Forum menu
How about redesigning car windscreens so you can see out of them more easily?
[img] 
[/img]
God forbid that anyone one a "cycling forum" would accept that their "right" to be on the road could have responsibilities to their actions.
I think you're missing the point entirely. Not everyone who cycles has a license to drive. Hence creating a two-tier unequal penalty system. Stupid idea.
Now who's being an arse? This is about being on the road and committing an offence
Yes, but what you are suggesting is punishing someone for cycling offences by penalising their license for driving a car.
I'm not "being an arse" - that makes no sense.
Apart from the obvious legal issues, and the obvious difficulty of enforcing it (i.e. identifying cyclists/bikes), what about folk without driving licenses? Will they just not be allowed to cycle on the roads then?
"A festive custom we could do worse than foster would be stringing piano wire across country lanes to decapitate cyclists",
Matthew Parris, The Times, 27 December 2007
Still find it hard to trust this paper
Point's on the licence isn't a bad idea, it works for motorcycles and trucks, you only get 1 licence for all other vehicles, why should bikes be different?
The problem is, how do you enforce a ban on cycling? The threat of a ban from driving would work in most places, but I imagine a lot of Londoners don't drive at all and therefore could continue to accumulate fines indefinately.
It would also require everyone in the country to be issued with a driving licence.
Point's on the licence isn't a bad idea, it works for motorcycles and trucks, you only get 1 licence for all other vehicles, why should bikes be different?
Because, as you say, it means everyone would HAVE to have a driving license pretty much from birth, then due to the legal ramifications of being licensed etc you'd have to be insured, so another set of insurance would be required and add more cost to cycling, putting more people off it.
There's laws to stop people doing stupid things. We don't need more. They need to be enforced, that's all.
The problem is, how do you enforce a ban on cycling?
Also, how do you uniquely identify a bike? Car-style reg plates, front and back, big enough to be read by ANPR cameras? Mmmm.. nice.
Oh and not to mention setting up a new agency, at least twice the size of the DVLA, to handle registration of all the bikes in the UK (+ transfer of registration when you sell it obviously. Hmm.. What happens if you just sell the frame?)
would also require everyone in the country to be issued with a driving licence.
Including children.
Some classic stuff on here.
Of course it is safer at times to jump red lights - thats because of bad road design and illegal parking.
Chamley - wtf? Of colurse bimblers have a right of use the road as well FFS
Those of you that want to prosecute cyclists for everything lets see some proper management of cars as well- I almost never see a car driving in accordance with the highway code. You know giving enough room and so on let alone parking where ever they want or breaking speed limits.
Zero tolerence works all ways - every car on the roads would be stopped and prosecuted every journey near enough
Classic STW - even a campaign to make cycling better is no good for the STW petrol head tendency
GrahamS - Member
Now who's being an arse? This is about being on the road and committing an offence
Yes, but what you are suggesting is punishing someone for cycling offences by penalising their license for driving a car.
[b]EXACTLY![/b] So you're saying you have exemption from the Road Traffic Act 1958 because you are a cyclist? What makes it ok to commit an offence ON THE ROAD yet have zero repercussions? Because your are a cyclist it's now ok is it? Drive to work and do the same as on your bike and see how long you keep you freedom let alone your license![b]
I'm not "being an arse" - that makes no sense.
[/b]Makes perfect sense - on the road - liable for any offense REGARDLESS OF MANNER OF TRANSPORT.[b]
Apart from the obvious legal issues, and the obvious difficulty of enforcing it (i.e. identifying cyclists/bikes), what about folk without driving licenses? Will they just not be allowed to cycle on the roads then?
Why not? If you choose to cycle on the road then why should you not expect to be punished for breaking those rules in place. There are enough cameras to easily identify persistent offenders, police/CSO's to enforce and fine and if you keep doing it then why shouldn't that "right" be taken from you?
Has nothing IMHO to do with "petrol head" but simply enforcing the rules. There isn't one rule for motorists and another for cyclists in the Road Traffic Act...........
Of course it is safer at times to jump red lights - thats because of bad road design and illegal parking.
No it's not, the safest option is to get the drivers to drive to the law and sensibly. But I agree that generally car users are just as in need of paying attention to their techniques.
Classic STW - even a campaign to make cycling better is no good for the STW petrol head tendency
To be fair I'm both a petrol head and a cyclist who loves road riding and MTBing and from my point of view, I like to think I've got balanced views on this!
No-one should be flouting the law, cyclists shouldn't need their own lanes and special dispensation/road equipment if everyone used the roads correctly, which is perfectly possible (no matter how unlikely).
there are unquestionably places where it is safer to RLJ. then I will do it.
You keep saying that TJ and you are quite correct, but it dodges the real issue which is people ignoring red lights completely as a matter of course.
proven to be wrong - you use less fuel at 20 mph
Unsure about this. My car certainly does not. It does drive fine and I've no problem with 20mph limits but I am sure my car is not more economical at that speed due to having to be in a lower gear.
But anyway - yes to training, yes to better education and communication and yes to better cycle facilities. BUT cycle facilities need to be good. Something they could really do would be to add cycle filters at suitable junctions, which would potentially allow turning left on a red, say.
So how can you stop incidents like [url= http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1484357_cyclists-horror-as-road-rage-thug-mows-him-down-at-lights-in-fallowfield ]this[/url] happening?
More severe penalties for people who kill by driving dangerously would be a start.
All of these pleaded guilty and got 200 hours community service...
http://road.cc/content/news/25919-driver-worked-and-drove-all-night-fatal-collision-cyclist
http://road.cc/content/news/38525-driving-ban-and-work-order-hit-and-run-killer-lancs-cyclist
Molgrips its been tested. You are accelerating less so you use less energy. RAC tested it and even with loading the test as much as they could they could only get the cars to use less petrol kept to 20 mph in very unusual circumstances
hamm yuk - I do like your frothing. It's amusing. Do keep it up..!
More severe penalties for people who kill by driving dangerously would be a start.
Doubt it. For most people having to live with having killed an innocent person is far worse punishment than anything else.
Molgrips its been tested. You are accelerating less so you use less energy
Then I doubt their test set-up. Depends on many other factors. But I digress, this is not important here.
Chamley - wtf? Of colurse bimblers have a right of use the road as well FFS
Yeah fair enough i knew that wouldn't go down well, thats why i asked for thoughts. Everyone's got their own speed etc once they're moving, some faster than others but I feel setting off as slowly as possible is just stupid. If you're sat in an ASL and a trucks parked up behind you, there's a pretty good chance they can't see you from the cab. Given we're years away from any decent development of cycling infrastructure, it wouldnt take much to give people a bit of guidance about getting in a more visible position. Common sense I would have thought...
Sometimes I think the people who run the country have no idea what they're talking about.
Only sometimes?
You can include a large chunk of STW posters too.
Hmmm... I can't tell if you're just trolling or not hammy, so just in case...
So you're saying you have exemption from the Road Traffic Act 1958 because you are a cyclist?
Nope. In fact the [url= http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/contents/enacted ]Road Traffic Act 1988[/url] contains specific rules for cyclists (sections 24, 28-32 and 81). And that's fine.
What makes it ok to commit an offence ON THE ROAD yet have zero repercussions?
Nothing. The existing rules can and are enforced. [url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/16/police-cyclists-red-lights ]Cyclists [u]are[/u] prosecuted for jumping red lights[/url] for instance.
So to be clear, I'm [u]not[/u] arguing cyclists should be exempt from any applicable road traffic laws.
I'm saying that punishing cycle offences with points on a driving license is completely unworkable.
[list][*]what about cyclists (like CaptJon) that don't have driving licenses, either because they are too young to drive or they just never have? Are you suggesting they'd be exempt from punishment or would they just not be allowed on the road any more?[/*]
[*]how would you identify bicycles/cyclists on sight to issue penalties from cameras or to catch the "disqualified cyclists" who are riding without a driving license? To work with current systems you'd need car-style reg plates on bikes. Where would we mount them? And who'd pay for the enormous new DVLA-style agency required to register all the bikes in the UK?[/*]
[*]legally speaking cyclists do not need a "license". They have the historic right to use the public road. Driver's must seek a special license from the crown (derived from the licence to [i]"drive"[/i] cattle). You'll need to rewrite a [u]lot[/u] of laws to bring cyclists under license. And presumably pedestrians and horse riders will also then need to be licensed?[/*]
[*]In road regulations [url= http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069869 ]"references to ‘road’ therefore generally include footpaths, bridleways and cycle tracks"[/url]. So in your "fair" vision you could get your driving license taken off you for offences that were not even committed on a road. Upset a rambler, lose your driving license. Great.[/*]
[*]the penalties for motor vehicles are harsher for a good reason. In an average year there will be around 2000 people killed on the roads. Collisions with cyclists kills less than one person a year.[/*][/list]
Also none of this is actually a solution any way. Cars already have reg plates and get points on their license, yet the majority of drivers regularly break road traffic laws. And even when they are repeatedly caught, [url= http://road.cc/content/news/44102-courts-let-nearly-half-motorists-who-accrue-12-or-more-penalty-points-continue ]almost half of drivers with 12 points or more get to keep their license anyway[/url].
molgrips - MemberMolgrips its been tested. You are accelerating less so you use less energy
Then I doubt their test set-up. Depends on many other factors. But I digress, this is not important here.
it was a motoring organisation trying to show 20 mph limits would use more petrol - and failed
Just think about it - accelerating to 20 mph or acceleration to 30 mph which takes more energy? Driving at 20 mph or 30 mph - which has more friction?
Ok - so you might claim the engine is in a less efficient rev range - well use the gears to put it back in that efficient rev range
The reasons cyclists die under the wheels of HGV's is that they have put themselves in a dangerous position - and if you think otherwise go sit in the cab of one and see if you can spot the idiots trying to 'squeeze' though...
And its not just cyclists, m/c's and scooter riders do it also.
And 20mph, why not 10mph - or employ the man with a red-flag?
But if anyone has a problem with 20mph, just get an auto - they're fine for low-speeds.
Graham - no trolling at all! It's a genuine hate of mine - I have pretty much every category possible and spend a lot of money every year in fees, insurance, tax, etc YET the vast majority of both commuting and pleasure cyclists treat the road as their own private track. Sod red lights, give ways, solid white lines, paths and the rest.
Why shouldn't they be penalised in the same way as other road users? Just because historically the right is given to use the road shouldn't give carte blanche to ignore the law governing it.
There should be no exemption at all - there isn't for vehicles so why should there be for cycles? The odd story in the press doesn't count - sit with a coffee near any junction in any major city/town and watch how many break the law. Do it again the following day and see how many are the same people time and again yet they as often as not are drivers who wouldn't do it in the car but think its fine to jump the pavement/red light/etc on their pushbike.
As a driver - if I go through a red light or cross a solid white line then I fully expect to get penalised if caught.
So why should it be any different for a cyclist? Why should I expect to get treated differently because of the mode of transport - if I'm on the road then I should be governed the same.
All road users should be - ESPECIALLY if that cyclist has a driving license. If they don't then they should expect a fine and a requirement for mandatory training. Do it again and the punishment increases in the same way it does for a license holder. Works in other countries - commit any offence on the road and that offence is recorded and if you happen to have a licence then it's recorded on there - a cycle is treated the same as a car.
Why would there need to be a new agency - the rider is responsible so they carry the blame for their actions.
Treat those without a license the same as they are now ( illegal drivers, etc), any offenses go on record and any points go on your "license" held by dvla. Should they then choose to take their test, etc those points gained for the offenses committed become live and they suffer the consequences in the same way those who already have a license do( increased insurance, etc).
Persistant offenders get a court order keeping them off the road in the same way a curfew/tag works now.
Sounds harsh but it's how drivers are treated for offenses on the road and any cyclist doing so should be treated the bloody same.
Errmmm- two major issues with that
1) its not the vast majority of bike riders 16% in a recent survey and IME less than that
2) all road users are liable in the same way if caught Motorised or not.
How many car drivers do you see leaving adequate room? Obeying speed limits? using mobile phones? Using indicators and mirrors properly?
IME car drivers are far less likely to obey the highway code. Zero tolereance? all for it. No cars left on the roads on a few weeks. A car driven within the highway code is a very rare thing in deed
How many folk killed by cyclists? How many killed by cars.
Get some perspective on this
Was in that there London the other week on a quiet Sunday travelling from London City Airport to Canning Town.Even the bus I was on went through two red lights 😯
one of the biggest things they could do is introduce penalties for cyclists in line with those of other road users.
They already exist.
there are unquestionably places where it is safer to RLJ. then I will do it.
I'm struggling to think of one. It is late, but I can't seem to think of any time I'd rather RLJ, especially when you consider the latent hatred and anger it causes towards all of us which plays out in real-world incidents of cars purposefully causing danger to cyclists.
I would rather they be annoyed at me for RLJ that for getting int ehrir way or worse letting them squash me.
I'll find the google earth of one
You are coming off a cyle path thru a park. You get a green light at the same time as the cars from your right. Notice the parked cars ahead inthe cycle lane adn all the cars from your right want to go to the left lane. After the next junction I want to turn right.;
If I wait for the green as I reach the road the cars from my right are all swinging across in front of me despite my right of way and the cycle lane is almost always blocked with illegally parked cars - so I have to go along the road with cars coming from my right and squishing me into the kerb. at the next junction I have to get to the rightside of traffic and make a right turn. I have been run into a parked car hereby a car that came frommy right and simply changed lanes into me.
If I go on the red but when I can see the traffic from my left is clear I get a free run down to the next unction with no cars trying to squish me, I am at the front at the next junction so can make my right turn easily.
If there is no parked cars I will usually wait but its very rare there are not illegally parked cars one side or the other
edit
In this pic http://g.co/maps/5f5w9 yo can see the issue more clearly - I would be merging from the left there - there should be two lanes worth of room but look at where the cars are.
people get shouted at for RLJing there even if you wait for the green as cars from the right do not believe you got a green and the right of way
But as I said in my post, if the cars followed the rules and common sense on the road you shouldn't need to act illegally. Which has been my point all along - if all road users showed respect for the rules and each other we wouldn't have 99.9% these problems. And I don't think selecting which laws to obey and which not to is a viable option - you can't whine about illegally parked cars if you illegally run reds.
Purely pragmatic - its safer for me in that situation to go on the red. cars do not follow the rules of the road - I am all for zero tolerance - the roads would be car free in a couple of weeks. Just look at those pic and see - every car is in breach of the highway code - every single one.
edit - you said yo couldn't think of an instance when its safer to run a red - well there is one. I can see a hundred yards to my left where any cars would be coming from.
I do have some sympathy with the way Hammy feels, but not with his proposed methods of addressing the issues.
I spent a few days in Glasgow last year. One morning I sat at the hotel's bacony and enjoyed a coffee and a tab. I was surprised (my blood didn't boil and neither did my urine approach boiling point, my gast wasn't flabbered and I had no desire to change the laws of the land) by the huge shoals of cyclists running the red light of the pedestrian crossing below the balcony.
As a cyclist, it was embarassing. Cyclists were weaving between pedestrians through a red light - not one of them stopped. The next day was the same, and the next.
OK, so it seemed to be the accepted way of getting around - it's been normalised, drivers, cyclists and peds all expect it. Doesn't make it right.
he vast majority of both commuting and pleasure cyclists treat the road as their own private track. Sod red lights, give ways, solid white lines, paths and the rest.
May be different where you live, but round here it is a pretty small minority of muppets that ignore it to that extent. The majority of commuting and pleasure cyclists I see on the roads are pretty law abiding.
There should be no exemption at all - there isn't for vehicles so why should there be for cycles?
There isn't? What is it you think cyclists are exempt from exactly?
The laws applicable to all road users equally apply to cyclists.
sit with a coffee near any junction in any major city/town and watch how many break the law.
Yep. And I'm afraid you are likely to see far more drivers breaking the law than cyclists.
Why complain cyclists are "exempt" when those drivers are untouched and causing considerably more danger with their actions?
Jumping red lights in particular is definitely not a cyclist only problem:
(I particularly like the first one where the car honks the cyclist for not jumping the red light).
Why would there need to be a new agency
If you want to register/license bikes, then to cope with issuing registration plates, cycling licenses, ownership documents, etc for every single bike and cyclist in the UK then you'd need something at least the size of the DVLA (probably bigger, I seem to remember reading that bikes outsell cars two-to-one?). How would that be paid for? Cost is the main reason other countries have rejected bike registration.
Why should I expect to get treated differently because of the mode of transport
Because ultimately, cycling through a pedestrian precinct is considerably less of a crime than driving your HGV through a pedestrian precinct.
Cars and other motor vehicles kill or injure over 200,000 people a year in the UK. Bikes don't.
Why should the law not target those who do the most harm with the biggest penalties?
hammyuk - Member
Graham - no trolling at all! It's a genuine hate of mine - I have pretty much every category possible and spend a lot of money every year in fees, insurance, tax, etc YET the vast majority of both commuting and pleasure cyclists treat the road as their own private track. Sod red lights, give ways, solid white lines, paths and the rest.
This bears no relation to my experience of the roads.
TJ I do accept that junction is not perfect, I just go into the cycle lane and take it from there, then I'm just as I would be had I come from Lauriston Place.
Have you written to th. Council about it? I've not experienced your problems with drivers wanting to kill me from the RHS but it does seem poorly signed for them .
Bike gps generally log their data. In car gps/satnav never log the data - is this because an incar satnav would record criminal activity in pretty much any car it would be installed in and no owner would then ever buy one.
I wonder how useful it would be to police accident investigators if an in-car satnav logged the last say 500miles of data.
gwaelod: I think some car insurers now offer discounts to drivers willing to have a "black box" fitted to their car.
I can certainly imagine a future where insurers insist that all cars are fitted with a black box to record speed, G-force, control positions and ideally video from front and rear cameras.
I just don't get it. There's a campaign to make cycling safer and all people on here do is whinge and whine about [i]other[/i] cyclists breaking the rules.
My ride to work would be safer if I was given more room to ride my bike, wasn't cut up on roundabouts, pulled out on at junctions and basically ignored by most cars as soon as the driver's door has gone past me.
Are you lot actually cyclists or gatecrashers from pistonheads?
I only saw one cyclist whilst (driving) on the roads this morning. He was pretty exemplary - stopped at the red lights and navigated a large fast roundabout well with clear hand signals and good shoulder checks.
So if we're allowing anecdotal evidence then my sample clearly shows that no cyclists break traffic laws 😆
I did see plenty of motorists* flouting laws though: speeding, undertaking, ignoring lane markings, driving on the wrong side of the road, not stopping at the ASL line, not stopping at a stop sign, parking illegally. Tsk tsk.
(* including me!)
Dezb - its the same any time anything like this crops up on here. Even on a cycling forum nothing must be allowed that might possibly impinge on the great god car
TJ: To be fair, the idea that cyclists should abide by the rules of the road and be held accountable for breaking those rules is perfectly reasonable (and does already happen).
However I think motorists complaints of law-breaking cyclists are extremely hypocritical and quite often just plain wrong: there are plenty of videos on YouTube of drivers lecturing cyclists about their "law breaking" when they've actually done nothing wrong (i.e. filtering, taking the lane, riding two abreast, using an ASL).
Personally I've been honked at for using a Toucan crossing and shouted at numerous times for riding on the shared-use pavement, despite signs and painted markings. Just last week I had a sweet little old lady tell me to "**** off" when I courteously stopped to let her pass safely. 😯 (she was going the other way BTW. I'm not [i]that[/i] slow).
There was a load of criticism of "[url= http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.com ]The Cycling Lawyer[/url]"'s riding on here a while back. Worth reading his own '[url= http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.com/2012/02/my-personal-journey-with-bicycle.html ]my conversion to cycling[/url]' piece.
He also posts a link to [url= http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/zuvvi/media/bc_files/cycle_training/Effective_Traffic_Riding.pdf ]British Cycling's Guide to effective traffic riding[/url] which a few people on here would do well to read.
Ooh apparently the AA have just announced that they are launching black box based car insurance too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16969509
Not sure I agree with that BCF guide, certainly re. Roundabouts.