Naked cyclist faces trial in Bournemouth for riding in the buff

Bournemouth promenade is usually closed to motorised traffic it's very busy at times. People freely walk around. Cycling is fine so long as it is considerate to that fact. Rather than simply ban cycling on the prom (which they could do) a sensible compromise has been reached that benefits sensible cyclists and pedestrians alike. It involves the common sense approach of allowing cycling within a speed limit.

To be frank you come over a bit like Jeremy Clarkson moaning about speed cameras and the police having nothing better to do. You can cycle from Christchuch to Poole on the road if you like. No speed limit applies to cyclists (though there is one that applies to motorised transport for the same reason there is one for cyclist on the prom).

I count myself an experienced cyclist and respectable bike handler. More than 10mph on the prom when it's busy is a bit reckless and is likely to result in someone getting hurt. The police are right to occasionally spend some time making the point that the rule should be observed and might be enforced.

The worst bit about this article is the local plod using speed guns to enforce a 10mph speed limit ... are they really that under-employed?

This is a local issue, not a governmental one. He can't say he hasn't had fair warning either.

I regularly ride in a buff - I find it keep the early morning chill off my neck.

I'll get my coat.

Richard Collins is a bit of an eccentric and certainly not typical of naturists in general, but you have to ask yourself; who has he harmed? As far as I know the motorist was the only person alarmed enough to call the police and one wonders what the real source of his alarm was. If over a thousand naked cyclists can be cheered on by crowds around London (World Naked Bike Ride a couple of weeks before this incident), just how many people are truly 'alarmed' by the sight of a naked cyclist?

Real harm may be done to everyone's personal freedom if the succeed in prosecuting him under the Public Order Act as they are seeking to do, as this would considerably lower the threshold for conviction under that act. On the other hand, if he is not convicted and the government decide on a knee-jerk reaction to tighten the law, this could be just as bad.

It is to be hoped that the courts and the government can see that he is a harmless eccentric who poses no threat to anyone.

I used to work with a guy who admitted being a naturist. He was a bit wierd. Are they all like that?