Forum menu
It is being tagged on to an existing law going through parliament. personally I don't see the issue of it. However, the fact they don't deal with all the car death/injuries is the actual problem.
The point that IDS seems to miss is that there are more pressing matters to legislate for and, in any case, the sentencing guidelines that apply to drivers wouldn't apply to many cyclists:
It's unusual for a cyclist to kill, unlike drivers, and they're unlikely to have previous cycling convictions
It's unheard of for a cyclist to kill more than one person in the same collision, unlike drivers
It's unusual for a cyclist to be exceeding the road speed limit (assuming that they applied)
Collisions involving cyclists are often contributed to by the pedestrian
Enforce existing legislation with cyclists. Crack down on illegal e-motorbikes, e-scooters, etc and you'd remove much of the perceived problem
Or could this apply off-road?
The actual text of the amendment is here. The wording is "on a road or other public place", so the answer would be yes.
As for "equipped and maintained to standards set out in the Act", the 'Act' in this case is the Road Traffic Act 1988, specifically Section 81 (Regulation of brakes, bells etc., on pedal cycles.).
I hit a pedestrian once who did exactly that – sprinted out from a gap in the traffic without looking, I hit her and fell off on the middle of the road. She was uninjured, got up, looked at me lying there and ran off.
I had this too, except I didn't fall off and they didn't get back up.
250kg's of Yamaha Fazer 1000 made sure...
Shit... sorry you had to experience that. Must have been hard.
I'd be much happier with a "death by inconsiderate cycling" law, if there was matching "causing injury by walking like a pillock" law. In my (mostly London) commuting career, I've had many near misses and the (very) occasional shoulder barge with peds who step blindly off the pavement, staring at their phones and with headphones on.
I've only once had conflict with a cyclist at a crossing, it's the one on Kirkstall Road in Leeds by the Abbey.
Dude ran the light as I stepped out, (I wasn't paying that much attention, if I had I probably would have seen he wasn't stopping and elected to stay on the curb) I turned just in time, yanked the dog back and he bounced off my back/shoulder (which ****ing hurt mind) but he then clattered into the railings and ended up in a pile.
I did go to make sure he was okay after his subsequent spill, he was quite cranky and sweary, I felt less bad at this point and imagine he was/is a dick in a motor vehicle too.
At that point I was no longer interested in his wellbeing and went about my day as the dog was quite freaked out and was more my concern.
I'd argue the underlying issue is one of social responsibility and conscience, no?
Laws are great but seems to me this latest Knorr culture-war soup mix will simply be more divisive than cohesive.
People are ****ing dicks, and dickish behaviour is simply magnified depending on the size of the vehicle they're piloting.