex myself but live up in the pennines Yorkshire now...I've got family there aswell... Wishing you all a safe journey anyhow...

@@jaycearoo lovely part of the world where you are. Appreciate the kind wishes!

Try using that excuse on a yellow box junction.

Because I have politely challenged this behaviour before and been met with foul-mouthed abuse and physical threats. Now, I most often let the police themselves handle it.

Yes.

Personally I didn't see anything wrong with what occurred here.

@@iallso1 . What you mean like not stopping at the stop line.

@@grahvis the lights are red, the police car stops, the cyclist has taken a position behind the car, the lights change, the car moves off, makes its left turn, the cyclist follows, no big deal.

IKR 👍

Just someone who loves to cause issues for themselves. I guarantee this cyclist is the type to drive into danger and then complain.

You're a braver man than I.

Pointless and irrelevant enough for you to watch and then take the time write a comment about. Well done.

@James Foo 👍

@@scottglossop: Was going to comment this - he'd almost certainly fit under the category of a vehicle allowed to use a bus lane.

He was not in a Bus Lane, the Bus Lane starts over the junction at the bottom of the hill

@@michaelfrancis7072 -The bus lane is clearly from the mini roundabout to the traffic lights and has the solid wide white line between it and other lanes along its full length.

Done, driver was sent on an awareness course.

@@makecyclingsafeagain6575 good, nice to know the police own up too

@@Ben-db5re I was a bit surprised!

Yet, they sent their own driver on a driver improvement course.....

Mind you, faded stop lines really get on my nerves, but here they're pretty visible imo. There are plenty which look like they've been erased with only the anti-slip outlines remaining (or a new stop line will be painted on without the old one being removed) yet here I would think that they're very legible?

@@makecyclingsafeagain6575 They might have TOLD you that!

Change that to drivers.

It’s idiot car drivers that make cycling unsafe. I should be able to ride my bike to work without being flattened by some self entitled pr!ck who thinks I should move out the way just because he/she is driving a car and I’m not. Swear once people get a car they think they own the road.

The only way the police car could go was left, ahead was a bus lane which he could only use in an emergency and showing Blue lights.

100% law abiding whether I'm driving, on the bus, on the train, cycling, running or walking. Hope you are likewise 👍

I take road craft seriously on my bike, motorcycle or car. In my car I often but not always see bad driving. I sometimes see bad cycling, and I'm often in Cambridge. On my bike, omg driving standards plummet around me.

No doubt. But you’d expect the rozzers to be for sure

When 93% of car drivers exceed 20mph speed limits. The highest percentage of transgression of any law in this country!!

@@davemartin6319 and an extraordinarily important and equally extraordinarily trivialised safety critical law too