|
Many years ago my parents made me take the cycling proficiency test. They had got me a new bike when I went to senior school and wanted me to be safe as the intention was I cycle the three miles to school. Riding on the pavement was a no no!
These days parents have a bizarre mindset. Whilst I do not object to toddlers cycling on the pavement family groups should not being doing so! Then these children cannot cycle any distance to school so we get the phenonium of the school run. However, now we are in the summer holidays these same children are cycling wherever it takes their fancy, often without helmets and without lights (after dusk). With this start they become the arrogant cycle warriors of tomorrow. The more it goes on the harder it will be to cure.
|
|
|
|
This very subject has been discussed at length on here within the last 12 months. Nothing will happen until changes in legislation are made. Drivers of any motorised vehicle could have insurnace included in a their poliicy to cover them for riding a bike. But what of children, students? As for licences are we going to make children have those? I don't think so.
My views on traceability, of cyclsists who commit offences, have been made in the past, and views on the wearing of hi-viz apparel. As an aside I was recently at a pelican crossing in a local city. I crossed the road while a cyclist on either side waited, as I walked across one cyclist started to move while the lights were against him on red. The other cyclist said to him "You are not going to go are you? You give us cyclists a bad name". The law breaking one continued. The law abiding one had lights, a cycle helmet and hi-viz waistcoat. The other had nothing to help save his life, not even a brain!
|
|
I appreciate some motorists can be thoughless and intolerant of bikers.
But the sad fact is that cycling is a hugely dangerous activity - on a par with paragliding, high mountain ascents etc. A 10mph coming together with a car can be fatal or life changing - the car and occupants suffering only minor harm. The quickest way to reduce road deaths and seriously injured by 10% + woluld be to ban cycling!
Legislation is needed to ensure all cyclists wear high vis clothing, have passed a basic training course, carry insurance for third party damage, do not cycle incapable through drink or drugs, and conform to the rules of the road.
Any cyclist involved in an accident who has not taken these common sense basic precautions should have only limited claim to compensation from other road users unless they also contributed to the accident - in which case any claim would be a max of 50% of the potential.
.
|
But the sad fact is that cycling is a hugely dangerous activity - on a par with paragliding, high mountain ascents etc.
Utter nonesense. Cycling has roughly same risk as being a pedestrian. Perhaps slightly more risk than a sober pedestrian but WAY less than walking home after a skinful.
I used my eponymous folding bike in Central London for 15years with nothing worse than a bruise on my bum. The accident that put me in hospital happened on the station car park at home and didn't involve another vehicle.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 12/08/2017 at 21:40
|
|
Bromtonaut, actually cyclists appear to be even lower risk than pedestrians for road fatalities, although this does vary on the country.
ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafet...f
|
|
|
|
Legislation is needed to ensure all cyclists wear high vis clothing, have passed a basic training course, carry insurance for third party damage, do not cycle incapable through drink or drugs, and conform to the rules of the road.
My brother would not get a driving licence as he did not want to get "done" for drink driving in the 70's. Now has not drank for 15 years , lives in a small town..no licence and stuck!
|
|
|
|
|
It will never happen, any legislation directed towards cyclists will be very difficult, almost impossible to police.
|
It will never happen, any legislation directed towards cyclists will be very difficult, almost impossible to police.
Where there's a will...........
|
It will never happen, any legislation directed towards cyclists will be very difficult, almost impossible to police.
Where there's a will...........
Where there is a will and a way there will be a jobsworthy!
|
|
|
|
|
Cyclists are on the road by right and motor vehicles by licence. Not a lot of folk are aware of that. Horse riders as well. Cycling should be encouraged as it can be relatively inexpensive and is most definitely green. I think the BMA reported that the health benefits of cycling far outweigh the disadvantages. As for cyclists and no insurance; a far greater worry are the numbers of uninsured / unlicensed people driving on the roads. I pesonally have no wish to be forced to wear high viz or a helmet. When I do choose to wear these items I do not necessarily feel 'safer'. As a long-term road cyclist what is a major concern are ridiculously bright / dazzling DRL's and drivers who believe they can cope with operating smartphones and in-car 'infotainment' systems whilst on the move. For the record I am a pedestrian / cyclist / motorcyclist / car driver / light goods vehicle driver.
|
When I do choose to wear these items I do not necessarily feel 'safer'. As a long-term road cyclist what is a major concern are ridiculously bright / dazzling DRL's
You may not feel 'safer' but you may in fact be (statistically) safer.
As to the DRLs, I tend to agree, but even more irritating are the powerful flashing LEDs that some cyclists have adopted, possibly in retaliation?
It's at least thirty years since I cycled regularly, in the old days when one had a good chance of staying undamaged when riding on country A-roads. I do remember almost being squashed between a stone wall and an overtaking lorry, when a student.
|
As to the DRLs, I tend to agree, but even more irritating are the powerful flashing LEDs that some cyclists have adopted, possibly in retaliation?
And there's the difference. About the most that a cyclist can do to somebody in a car or lorry is to irritate them - although most are just winding themselves up and blaming the cyclist, because they didn't set off soon enough and think they are being "held up" for a few seconds.
It makes a great deal of sense to wear contrasting/hi viz clothing, and to use flashing lights. The angular size of a cycle (or motorcycle) is much smaller than a car and that leads to the 'smidsy' events we are all familiar with.
Here it is yet again.
www.slobc.org/safety/documents/road-survival-guide...f
|
|
|
|
|
|
This doesn't need to degenerate into a slanging match for and against cyclists. The accident in Warning's OP could have equally been caused by, say, a pedestrian stepping into the road ...
I'm not normally in favour of increases in legislation, but it could be a good idea to require cyclists to wear helmets and hi-vis jackets or at least diagonal belts. Basic 3rd-party insurance might be a possibility but hard to enforce.
Yes a ped could have done that, and in fact a cyclist on a pavement is nearer to being a ped than a serious cyclist. Make all peds wear numbers and have TP insurance? No? So deal with cycling on pavements.
There's some absolutely typical anti-cyclist prejudice in this thread.
What the cycle-haters overlook is that cyclists have a serious vested interest in not colliding with cars. They don't need laws to make them careful, cyclist v. car is a very uneven contest. A few seconds thought and ignorant car drivers (most cyclists are also drivers BTW) would understand many of the cyclist behaviours they criticise.
I have no patience with anti-cyclist rants from people in metal safety cells who frequently make no effort to show proper consideration for other, more vulnerable road users.
Edited by Manatee on 12/08/2017 at 20:38
|
|
A change in attitude is what is needed......from both sides!!
|
|
For the record, I'm not anti-cyclist, have a bike and use it when I can. I'd just like cyclists to stay alive, some have NO idea how vulnerable they are, especially when they behave like idiots. Idiotic drivers have some metalwork surrounding them instead, so a bump is invariably just a bump. When cyclists realise a bump could be a wooden/chipboard box perhaps they'll learn to ride responsibly, and a cycle helmet could save them from a brain injury, oh well, it's their life, or not, as the case might be.
Some liken pedestrians to cyclists, invalid to do so, cyclists are responsible for a wheeled mode of transport, just like motoriists.
|
When cyclists realise a bump could be a wooden/chipboard box perhaps they'll learn to ride responsibly, and a cycle helmet could save them from a brain injury, oh well, it's their life, or not, as the case might be.
Most cycle helmets are useless!
|
When cyclists realise a bump could be a wooden/chipboard box perhaps they'll learn to ride responsibly, and a cycle helmet could save them from a brain injury, oh well, it's their life, or not, as the case might be.
Most cycle helmets are useless!
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/sep/22/bicyc...s
|
|
|
|
|
Enforcement of cycle licences and insurance would not be possible.
The police struggle enough as it is to enforce the law against errant motorists without having to chase "pedestrians on bikes" as well.
|
Enforcement of cycle licences and insurance would not be possible.
The police struggle enough as it is to enforce the law against errant motorists without having to chase "pedestrians on bikes" as well.
With number plates ANPR cameras would catch them, no need for police to chase them.
|
|
|
|
Back to the original post, , It sounds to me that the driver was driving at a speed beyond his abilities. When I see a cyclist or other vulnerable road user or I approach road works I reduce my speed just in case, I haven't had to crash into a stationary vehicle yet.
Most serious cyclists have 3rd party insurance voluntarily. As the Police struggle to enforce the law regarding the registration and insurance of motor vehicles which can kill and maim, lets not burden them with the small problem of the bicycle.
|
Back to the original post, , It sounds to me that the driver was driving at a speed beyond his abilities. When I see a cyclist or other vulnerable road user or I approach road works I reduce my speed just in case, I haven't had to crash into a stationary vehicle yet.
No-one has yet suggested the possibility of that driver being on the phone (or the cyclist, for that matter) :-)
|
|
Cyclists and certain drivers are a law unto themselves regardless of what opinions people have of them, I do not see this attitude changing in the foreseeable future
and if the police force is reduced even more, which there was talk of, then law breaking is going to rise and peoples attitudes to wrong doing will get worse because they know they will not get caught
as for cyclists having insurance, how would it be enforced as our police just do not have enough people to do the job. like everything else.. government cuts back but expects twice the work out of whats left
|
|
While we are at it can we also do something about errant and irresponsible horse riders?
Particularly the one who, earlier this morning has allowed their steed to discharge the remenents of its, very harty by the look of things, last meal on the pavemant (NOT the carriageway) directly across the entrance to my drive.
And they wonder why they face such hostilities!!
|
While we are at it can we also do something about errant and irresponsible horse riders? Particularly the one who, earlier this morning has allowed their steed to discharge the remenents of its, very harty by the look of things, last meal on the pavement (NOT the carriageway) directly across the entrance to my drive.
I presume this query was tongue-in-cheek. I don't think many riders are able to control the urges of their mount's bowel, which is why many continental tourist-towns (like Bruges) fit cr*p-collectors to their smart carriages, to save frequent street cleaning.
I doubt that your offender had deliberately targeted your driveway. (reminds me of SWMBO's Tyneside grandfather, who allegedly used to collect such offerings in his flat-cap, to put on his garden or allotment)
|
|
Horse muck is fairly inoffensive stuff, as it goes, certainly compared with dog muck which most people are about 100 times more likely to get on their shoes.
I was a bit put out recently when I stood in an enormous pile on the pavement outside the pub, in the dark, recently. I was just so happy that it wasn't dog s***e.
Horse riders too have a lot to put up with from ignorant and selfish drivers.
Edited by Manatee on 13/08/2017 at 12:41
|
|
|
|
My point was, and also it would seem you missed was that the deposit was on the actual pavement, directly in front of my driveway making it impossle to remove my car without disturbing it. Had it been in the road instead of inches from my curtledge it would have been of no concern.
Uvoidable...yes. Courteous and respectful....no.
The matter will be highlighted at the next parish meeting with representatives of the police and local council.
Please refer to rule 54 of the highway code and the relevant part of the highways act before making further comment.in defence of action I have mentioned.
|
My point was, and also it would seem you missed was that the deposit was on the actual pavement, directly in front of my driveway making it impossle to remove my car without disturbing it. Had it been in the road instead of inches from my curtledge it would have been of no concern.
You have to be joking? Could you not have deployed a garden spade and either used the material on your plot (if you have one) or moved it to the road where 'it would have been of no concern' ? (other people's concern presumably)
Parish meeting? Police ? Don't make me larf.
Edited by Andrew-T on 13/08/2017 at 15:20
|
|
This has been a long standing issue in my neighbourhood affecting not just myself but many others.
Can I ask why you believe I and others others, should on a regular basis, forced to suffer the unpleasantness and inconvenience caused by someone else's ignorance and negligence?
Had you taken my advice to look further into the matter you will see that in allowing horses onto the pavement and in allowing fouling of the pavement laws are being broken. On that basis are we being unreasonable in bringing our concerns to the attention of the authorities and asking that something is done?
We are in no way seeking stiff penalties for those concerned, in fact we hope all that is needed is a visit to the local livery yard by a PCSO and a friendly chat with the teenage girls who we believe are both responsible and unaware of the legal obligations.
Is this unreasonable behaviour? I think not.
Edited by TedCrilly on 13/08/2017 at 15:50
|
Can I ask why you believe I and others, should on a regular basis, be forced to suffer the unpleasantness and inconvenience caused by someone else's ignorance and negligence?
On that basis are we being unreasonable in bringing our concerns to the attention of the authorities and asking that something is done?
I don't think I said anything about 'what I believed'. I just implied that as a horse tends to dump whenever or wherever it gets the urge, the only way to prevent a recurrence might be to ban horses from your street - where, as has been said, they have an ancient right to be, like pedestrians and cyclists. 'Forced to suffer' - who by? It's just one of the charms of the environment where you live.
In reporting what you see as a public nuisance, no, you aren't being unreasonable. Just optimistic, subject to my point above.
|
|
Again you appear to be overlooking the fact it is ilegal to allow a horse onto a pavement.
You have commented and highlighted on all but this fact.
Your opinion of those who break this law.......please?
|
Your opinion of those who break this law.......please?
I have no opinion about those you refer to. I just feel that it must be a very occasional nuisance which can be dealt with simply in a very short time, without resorting to law or making inflated waves, and probably local enemies as well.
Admittedly I don't have to live with the problem, but if I did, (a) I might quite like horses passing my front door and (b) I would not mind doing the necessary on the rare occasion when it happened. Life is too short to get worked up like that.
|
|
Point taken Ted.
I might just raise the matter of the horse muck outside the pub with the Parish Council to see what reaction I get. Clearly it is their responsibility:)
Actually I know the person responsible or, more correctly, the owner of the horse responisble. I have already moaned at her (the owner, not the horse).
|
|
While not the direct responsibility of the PC, it is their responsibility to deal with minor community issues and grievances raised by their parishioners, especially when it can be argued these issues are in fact illegal.
Edited by TedCrilly on 13/08/2017 at 19:52
|
|
After reading my Highway Code, I realise that Ted's complaint (not originally obvious to me) is really about horses ridden on the pavement. The dunghill was merely evidence of that, and almost irrelevant.
I stand by my earlier attitude - Ted is 'in the right', but going to law may do as much harm as good.
|
Point taken Ted.
I might just raise the matter of the horse muck outside the pub with the Parish Council to see what reaction I get. Clearly it is their responsibility:)
Actually I know the person responsible or, more correctly, the owner of the horse responisble. I have already moaned at her (the owner, not the horse).
And the horse said neigh.. it wasnae me!
|
|
|
|
Cyclists and certain drivers are a law unto themselves regardless of what opinions people have of them, I do not see this attitude changing in the foreseeable future
and if the police force is reduced even more, which there was talk of, then law breaking is going to rise and peoples attitudes to wrong doing will get worse because they know they will not get caught
as for cyclists having insurance, how would it be enforced as our police just do not have enough people to do the job. like everything else.. government cuts back but expects twice the work out of whats left
"Cyclists and certain drivers are a law unto themselves"?,
So you're saying all cyclists are a law unto themselves?,
really?,
all of them?
|
Cyclists and certain drivers are a law unto themselves regardless of what opinions people have of them, I do not see this attitude changing in the foreseeable future
and if the police force is reduced even more, which there was talk of, then law breaking is going to rise and peoples attitudes to wrong doing will get worse because they know they will not get caught
as for cyclists having insurance, how would it be enforced as our police just do not have enough people to do the job. like everything else.. government cuts back but expects twice the work out of whats left
"Cyclists and certain drivers are a law unto themselves"?,
So you're saying all cyclists are a law unto themselves?,
really?,
all of them?
Ok, I should have said certain before cyclists as they are both as bad as each other.
I personaly have seen more cyclists trying stupid maneuvers than any driver could, but then there are good and bad wherever you are, but still don`t understand why most never use a cyle lane made for them at great expense but never use, they would rather hold up the traffic and usually do?
|
|
<< ... still don`t understand why most never use a cyle lane made for them at great expense but never use, they would rather hold up the traffic and usually do? >>
I always ask the same question about those joggers who insist on running in the 'gutter' when there is plenty of reserved space for pedestrians. Are they avoiding other (usually absent) pedestrians?
Like the one on Putney Bridge recently ...
Edited by Andrew-T on 13/08/2017 at 15:17
|
|
|
k, I should have said certain before cyclists as they are both as bad as each other.
but still don`t understand why most never use a cyle lane made for them at great expense but never use, they would rather hold up the traffic and usually do?
As ever when this question is asked.....
The usual reason is poor design and/or implementation of the lanes. Examples are sending you round slow and circuitous routes through junctions, frequent intructions to dismount and lanes that end dangerously just where you need them most. Another is poor surfacing as in lane from here to next village; loose grit mixed with broken glass and occasional top dressing of dog poo. Passable OK on a mountain bike and with care on a Brompton but lethal on anything with 27*1.25 or 700C road wheels.
EDIT: Example here goo.gl/maps/NA124cGbxHT2. Going straight on towards the new building on left rationally, and assumnig you're half competent on the road, you'd follow the bus and integrate yourself into traffic. The cycle route goes along pavement (see arrow and blue shared route sign) then through THREE 'toucan' crossings to join the road.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 13/08/2017 at 15:56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
