[Closed] Why I won't let my 8yo cycle on the road - Chris Boardman

According to Dirk on the BBC comments, Cycling is not in the British Blood! Right I'm off to buy some golf clubs and scrap my bikes.... 🙄

Increaesd traffic volume.

Well Duh. But why exactly is it that increased motorized transport automatically equate to worsening attitudes, less consideration for others, a greater sense of entitlement?

I can't help thinking some sort of general malaise is becoming a deeper and deeper part of British cultural identity, we've become quite a nasty, self centred bunch...

If our general use of the roads and the way we behave towards one another when driving, reflects the national psyche then the future is looking pretty grim IMO...
But I don't want to run away and hide from it all on a sustrans route, I'd rather live in the country I grew up in (rose tinted hindsight) and feel safe cycling on the road...

[quote=cookeaa ]To now start saying cyclists need some additional, special provision because "Roads are now too dangerous" spectacularly misses the point...

I'm suggesting cyclists need some additional special provision because it works in Holland (and there isn't anything that fundamentally different about Holland or the people who live there). That is a practical solution which has been proven to work. Everything else is unproven theory.

[quote=wors ]According to Dirk on the BBC comments, Cycling is not in the British Blood!

Which is one of the classic fallacious arguments about the Dutch model not working here.

(and there isn't anything that fundamentally different about Holland or the people who live there)

There might well be, according to the map.

This weekend I did around 200Km on the roads and had just one "incident", pretty well every other driver hung back if I indicated that it wasn't safe for them as I could see vehicles coming the other way then I'd wave them on and we'd acknowledge each other with a wave of thanks.

Some people (and I use that word rather than motorists) have little time or patience for [b]anyone[/b] else. When driving they see anything that gets in the way of their inalienable right to drive how they see fit as something to bully out of their way, any accident is always the other person's fault as they can't possibly be in the wrong. Fortunately they are a very small minority.

@molgrips, not a fundamental one for most of the places in the UK where this could happen.

Thinking of Cardiff, I'm struggling to think what I'd do to improve cycling infrastructure. There's a couple of main arteries that'd benefit from a big alternative cycle lane, but beyond that - the normal roads do just fine. The problem is that most drivers only drive on the arteries and think 'sod that, I'm not cycling along Newport Road' for example.

Cardiff's infrastructure fine for who? An experienced cyclist such as yourself or an 8 year old on the way to school?

As seems to be the main argument (not read the whole thread) Drivers attitudes have to change.

I'll give you a few recent examples from a drivers point of view - with me being a cyclist - and a cycling point of view

A few weeks ago now, i followed a group of guys down a descent near me (aptly titled on Strava "we're all going to die") the rear 2 guys were riding really close and going at 40+ mph in a 40 limit. i backed right off them sensing something was not right with their ability or knowledge of the area, sure enough, one guy loses it not 5 seconds later and runs off the road at the next corner into a ditch, cartwheels down the road, destroys his bike and ends up half lying in the road. i stopped sharpish, hazards on, backed up to stop the traffic as its a blind corner. made sure he was ok and his mates came back. once all was sorted, i carried on safe in the knowledge no one was going to run him over and he was ok, with a nice warm fuzzy feeling for doing a good deed.

Now, fast forward to last Friday, i'm riding to work, traffic is light, there are 2 vans maybe 200m behind me and a car heading towards the junction i'm turning into by a bus stop, he's a good 200m away too.
I turn in and its covered in diesel and i hit the deck quicker than i can blink. bike gets mangled and i'm lying prone (but un-injured) in the middle of the road.
NO ONE stops, not one. The guy approaching the junction who saw me crash slows to let the vans past, then drives round me as if i was road kill without a second glance. if anyone had been behind him and not seen me crash, they probably would have driven straight into me.
The only person to see if i was alright was a chap at the bus stop who looked up from his phone for 2 seconds to say "alright?" and that was it.

I think unless you are actually an avid cyclist driving a car, attitudes suck towards cyclists, which i can understand to a point (we all get riled by big groups of roadies at the weekend right?). But it seems to be of late going to a whole new level where common decency and looking out for other human beings seems to be left behind, seems like being behind a car steering wheel is slowly robbing people of any moral standards and cycling is seen as terrorism on the roads.
I could not and Would not drive around someone who had crashed directly in front of me without at least checking they are able to get up.

I fully agree with Boardman tho. Riding in a City is deadly, but it has nothing to do with bad infrastructure. we all have eyes and can see hazards, but, we are the vulnerable soft fleshy lumps not protected by a big metal box. and therefore need to be given the space and consideration required to go about our lives safely, just as any decent driver would do to other drivers.
I'm glad my commute is mostly Rural save for the last mile as my interaction with other traffic is minimal now.

Maybe if traffic laws were properly policed and enforced with appropriate sentences, so that drivers faced a genuine risk of a month or two without a car and the consequent impact on jobs etc, then drivers attitudes would change.

I would also expect an equal enforcement of rules relating to cyclists. Maybe if some of the asshats who ride stupidly/illegally had to fork out for some fines, maybe sell a bike to pay them, then their attitudes might change.

There are too many with a sense of entitlement and/or righteousness on both sides of the argument.

I live not far away from CB,and there are quite a few quiet roads, and dedicated off road cycle paths close to his house, our local council also has free cycle training for adults and children and over the summer me and fellow volunteers have handed out freebies, bells, hi viz, cycle maps, and info about cycling around the wirral, and quite a few people have said theyre afraid of trafic, they fail to realise they are traffic when in a vehicle or on a bike, and my point is cycle quiet roads, get trained,build up confidence and get out on the bike, more bike make motorists aware we exist,tell your freinds and workmates about the benefit of cycling for health , the environmnet, encorage them to rent a bike to try one available from quite a few local stations and almost every street in liverpol or so they seem.

Maybe if traffic laws were properly policed and enforced with appropriate sentences

Today driving home, pathetic idiots flashing me and others behind because those nasty fund raising POLICE where manning a speed check on a 30 mph road.

and further on a 20 mph speed limit through a small village,past a school, surgery and shops, again a pathetic woman flashing her lights like a demented christmas tree, because i was doing 20 mph.

Sometimes you just cant win at educating stupid people.

Thinking of Cardiff, I'm struggling to think what I'd do to improve cycling infrastructure.

The problem is that most drivers only drive on the arteries and think 'sod that, I'm not cycling along Newport Road'

Haven't you just contradicted yourself? There's nothing you can think of to improve cycling, here's a major arterial route which isn't perceived as safe to cycle.

I'm not familiar with the road in question so I might be missing something.

Why would you want to cycle on a major arterial road tho? you are on a bike, use better, safer roads!
Major roads are to move cars and large vehicles quickly and efficiently, Why expose yourself to that?
Unless you have absolutely no choice (which in a city is improbable) use other routes, its more fun, safer and probably quicker!

Major roads are to move cars and large vehicles quickly and efficiently, Why expose yourself to that?

Maybe you want to get where you are going quickly and efficiently EVEN WHEN USING A BICYCLE

Why would you want to cycle on a major arterial road tho?

I cycle a major arterial route every day, one with decent cycling provision. It's a great way of getting to work quickly and easily.

Scotswood Road in Newcastle by the by.
[img] [/img]

get trained,build up confidence and get out on the bike, more bike make motorists aware we exist,

I agree. The more cyclists of all ages there are on the roads, the more likely provision will be made for cyclists in road design.

If there are few(er) cyclists using the road, I can understand the argument by transport planners that number of bikes on the road does not warrant a seperate provision for them.

But thats my point, you generally can be almost as quick and efficient using smaller roads because you are going the same speed on a bike, [b]you[/b] don't need a trunk road to do 20mph on a bike.

My comments earlier in my previous post about crashing and car drivers not seeming to give a damn about cyclists can also be flipped around to cyclists who seemingly put themselves in danger or are confrontational because they are "within the law" even if its monumentally stupid to do it.

Legally i could ride out of Brighton on the A23 or up the A3 from Guildford on my bike, would i? no chance.

Everyone has a brain, so why moan about Trunk roads being dangerous when there is probably a much safer quieter route that is more fun and takes maybe a minute or 2 longer?

i don't see the point in putting yourself in danger because its not illegal.

[quote=daver27 ]As seems to be the main argument (not read the whole thread) Drivers attitudes have to change.

When is it going to happen?

i don't see the point in putting yourself in danger because its not illegal.

But I'm not putting myself in danger because they've made provision for cyclists - which is what we're talking about, right?

edit: In fact I'd wager it's safer and less stress than a smaller, narrower road with more junctions and parked cars to contend with.

[quote=richpips ]If there are few(er) cyclists using the road, I can understand the argument by transport planners that number of bikes on the road does not warrant a seperate provision for them.

I suppose, yes I can understand the line of thought which results in them being so wrong.

[quote=daver27 ]why moan about Trunk roads being dangerous when there is probably a much safer quieter route that is more fun and takes maybe a minute or 2 longer?

Gosh, imagine the outrage from motorists if you did something to their roads which resulted in their journeys being a minute or two longer. If we're going to do it properly there should be good separate cycling provision alongside the main trunk roads going exactly where cyclists want to go. That just might encourage more people to see cycling as a viable transport option rather than something you only do because you're an enthusiast. Which is the whole point really.

its fine riding along ones that keeps you separated! although, does that road really have a cycle lane on the pavement AND the road? seems a bit silly, just have it on the pavement!

i'm just saying there are plenty of people that choose to ride on roads that its technically legal to ride on even though its a properly stupid thing to do.

accidents happen, but you have to reduce the chances yourself, so at the very least your are above blame should the worst happen.

I for one will go the safe way rather than the few minutes quicker way (to the point i've bought a CX bike so i can stay off the roads this winter on my commute)

If there are few(er) cyclists using the road, I can understand the argument by transport planners that number of bikes on the road does not warrant a seperate provision for them.

I don't think that's entirely true. Often it is that there is not the available money to build provision. A political decision. As has been shown with 'road' infrastructure and good cycling infrastructure if you build it people will use it.

lemonysam - Member
Why would you want to cycle on a major arterial road tho?
I cycle a major arterial route every day, one with decent cycling provision. It's a great way of getting to work quickly and easily.
Scotswood Road in Newcastle by the by.

I would argue that is relatively poor cycling provision sorry

seems a bit silly, just have it on the pavement!

It has two on each side, means that those who want to ride on the pavement can and those who want to ride in the road can. It works very well in my experience. It even allows for two way traffic on both sides of the road so less crossing and re-crossing to get where you're going.

i'm just saying there are plenty of people that choose to ride on roads that its technically legal to ride on even though its a properly stupid thing to do.

Agreed but where we seem to differ is that I'm saying that it might be a good idea to make them safer, especially where they are obvious commuter routes into a city centre.

accidents happen, but you have to reduce the chances yourself, so at the very least your are above blame should the worst happen.

[s]Most [/s] Lots* of the urban accidents I can think of involving cyclists happened on rat-runs rather than on arterial roads to be honest.

*I totted up and I reckon it's roughly equal actually.

@daver27: It's limiting the risk, my commute is a mixture of side roads; main roads and cycle paths. It also happens to be pretty much the most direct route when you look at it on a map but that's more by chance than anything.

People confuse risk with danger, if there's risk then it simply can't be safe. Risk is simply the likelihood of a danger happening not the absence of safety: you could get hit by a car - that's the danger but the risk (probability) of it happening is small, very small. In over forty years of cycling I've had exactly one accident due to a car - there was no contact well I had the choice of riding in to the side of the car turning left across me or biting pavement and chose the latter.

what's easier to change? Drivers attitudes or the infrastructure?

I think that driverless cars might actually offer a better chance of a safer future for cyclists. If it is demonstrated that driverless cars are significantly safer, insurance premiums for human drivers could increase enough to price them off the road. It won't matter how much people complain, economics will make it happen.

agreed that it would be a good idea to make these routes safer, but in the mean time, because it isn't going to happen any time soon, find a quieter route that will probably be more fun!
I'm one of these people that will go out of my way to avoid bits of road like that if there is a better alternative (read quieter more fun etc) if i have to get up earlier and home later, so be it!

My commute is now 20 minutes longer on the cross bike, 80% off road and a whole heap of fun. Saying that, i did have my first crash on the road in years last week on it. oops... 😆

Theres a lot that can be done to make things safer, but for now, its up to us to make ourselves safer.

Tackling either of these in the UK is just a massive vote loser at the moment

I agree, and less than a year away from a general election, means that being seen to be 'soft' on cyclists or 'hard' against the poor oppressed motorists is political suicide.

But then again, if we get a coalition with UKIP involved in any small way we'll be fine, as they have such progressive policies on all of this don't they? Ah...

I think that driverless cars might actually offer a better chance of a safer future for cyclists. If it is demonstrated that driverless cars are significantly safer, insurance premiums for human drivers could increase enough to price them off the road. It won't matter how much people complain, economics will make it happen.

Imagine the rage that will build up inside those driverless cars that *refuse* to overtake a cyclist on the road because it's unsafe, where before the human would have squeezed/bullied their way through.

Still agree with them, but I reckon that is a very real hurdle that we will have to overcome, getting people to 'calm the flip down' in general would be a good start.

Anyhoo, Oil will become so scarce in the next 10-15 years or so that cars will go the way of the dinosaurs and we'll all be forced to cycle. 😆

molgrips - Member
Bristol's quite hilly and that's one of the largest cycling cities is it not? It's also bloody congested and crowded, but still plenty of bikes.

Though they're all nicked bikes.

daver27 - Member

Anyhoo, Oil will become so scarce in the next 10-15 years or so...

this just isn't true.

(i know you've put a smiley there, but it's surprising how many people believe this)

we've got something like 60 years left of the easy stuff, but we're already going after the hard stuff (example: the Alberta tar-sands), and there's chuffing loads of that.

(extracting it is an environmental disaster, but clearly we don't care)

Here's his "why I didn't wear a helmet" article: http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/campaigning/article/20141103-campaigning-news-Boardman--Why-I-didn-t-wear-a-helmet-on-BBC-Breakfast-0

A few weeks ago I was riding down a narrow street with parked cars either side. About a 100 yard stretch, not wide enough for a car to pass a bike. About 10 yards before the end of the parked cars a car appears and piles onto narrow bit. Funnily enough he has to stop because I am there. As I inch the bike past him, he winds down his window and starts screaming "OOR ROADS, OOR ROADS" (he was Scottish)

Kinda sums up the problem with attitudes.

@ahwiles

by that i meant it will get so expensive, cars will be priced off the road, not that we will run out.

Good article.

People wear helmets and high vis as they feel it’s all they can do to keep themselves safe. It shows just how far away Britain is from embracing cycling as a normal and convenient form of transport.

it's already profitable to dig up and process tar at the current (low) price of what? $90/barrel.

oil is about as expensive as it's going to get for a long, long time.

even if prices doubled (which is unlikely), it'd mean a price/litre of what, £1.60? maybe less?

we'd hardly notice.

@daver27 - except that the real price of motoring is falling.

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-driven-on-to-roads-by-falling-cost-of-motoring-1681052.html ]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-driven-on-to-roads-by-falling-cost-of-motoring-1681052.html[/url]

I agree that the situation is very changeable, but unless a government fancies hiking up VED to the point that even economical cars are too expensive to run, and fancies putting most oil companies out of business prematurely, then people will continue to use motorised vehicles as a primary mode of transport.

@imnotverygood

I took great delight in making someone reverse after doing that to me the other day, I was 85% of the way down the road, he started to turn in, briefly braked, saw me, and carried on, so did I. We came to a stop head to head with him just over a cars length into the road and he gave me a dirty look and then wound down his window and asked why I didn't wait for him!?!

I told him I was nearly at the end when he pulled in and he should have waited for me, just like if I had been a car, then he spouted some nonsense about having right of way so I decided at that point not to squeeze past, told him my bike didn't have a reverse gear and stood my ground. We had a bit of a glaring match but he did eventually reverse.

What made it even sweeter was that while he was reversing a couple more cars followed me down the road so he had to wait for them too 🙂

the cost of motoring is falling as its general election next year, got to make everyone seem better off..

I was being a bit tongue in cheek with the oil comment..

Environmental issues will do more to drive petrol/diesel cars off the road than lack of oil.

anyway, WAY OFF TOPIC!

Given that I'm currently thinking hard about cycling to school with my own daughter, I think that *much* of it is indeed okay for kids, but the arterial road arrangement is the bit that could do with changing. Hence my post.

By that I mean that there are plenty of small quiet roads but they all lead out onto big roads at some point. So I think all that needs to change is that they need to link up better. And to be fair quite a few cities do this.

If you do that then cars still need to share the roads with cyclists, and drivers therefore still need their attitudes adjusted.

Unless you have absolutely no choice (which in a city is improbable)

Not really. You can't get from my house to town or my kids' school without either a short spell on Rhyd y Penau road (which is fairly busy) or going on St Mellons road which is a ridiculous country lane rat race.

Theres a lot that can be done to make things safer, but for now, its up to us to make ourselves safer.

Earlier this year I was knocked off my bike by a motorist. It was daylight, I was wearing hi-viz, a helmet and had my headlight and rear light on. Oh, I was also cycling on a segregated pedestrian/bike path (not an on road cycle lane).

Theres a lot that can be done to make things safer, but for now, its up to us to make ourselves safer.
Earlier this year I was knocked off my bike by a motorist.

He said safeER, not 100% safe. You can never be that.

Lots if chat about changing drivers attitudes.

The only way to change attitudes is to change cyclists from being just someone who gets in your way to your friend, your daughter, your father, your colleague, you sister etc...

I.e. Peoples attitudes won't change until cycling is a normal thing lots of people do.

For this to be the case normal people need to see cycling as a safe, efficient, cheap and easy means of transport and this means real infrastructure. Separated lanes not poxy pavement routes that class a cyclist as equal to a pedestrian. You need to be able to jump on a bike in your normal clothes, not worry about being castigated for not wearing a helmet and get to where you need to get to.

Drivers attitudes will change but not until they are first and foremost cyclists. Dutch drivers don't magically have more respect and Britain isn't broken, Dutch drivers just grew up as cyclists. And once more people are cycling things will snowball, there will be more support for harsher penalties for drivers, more support for even more infrastructure, more respect and so on.

Things can change, we just need to start the ball rolling by spending a modest amount of money now.

real infrastructure

On the other hand, we already have infrastructure, people just need to learn how to use it properly.

Show me an example of somewhere that has been successfully achieved without lots of specialist infrastructure, resulting in riding a bike for transport being a normal thing to do for lots of ordinary people and I might just be convinced. And no, countries where people use bicycles because they're too poor to afford anything else don't count.

Meanwhile we have Holland.

On the other hand, we already have infrastructure,people just need to learn how to use it properly.

But we've had 60+ years of trying to make people play nice. It's clearly not working.

People drive in their thousands to ride their bikes around a closed road on a SkyRide, then they put the bikes back on the car and drive home. They spent loads of money going to Centreparcs and ride bikes around empty roads. People WANT to be safe, they want to FEEL safe, which means separation from motor traffic on anything more than a 20mph, quiet, residential street. (and let's not forget that the Dutch design streets properly so if you're mixing bikes and cars then it's only with cars going to a destination near enough on that street. Through traffic and rat runs are designed out.)

You surely wouldn't say that we should rip up the pavements, turn them into more road lanes and then tell pedestrians to 'learn to use it properly'.

we already have infrastructure, people just need to learn how to use it properly

My local cycling infrastructure is inconsistent, badly designed and poorly implemented. It's simply not good enough to get a critical mass of people cycling safely.

Here's an example of something that was recently implemented as part of the state of the art tram system in Edinburgh:
[img] ?nocache=2421[/img]
Cyclists have to leave the main road (on the right of the picture (to avoid the narrowing gap between the tram lines and the kerb) cycle down the "dedicated lane" (a.k.a station taxi rank) cross the tram tracks at right angles and then rejoin the traffic flow on the right of the tracks to continue on their way. This is cycling infrastructure for a 21st century traffic project that took years to plan and deliver. Cycling was obviously not taken seriously as part of this process.

There's another example of poor infrastructure on the west of Edinburgh, where a key cycle route crosses one of the busy arterial roads. To get from one side of the road to the other involves a 500 metre detour traversing 4 exits used by motor traffic, two pedestrian road crossings, and one road crossing with no pedestrian signals.

Effective cycling infrastructure has to be safe, practical and universal. We are just tinkering around the edges in the UK. It's not about teaching people properly; if you have to teach people how to use the cycling infrastructure, it's already failed.

Now, fast forward to last Friday, i'm riding to work, traffic is light, there are 2 vans maybe 200m behind me and a car heading towards the junction i'm turning into by a bus stop, he's a good 200m away too.
I turn in and its covered in diesel and i hit the deck quicker than i can blink. bike gets mangled and i'm lying prone (but un-injured) in the middle of the road.
NO ONE stops, not one. The guy approaching the junction who saw me crash slows to let the vans past, then drives round me as if i was road kill without a second glance. if anyone had been behind him and not seen me crash, they probably would have driven straight into me.
The only person to see if i was alright was a chap at the bus stop who looked up from his phone for 2 seconds to say "alright?" and that was it.

I'd like to see a serious psychological/neuroscience study into what happens to people's thought processes when they get into a modern car - this lack of empathy/understanding of other people's needs that seems so prevalent is almost psychopathic in it's lack of basic human kindness... I suspect there's something about isolation from the outside world that comes from the sheer size and level of protection which fully detaches drivers from any sense of connection with the outside world. I've said it before but the level of discomfort and inconvenience on rush-hour trains and the Tube is quantifiably worse than driving but you never see the same levels of anger and aggression - and my guess is that you know you'll get a punch or at least have to deal with the consequences of your bad behaviour with a bunch of dirty looks and tuts from the people around you 🙂 You have no protection if you act like an anti-social git, so you don't act anti-socially - simple.

That said, I actually think cycling is winning at the moment. Massively. New cyclists I talk to are really quite shocked about the treatment they receive. I think they're more powerful than me when the complain about it to friends and family because they're 'normal people' rather than mad-keen cyclists...

The sheer numbers I see commuting and out at weekends in London shows that despite the ranters, the aggression, the negative media, the lack of political leadership, the masses are getting increasingly keen on cycling. People are ignoring all the negativity and getting on with it anyway...

Wide passes and staying back till there's space is getting noticeably more frequent IMO - last year and this year especially. There's definitely a trend towards deliberate courtesy. The aggressive drivers are, I think, getting worse in the levels of aggression, but they really are in a minority (and I suspect they know it). Social norms are very powerful and actually a campaign suggesting that being anti-cyclist and an aggressive driver puts you in a disliked minority that everyone else looks down on could be quite powerful...

Imagine just how far it will go when and if we finally get the politicians, police and media onside...

On the other hand, we already have infrastructure, people just need to learn how to use it properly.

It's often hard for us enthusiasts to see the need for infrastructure or why what we have is bobbins. Turning right on a main road or using a roundabout may be easy and safe if you are confident to take the primary position, brake and signal at the same time and keep up with the traffic but put yourself in in the shoes of a 50yo woman or a mum taking her 3 kids to school.

The example of good I like is when I first arrived at the main railway station in The Hauge. I was able to hire a bike and ride to my destination on the main route to my destination, about 5 miles, without once coming into conflict with a car and only using shared space on tiny residential streets near my destination. There isn't a single UK City where that could happen.

"Tomorrow: is it safe to ride with headphones?" Oh dear oh dear 🙄

"Tomorrow: is it safe to ride with headphones?" Oh dear oh dear

Why "Oh dear"? So far the points I've seen the BBC raising have been fairly reasonable and well made - why should the headphones be different?

It's good that this discussion is happening surely? This is part of the "Changing drivers attitudes" thing that we've been banging on about for years.

[i]why should the headphones be different?[/i]

Because, again it's making the cyclist at fault.

I've been commuting 20odd years with headphones and not one single problem has been caused by it (to me or anyone else).

Changing motorists attitudes is the way forward... But seeing the attitudes on a daily basis we're on a hiding to nothing

🙁

[quote=DezB ]"Tomorrow: is it safe to ride with headphones?" Oh dear oh dear

Where are you seeing that?

[i]Where are you seeing that?[/i]

I saw it on the telly coming out of the Minchin's mouth (just after a feature I missed, which appeared to be about getting motorists to ride bikes around, judging by the last few seconds of it.)

Because, again it's making the cyclist at fault.

Only if they say, "cycling with headphones is dangerous" if they say "cycling with headphones is not dangerous" then it's debunking a commonly held misconception about cycling.

I just don't think it should be part of the debate. It's an irrelevance.

DezB +1 - it's just another way of avoiding mentioning the elephant

Did you catch the guy on there who's been riding around with cameras on? "No ifs no buts, No coconuts" 🙄

He struck me as someone who thinks he's doing good, but was actually quite confrontational when there was little need. hitting a van roof for example, yeah he was close, but if it was that dodgy an overtake, why take your hands off the bars and potentially lose control to instigate confrontation? granted getting punched probably wasn't what he was after, but i couldn't help think he deserved it! if he'd just carried on riding, all that would have happened was...nothing!

Don't get me wrong, some car drivers are bad, some are good, as are cyclists, we just need to get along.

"Tomorrow: is it safe to ride with headphones?" Oh dear oh dear

That's what I said is it?

That's what I said is it?

What's not to like?

I say it's an irrelevance to a safety debate.
You really think, with all the ****ing problems we get on the roads, checking whether a cyclist listening to music has any bearing whatsoever on the issues?
Can they investigate the safety of each and every cyclist and the environment they ride in?

I say it's an irrelevance to a safety debate.

It's relevant because it's such a common talking point in the existing debate. I agree that it's a tiny point but that didn't stop the bandwagon being jumped on in London last year.

Because you can guarantee that the next day won't be :

"tomorrow - is it safe driving with the radio on"

As DezB says, it's a distractionary, not-relevant, picking on minutiae, and avoiding the real issues which is where the focus should be.

yes, having previously disliked bike paths, like any recent convert I'm now an evangelist

But thats my point, you generally can be almost as quick and efficient using smaller roads because you are going the same speed on a bike, you don't need a trunk road to do 20mph on a bike.

"Tomorrow: is it safe to ride with headphones?" Oh dear oh dear

If every driver had to retake there driving test (never going to happen) mind maybe many of the inconsideate drivers would be off the road. The drivers that squeeze past are for the most part not being malicious but they are not thinking. You see it when they pass parked cars with on coming traffic and get a bit stuck. It happened to today in the village I live in. Lack of thought about what ahead and what might be ahead is the problem. cylists to be honest can be guilty of that too but bikes rarely kill other, cars do though.

A proper driver awareness campaign is needed to change attitudes and get drivers to think, that all it has to achieve.

Cars don't have high vis jackets on them so cyclist should not need them too. Good lighting when it dim or dark should be all thats needed. If a driver fails to observe what is around them then they should simply be removed from the road. As I said before cyclist rarely kill other but a car is deadly weapon which is why a licence is granted to drive it. Licences are not removed easily enough as it seen that a car is essential today. It most certainly is not essenital people just think it is.

I certainly won't let my 5 year old daughter ride on the road, especially on the way to school. Too many mental drivers around, especially during the morning rush. RTA's on the road outside the school are almost a daily occurrence.

I rarely ride on the road myself anymore, just too much traffic and general ignorance toward all other road users for my liking. It certainly wasn't like that 25 years ago when I was cycling to Uni/work daily. There was much less traffic and much less road rage (probably related).

^^ i reckon BANNING the use of cars to take kids to schools or within a mile of their school should happen.
Most people live near to their schools and choose to drive (my neighbour lives 150 yards from the entrance and regularly drives her daughters to school :roll:) and a mile walk is not a big deal if they don't.

^^ i reckon BANNING the use of cars to take kids to schools or within a mile of their school should happen.
Most people live near to their schools and choose to drive (my neighbour lives 150 yards from the entrance and regularly drives her daughters to school :roll:) and a mile walk is not a big deal if they don't.

Not always bad. There certainly are parents who drive kids to school and then head back home in time for daytime TV, but in the main it's parents dropping their kids then needing the car to get to work in time often miles away, the extra 20mins walking home again to pick up the car can be an issue.