|
Or rather those who cycle around with no lights. Nearly got hit by one of these as I was reversing out of a carpark the other night. No lights (back or front), dark clothing and impossible to see head on. Only caught a glimpse of him once I'd completed the manouvere, a couple of seconds later then it could have been nasty. What worries me is that if you hit one, they normally come off the worst and it'll be your fault - even if they could not be seen. About time the local plods cracked down on this.
|
About time the local plods cracked down on this
Heartily endorsed by this daily cyclist.
|
About time the local plods cracked down on this Heartily endorsed by this daily cyclist.
and by this former cyclist
|
|
|
|
And by this one.
|
|
Posted in wrong slot -- I'm a daily cyclist, member of the CTC and a tourer.
|
|
|
|
|
About time the local plods cracked down on this.
Also it's about time that all cyclists over the age of 11 had to have insurance.
--
L\'escargot by name, but not by nature.
|
|
On reflection, I have my doubts about the BiB. A couple of years back, a friend of mine actually collided with an unlit cyclist at night. It was two teenagers on one bike, no lights, dark clothing, no warning stripes or reflectors, street lamps along the road but pools of black. Bob braked just too late and nudged them from the rear, throwing the two of them off. No real harm done and luckily no injuries. Bob was done for due care and attention. The cyclists were not not even cautioned, but appeared as prosecution witnesses and to claim their compensation.
|
Whilst I have every sympathy for your friend, and agree that unlit cyclists are a menace to themselves and everyone else, I can see the reason for the due care rap. Presumably the police or the CPS took the view that while the cyclists were unlit, the car wasn't, and the driver should have been aware of their presence had he been paying proper attention. After all, you could'nt claim that a tree you hit was at fault because it had no lights.
Disgraceful that the cyclist was not also prosecuted. Cycling without lights is something that is completely ignored by the police.
|
dont u understand
its ALWAYS the motorists fault
no matter how badly the road is designed or maintained
no matter how mad the pedestrain/cyclist is
its a 100% anti motorist agenda, wrapped up in a lof of spin
|
>no matter how badly the road is designed or maintained, no matter how mad the pedestrain/cyclist is, it's a 100% anti motorist agenda, wrapped up in a lof of spin<
Can't agree with you, john d. When you are in charge of a ton of moving metal you can't expect inanimate stationary objects to take any blame for your actions, can you?
|
I was coming back along my usual route home from work a few weeks ago and approaching a bad bit of it where the road narrows to single track for about 20 yards. This is actually in the town. I was travelling well under the speed limit, doing a suitable speed for the conditions. Two teenagers on one bike suddenly shot out of turning on my right. If I had been a second or so further down the road, there would have been a collision. They had come down a one way street the wrong way, 2 on the bike with no lights. I was releaved that there was no collision, obviously no one wants to injure another road user.
I am also certain that if a collision had resulted, I would have been found at fault.
Why?
Because John D is right, the motorist is always found at fault.
I also know that even if no injury had resulted I would have been out of pocket paying for repairs to my own vehicle.
If I had driven an overloaded vehicle the wrong way down a one way street with no lights, and been caught, I would quite rightly have been done.
|
|
|
|
Speaking as a lorry driver.
If you have a prang with a lorry, regardless of size, doesn't matter if you run into it, its always the lorry drivers fault, experience tells me this.
Pastyman
|
|
|
|
|
Bob pleaded guilty and holds his hands up. He spotted them, but just a fraction too late. My point was not he deserves sympathy, but that no-one was remotely interested in the unlit cyclists, whose conduct was at least a contributory factor and who have now been given a clear message that it's OK.
|
|
|
you could'nt claim that a tree you hit was at fault because it had no lights
You might if it was riding a bike along the road at night. . .
|
|
|
>>After all, you could'nt claim that a tree you hit was at fault because it had no lights<<
Eh? Trees don't move along the road.
--
\"Nothing less than 8 cylinders will do\"
|
>>After all, you could'nt claim that a tree you hit was at fault because it had no lights<< Eh? Trees don't move along the road. -- \"Nothing less than 8 cylinders will do\"
Ah yes, but the same arguement applies to pedestrians walking or running for that matter. You need the visability to see where you're reversing onto.
H
|
"No real harm done and luckily no injuries. Bob was done for due care and attention. The cyclists were not not even cautioned, but appeared as prosecution witnesses and to claim their compensation."
I wonder if that's why there appears to be growing reports of 'hit and runs'
After all, you could'nt claim that a tree you hit was at fault because it had no lights.
You can if the tree crashes into the road in strong winds, which is the nearest think to a kamakazee stealth cyclist.
|
|
Okay, okay. I was only kidding about the tree.
|
The City of London Police has its own cycle squad. They do chase down inconsiderate cyclists (normally couriers!) who cycle the wrong way up a one way street or on the pavement etc. They do issue FPN's.
|
The City of London Police has its own cycle squad.
Indeed; bikes made by Smith and Wesson. Met have a few pedal cops as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh well here goes... (throws petrol on to the fire of discussion)
I agree that there are plenty of non-sensible cyclists that need to be informed of the error of their ways, but...
Were you "reversing out of a carpark" onto a main road?
Regards,
John R @ Home
|
A valid point but the design of the car park is such that it is practically impossible to turn the car around in it, especially when the car park is full. Its a local shop (a Costcutter to be exact) located in a suburban area off a minor road which I would'nt consider to be main.
Just to fuel the discussion just a tiny bit more, I came across an article in the Sunday times today :
Which is an extreme attitude for an insurance company to take and something I disagree with entirely. However, I just wonder what their attitude would be to a injured cyclist who had no lights at the time of the accident ?
|
|
|
|
"About time the local plods cracked down on this."
Agreed. Where I live it is the rare cyclist that rides with lights at night. Usually no lights, dark clothes, and sometimes on the wrong side of the road. During the day at least half of all cyclists are on the wrong side of the road. This seems to have got worse since cycle lanes were marked out. Quite often a cyclist will cycle across my path while I am driving along. Even lycra clad ones are bad. I've been scared witless several times by lycra clad cyclists on pavements going at high speed. I know some sensible cyclist, but im my experience most are accidents waiting to happen.
In our area mobile speed cameras are common, but I doubt they ever do anything about cyclists who contribute disproportionately to the KSI figures.
|
|
Last week in Winchester a lady friend of mine was knocked down by a speeding cyclist. Both she and the offender where on the pavement. She now has a broken elbow and the cyclist is long gone. Lots of sympathy from the police but not alot else.
|
would have to agree with the fact that it should be cracked down on more, maybe all cyclists should have to do cycling proficiency course or something similiar.
--
Im a student ive got time!!!
|
|
I've got lights, reflectors and a hi-vis / fluourescent jacket and still idiot car drivers pull out on me - more so than when I am on my motorbike. Problem is most of them don't realise that a pedal bike could easily be doing 20mph on the level or 30mph down hill (or with a fitter cyclist than me!)
|
I've got lights, reflectors and a hi-vis / fluourescent jacket and still idiot car drivers pull out on me - more so than when I am on my motorbike. Problem is most of them don't realise that a pedal bike could easily be doing 20mph on the level or 30mph down hill (or with a fitter cyclist than me!)
Not just the pull out's. I'm regularly pulled in on drivers who've forgotten me as soon as I'm aft of the B-Pillar. Like Edward I'm well lit and wearing a hi viz waistcoat.
|
Those of us who are both drivers and cyclists, like myself, are probably acutely aware of the dangers some cyclists put themselves in.
Having said that, I have no need to cycle at night at present, so I haven't got any lights!
cheers, Sofa Spud
|
|
|
|
