This is a topic of 'debate' on this mornings show. I think I'll give it a watch. It should be entertaining if the comments on their fb page are anything to go by.
Perhaps they can also tackle the following:-
People using phones on bikes
Pedestrians using phones and not looking where they are going - including junctions
Skateboarders using roads
Cyclists actually using lights at night - bet they would whinge if a car hit them because they didn't see them
Cyclists wearing helmets - it's up to you. Why do they need to legislate?
Only if all pedestrians have to wear a sumo 'fat suit' when they leave the house
It's much safer for them if they get hit
I expect the answer to be a 'yes'.
Always amazes me how the general public are so concerned for a cyclists safety except when trying squeeze past them to gain a couple of car lengths.
Sadly I think that is probably a big part of the motivation mattrgee
[i]"Cyclists are very vulnerable. I worry about squishing one. Let's force them to wear armour so I can squeeze past them without worrying."[/i]
They should make everyone looking to get a driving licence take a cycling proficiency test (including some town centre road miles before hand. Perhaps then when they got behind the wheel they might have a better idea of the consequences.
They should make everyone looking to get a driving licence take a cycling proficiency test (including some town centre road miles before hand. Perhaps then when they got behind the wheel they might have a better idea of the consequences.
That's the catch22 situation that the UK is now in, it's seen as too dangerous to cycle because of traffic so nobody (or very few)does, because there is so few cyclists there is no proper infrastructure.
Cycle racks have gone from most schools a long time ago, so a lot of kids are now growing up and becoming drivers without ever ridden a bike.
That's the thing about country's like the Netherlands and here in Germany, lots of people cycle at least occasionally, kids ride bikes to schools, lots of people cycle to work in summer. So even if someone doesn't cycle themselves, there is a very good chance there children or other family members or friends do. So it makes a lot of people far more aware of cyclists, still get the odd nobhead, but generally most drivers are far more respectful of cyclists.
That's the catch22 situation that the UK is now in, it's seen as too dangerous to cycle because of traffic so nobody (or very few)does, because there is so few cyclists there is no proper infrastructure.
which is why there has to be a legal requirement that all new developments and all new roads are built with full consideration of cyclists and pedestrians. I agree sorting out what exists isn't always easy, but if you are starting from scratch there are no excuses*.
* well i guess the fact developers won't make as much money is one....
See when you're trying to win a battle it's always better to have an elevated position. Make helmets compulsory, take the high ground, THEN go after the muppets in tin boxes. VED stickers for bikes would be a good start too.
The debate about compulsory helmet wearing is a stupid one, there's no way it would be enforceable.
I'm not in favour of compulsion, but I'd see some merit in a compromise - compulsory helmets on roads with higher speed limits (maybe kicking in above 40?) With the flip side being more 20mph limits (ie reducing the limit on the roads where helmets aren't required). No helmets required onoff road cycle paths/bridleways/anywhere with no cars.
Make helmets compulsory, take the high ground
no, make helmets compulsary and then see the debate move to forced use of cycle paths.
Ask yourself why there is talk about compulsary helmets, who really benefits? why do the Dutch and Danes not have compulsary helmet laws?
The debate about compulsory helmet wearing is a stupid one, there's no way it would be enforceable.
The debate about seatbelt wearing is a stupid one, there's no way it would be enforceable....
Remember that?
Somewhere in Edinburgh....
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
I'm watching susanna Reid right now.
Mmmmmmm
Despite a potential war in Syria and this helmet nonsense, they seem to be focussing on a non-story about an idiot who drove into a flooded road. Not once have they suggested the driver is to blame. He couldn't possibly be at fault, he was in a car. Maybe there was a cyclist around who caused the incident, or a faulty sat mac.
But definitely not the ****wit behind the wheel.
Oh, hang on, they've hinted that it was the crap driving but no, it was an appropriate vehicle.
It would seem not, eh?
[url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7423/9136661513_75fbf5feab.jp g" target="_blank">
Am I the only one who thought it already was the law? Anyway I'm not convinced it would make any difference either way. People who are daft enough to disregard their own safety while cycling will continue to do so. It's illegal to ride without lights in the dark, doesn't stop people though.
The one thing that always strikes me is how helmets are always portrayed in the media as a miracle life saver. I don't know the details, but if the guy who was hit head-on by a van was wearing a helmet it could very well have made no difference at all. Granted at least his chances would have been better, but still.
People who are daft enough to disregard their own safety while [s]cycling[/s] driving will continue to do so.
FTFY
See when you're trying to win a battle it's always better to have an elevated position. Make helmets compulsory, take the high ground, THEN go after the muppets in tin boxes. VED stickers for bikes would be a good start too.
😀
People who are daft enough to disregard their own safety [s]while cycling driving will[/s] continue to do so
I missed the main debate because I’d already left for work, by bike, without a helmet as it happens. I’ll just go along with whatever Suzanne Reid agrees with.
why do the Dutch and Danes not have compulsary helmet laws?
This morning I was talking to a Dutch guy who has just come back from holiday the UK. One of the things he mentioned was how crazy it seemed that cars and bikes had to share a road where the cars can be going over 100kph – it doesn’t make a lot of sense does it?
Helmets for car drivers could save $380 million in Australia.
[url] http://www.copenhagenize.com/search/label/helmets%20for%20motorists?m=1 [/url]
Seems like helmets for drivers should be made mandatory immediately.
Ian Munro - would you be happy to put a VED sticker on your bike? Free sticker, small enough to wrap around the seat post.
Am I the only one who thought it already was the law?
Yes, quite possibly.
People who are daft enough to disregard their own safety while cycling will continue to do so.
Here we go!
CaptainFlashheart - Member
People who are daft enough to disregard their own safety [s]while cycling driving[/s] will continue to do so
Fair point.
[img] 
[/img]
would you be happy to put a VED sticker on your bike? Free sticker, small enough to wrap around the seat post.
Nothing is ever free, so who is paying for it? Are you suggesting raising taxes to pay for a sticker?
Ian Munro - would you be happy to put a VED sticker on your bike? Free sticker, small enough to wrap around the seat post.
Depends on how nice it looked. Would it have important stuff on it like a series of crowns round the outside showing all the KOMs I own?
Am I the only one who thought it already was the law?
I would have thought so yes.
I'm not in favour of compulsion, but I'd see some merit in a compromise - compulsory helmets on roads with higher speed limits (maybe kicking in above 40?) With the flip side being more 20mph limits (ie reducing the limit on the roads where helmets aren't required). No helmets required onoff road cycle paths/bridleways/anywhere with no cars.
Where's the evidence that more accidents happen on 40+ roads versus 20s? Any evidence that you could survive being hit at 40mph better if you're wearing a helmet? New signs to remind you as you leave/join 20/40 roads that you can remove your helmet? Picking arbitrary numbers out of the air helps nobody! 😉
I always wear a helmet, but I'd like the option to not wear one as well. If helmets become compulsory then the very first time a helmet wearing cyclist is killed the news will declare cycling a lethal pastime. Ignoring the multiple car passenger deaths the same day.
that, bencooper, is getting stolen. love it.
the Beeb really have a bee in their bonnet about lids at the minute - cant understand why. Its usually from some f****d up personal agenda or plain greed driven.
[i]Nothing is ever free, so who is paying for it? Are you suggesting raising taxes to pay for a sticker?[/i]
We can just put an extra quid on everyone's car tax to pay for it.
That way bikes have a tax disk and everyone is happy.
that, bencooper, is getting stolen. love it.
I just stole it off Twitter 😉
Cycling is already seen as a second-rate form of transport - if you call for compulsory cycle helmets but not compulsory car helmets, you're contributing to that.
I just stole it off Twitter
It would be better if the cyclist wasn't a smug, brakeless fixieridingasshat, but otherwise a valid message! 😉
Yeah, the sideburns don't help 🙂
Nothing is ever free, so who is paying for it? Are you suggesting raising taxes to pay for a sticker?
What he said.^
Or indeed a penny onto the price of a litre of fuel.
I'd do the opposite.
Put an 18inch spike sticking out of the steering wheel, dashboard and back of the front seats, and ban seatbelts. Motorised vehicle drivers will drive a darn sight more carefully then, and kids in the back will sit still 😉
Tail-gaters will become extinct due to natural selection.
why do the Dutch and Danes not have compulsary helmet laws?
I actually saw someone wearing a helmet in Holland once. Probably a tourist.
Certainly makes more sense to spend a bit on actual place to lock bikes up. A few bits of bent steel can't cost all that much compared to a shed load of hours in Parliament for the discussion of laws that nobody really wants, apart from a politician or 3 trying to show they actually did something.
Take my street for example. I probably have more installed bike parking within 200metres of my apartment than a decent sized town centre pedestrian zone in the UK. And probably have more at my actual home address than Tesco's provide at one store.
Like! 🙂We can just put an extra quid on everyone's car tax to pay for it.
That way bikes have a tax disk and everyone is happy.
so in cases where the forces involved are waaaaaaay over what a helmet is rated for? cool can't see anything wrong with that.I'd see some merit in a compromise - compulsory helmets on roads with higher speed limits (maybe kicking in above 40?)
and his watch is too bigYeah, the sideburns don't help
Or indeed a penny onto the price of a litre of fuel.
that's fine then, I guess if the drivers want cyclists to have a tax disc then they should pay for it. But can we put a couple of quid on each litre and then we can have showers in every workplace, miles of purpose made cyclepaths, and if they are so insistant on cycle helmets i guess they can pay for them as well, and finally can i have a set of troutlights, 'cause cyclists never have lights and it is only fair that the rich important drivers help out the poor unfortunate cyclist who can't afford lights?
The debate about compulsory helmet wearing is a stupid one, there's no way it would be enforceable.
The same was said about motorcycle helmets in the 1960s, but how many motorcyclists do you see not wearing a helmet? Very, very few - and they're usually pikeys, so don't count.
I don't know about anyone else, but if I'm going to take part in a potentially hazardous activity then I'm going to make damned sure that I come out the other side if not completely intact then at least 95% of the way there - so anything that improves my chances of surviving is a good thing.
Mind you, having said that the sooner that all the brain-deads have got what little grey matter they aleady possess smeared all over someone's windscreen and the better. At least that way I won't have to share my oxygen supply with them.
Hmm, I'm now considering making dummy tax disc stickers to stick on the bikes I sell...
See when you're trying to win a battle it's always better to have an elevated position. Make helmets compulsory, take the high ground, THEN go after the muppets in tin boxes.
We already have the high ground. We don't kill thousands of people a year with our vehicles!
VED stickers for bikes would be a good start too.
They really really wouldn't.
VED would mean you need to have some kind of registration plate to identify the bike it applies to. Which means ownership documents and a registered keeper. How does that work for hire bikes or people who swap frames around?
Pointless bureaucracy which would cost millions to the tax payer and ultimately discourage people from cycling.
Mind you, having said that the sooner that all the brain-deads have got what little grey matter they aleady possess smeared all over someone's windscreen and the better. At least that way I won't have to share my oxygen supply with them.
My you're a charming chap.
Lolz
VED would mean you need to have some kind of registration plate to identify the bike it applies to. Which means ownership documents and a registered keeper. How does that work for hire bikes or people who swap frames around?
Frame number? Or just put "bike" in the reg number place.
Pointless bureaucracy which would cost millions to the tax payer and ultimately discourage people from cycling.
Away and shite.
