The question is a legitimate one, how do you identify cyclists when they’ve committed an offence ?

It’s like he followed that “terrible journalists guide for writing a cycling article”

The terrible journalist’s guide to writing an article about bicycles

jambalaya – Member
The question is a legitimate one, how do you identify cyclists when they’ve committed an offence ?

The same way you’d identify someone on foot who committed an offence.

The question is a legitimate one, how do you identify cyclists when they’ve committed an offence ?

How do you identify a shop lifter running out a shop with an armful of primark’s finest?

It’s nothing to do with identifying cyclists, it’s about frustrated or angry people trying to punish cyclists. The people who enjoy this sort of thing broadly fall into two categories:

– People who are angry drivers. This may be because they have a frustrating commute, or find the costs prohibitive. They hate seeing cyclists “enjoying” they roads without their perceived frustrations & costs.
– People who are just angry. They hate everything.

The brilliant irony of the dailymail article is that in the same paper you will see articles and comments reeling against “red tape” and “bureaucracy gone mad” etc.

The brilliant irony of the dailymail article is that in the same paper you will see articles and comments reeling against “red tape” and “bureaucracy gone mad” etc.

http://www.academia.edu/1207098/Dead_and_alive_Beliefs_in_contradictory_conspiracy_theories

The question is a legitimate one, how do you identify cyclists when they’ve committed an offence ?

Fear not. The Mail are already on the case and have thoughtfully provided, on their website, a mock of of how their proposed registration system would work…..

thankfully there is no peak on her helmet
She knows the rules

aracer – good read that. Yes it does explain why the Dailymail can simultaneously have articles about paedo scum, half naked photos of teenagers, articles about benefit scroungers, articles about hard working people who have unrealistic expectations, articles about mysticism / magic / ghosts, articles about gypsies who act a bit funny and believe in strange stuff, HSE gone mad, HSE not gone mad enough “Terror as mum loses fingernail in horror accident”, Articles about killer sharks / spiders / goats, Articles about children becoming too risk adverse, Stories about the glorious past (fiendly old men who looked after the local kids etc), stories about terrible things that happened in the past (Jimmy saville et al).

And so on.

@binners, first things first is to report her for riding on the pavement.

The same way you’d identify someone on foot who committed an offence.

@captjohn – I venture to suggest pedestrians don’t break as many rules of the road, they tend not to try and wipe out people on crossings either.

It is fairly obvious, and massively misleading and totally missing the counter point, to say that pedestrians [ who are not on the road ] break fewer road rules
Why did you do that?you know the point they made – counter it or accept it but do not do that.

Ok jam who commits the most crimes?

1. People on foot?

2. People on bikes?

that pic of the lady on the bike…how did it get through ots MOT with 2 flat tyres.

having said that it’s an old bike so it wouldn’t be liable for VED anyway…same as with vintage cars

Imagine having to think twice about leaving a car park to head up a road for a mile , before heading out into the hills , off-road, and thinking;
” I wonder if I can get away with not taking me plates with me while I’m on tarmac for 5 minutes, just so I don’t have to stash them in my Camel bak.”
Before we know where we are, babies will be being micro chipped at birth.

jambhalaya – Member

@binners, first things first is to report her for riding on the pavement.

The same way you’d identify someone on foot who committed an offence.

@captjohn – I venture to suggest pedestrians don’t break as many rules of the road, they tend not to try and wipe out people on crossings either.

Are you sure about that? I see more pedestrians ignoring the highway code than i do cyclists (and not just because there are more of them).

having said that it’s an old bike so it wouldn’t be liable for VED anyway…same as with vintage cars

Though according to the DVLA, the VED for that reg is £225 a year

Vehicle enquiry
Registration number: HF52 JXR
? Taxed
Expires: 01 April 2015
? MOT
Expires: 20 February 2015
New keepers must get tax before using the vehicle.

Vehicle tax
Vehicle tax rate for vehicle
6 Month rate £123.75
12 Month rate £225.00
6 monthly by direct debit totalling £118.13
12 monthly by direct debit totalling £225.00
Monthly by direct debit totalling £236.25 (Monthly payment of approximately £19.69)
Vehicle details
Vehicle make CITROEN Date of first registration 27 September 2002 Year of manufacture 2002 Cylinder capacity (cc) 1868cc CO?Emissions 181 g/km Fuel type DIESEL Export marker No Vehicle status Tax not due Vehicle colour BLUE Vehicle type approval M1

It is alos the rear number plate and it is celarly on the front

wonder how many journalists were cut up or nearly got hit/bumped/mowed down by drivers on the way to work yesterday and yet completely failed to write a diatribe load of shite about it.

jambalaya – Member
The question is a legitimate one, how do you identify cyclists when they’ve committed an offence ?

their face? So do you seriously think registration for cyclists is a good idea?

A number plate would only be of use to a passing cop. You can’t after all as a member of the public take down a driver’s number plate when they cut you up, jump a red light, and without any other evidence report them to the police. Well you can try, but they’ll say “so what?”.

So if it’s mainly cops who would use the information, they can simply just stop the person and ask for ID on the spot anyway and/or give them an on the spot fine if they’re doing something illegal. As for incidents where the cyclist actually causes a road traffic accident, well despite what the general public seem to think, they generally don’t anyway. Bringing in number plates to cover the few incidents of actual concern is hugely costly. Plus the plates would be at the cyclist’s cost and cause most to give up riding, leading to a fatter nation and higher cost to the NHS, and higher taxes for the whinging Daily Mail readers 😉

@DOnk not saying I have the solution, eg registration numbers, but I think the question is legitimate.

Yes I am certain more pedestrians break the high way code crossing the road but as I said I have never had a close shave being mown down by a high speed pedestrian running down the road whilst I was on a crossing.

I suspect there’s now a semi official anti-cycling campaign going on in the media.

registration, plastic hats, high viz, insurance….anything to divert the debate away from building segregated infrastructure.

The question to which you’ve been given a simple, effective, cheap solution which is already in place?

Yes I am certain more pedestrians break the high way code crossing the road

.

How?

I have never had a close shave being mown down by a high speed pedestrian running down the road whilst I was on a crossing.

So we have discovered two things

1. pedestrians are slower than cyclists
2. pedestrians dont use the road and cyclists do.

Every day is a school day here eh

You do know you have to state facts that support your view rather than just state facts?

Leavened bread has yeast in it

I have never had a close shave being mown down by a high speed pedestrian running down the road whilst I was on a crossing.

Nor me, depending on the definition of “high speed”, of course.

I’ve been very close to (and very likely being injured as a result of) a collision with a pedestrian who’s crossed a road inappropriately in front of my bike. So many times I can’t begin to say how many.

I suspect there’s now a semi official anti-cycling campaign going on in the media.

registration, plastic hats, high viz, insurance….anything to divert the debate away from building segregated infrastructure.

This ^^ x a lot.
Either diverting attention away from segregated infrastructure or actually using it as an excuse not to build it.
“oh but they disobey the rules of the road so we’re not going to build them anything until they behave…”

A persistent undercurrent of misinformation, anecdotes presented as fact/data and actual hatred. 🙁

Actually fair point I have had pedestrians wander out on me and only ever once been hit by a bike as a pedestrian
Chav on the footpath FWIW

jambalaya – Member

@captjohn – I venture to suggest pedestrians don’t break as many rules of the road, they tend not to try and wipe out people on crossings either.

I venture to suggest that the other day in Stamford 3 couples (six individual human beings) did forthwith step into the road as I did attempt to cycle past them on the highway, causing me thusly to slam on my retardation levers and come to an urgent halt, on said highway (admittedly, they weren’t at a crossing). I did already anticipate some untimely movement of said pedestrians due to the oldness of their age and the dodderiness of their nature, henceforth I did not plough them down but was able to come to full retardation in a timely manner.
Said pedestrians of the oldness and dodderiness type already alluded to by myself priorly, did then glance at me with beady eyes before carrying on their path across the said highway with neither a word or gesture of an apology forthcoming.
Even my uttering what I did done make along the lines of “Don’t effing mind me, will ya mate?” towards the most doddering of the dodderers, elicited little more than a snide glance and a continuation of said doddering.

Had these manic criminal miscreants been wearing number plates, I could have reported them for the criminal activity of ‘not looking where they are bloody going’.

Used to happen a lot on Southall high street too, which I commuted through daily.

I suspect there’s now a semi official anti-cycling campaign going on in the media.

registration, plastic hats, high viz, insurance….anything to divert the debate away from building segregated infrastructure.

No need to suspect, there has been a long term, sustained campaign from certain bits of the media aimed at just this, but I don’t think the goal is to divert the debate from “segregated infrastructure” (if you believe we need such things) it’s simply to try and marginalise, degrade and if possible outlaw cyclists.

Despite this bicycle use is apparently on the increase in the UK, which sort of gives me hope as it suggests the majority of the British public are intelligent enough to ignore the DM and their ilk…
Or else people are increasingly too skint to run their cars…

jambalaya – Member
The question is a legitimate one, how do you identify cyclists when they’ve committed an offence ?

Sort of presupposes cyclists commit a sufficiently large number of offences to warrant additional means of identification, but why not have the debate?

TBH, if those chasing DM reader votes really want to waste their time “Debating”
Bike/Rider “Plates”, “Tax” and “Registration” I say bring it on! A proper informed debate that is. If they can put pen to paper and actually propose some alternative to the current arrangements (or lack thereof) and let someone “Pro-cycling” argue the blindingly obvious counter points. We all know it’s easy enough to defeat these suggestions on their own terms:

-Additional Cost/Bureaucracy involved in registering all these extra vehicles, just as we’re seeing physical “Tax discs” for cars abolished to minimise Cost and Bureaucracy… “NHS in crisis” we’re told but lets spend some money on a database for all the UK’s Bicycles…

-Proportionate VED? So if a Prius gets a Zero VED rate can I expect a rebate for my 456?

-If I am asked to chip into the central government pot through some sort of “Bicycle Tax” I assume I can expect some funding and government backing for targeted cycle infrastructure? not just lines randomly painted on the pavement…

-How about the burden on the Police, CPS and DVLA? All these people who were no real problem yesterday are now transgressors if they haven’t taxed/insured/registered/SORNed their old bikes… Really? the police would be run ragged if they actually went round enforcing all measures DM Dickheads claim they would apply… Or they’d simply not bother like they do with half the rules Car drivers are supposed to obey…

-Detection rates? What actual proportion of currently unsolved criminal cases could have been closed through the application of a bicycle registration database? what is the expected reduction in Road traffic offences and incidents, and does this justify the cost?

-Accident Prevention? Do any of the proposed measures directly address cycling injury or mortality rates? Or are they simply intended as punitive measures for the “Lefty, tree hugger” types you’re more likely to find using bikes?

-Nanny State / Big Brother / personal privacy concerns? 100 years or so of minimally regulated bicycling here in the UK, and now you want to compulsorily Register and Track us? That could easily be classed as one of the worst excesses of state sponsored snooping. Having ANPR cameras/systems logging my bike journeys… Historically bicycle users have not been a major criminal or state security concern, what precisely requires such a major intrusion into my right to privacy?

And on and on it would go…

If the Minister for Pissing away money and wasting national resources can convincingly answer all the points against, I’ll be first in the queue at the post office applying for VED on my bikes, and probably trading in my car to cover it…
Of course we know it won’t happen, the “Cycling debate” isn’t a true debate, nobody wants any real changes, it’s just a left/right media tennis rally DM say we’re scum Guardian say we’re saving the Whale, Boris paints a gutter or two Barclay’s blue and the merry-go-round continues…

/rant

The press love a little counter-cyclical reporting. We’ve had all the TdF / Olympics love so let’s complain about bikes. There are of course large numbers of grumps writing in complaining about bikes.

@MrSalmond – when the red / don’t cross light is on

JY I was just responding to another request for clarification, I thought my point was self evident but obviously not so I gave the obvious examples. As I posted before on my Boris bike ride to the office I would say 99% of motorists stop at read lights vs 90% of the bikes.

-Nanny State / Big Brother / personal privacy concerns? 100 years or so of minimally regulated bicycling here in the UK, and now you want to compulsorily Register and Track us? That could easily be classed as one of the worst excesses of state sponsored snooping. Having ANPR cameras/systems logging my bike journeys… Historically bicycle users have not been a major criminal or state security concern, what precisely requires such a major intrusion into my right to privacy?

Wokingham has gained some RFID sensors on lamposts, you’re suposed to clock in as you pass them to register your journey.

I’m pretty sure they’re planning a cyclepath to the Soylent Green factory.

I posted before on my Boris bike ride to the office I would say 99% of motorists stop at read lights vs 90% of the bikes.

I know this will be a massive shock to you so sit yourself down

What happens in London is not what happens everywhere else.
IME more cars jump or race red lights than cyclists.

Hooray for “Anecdotal statistics” especially those derived from brief observations of the behaviour of Landarn commuters, if those dwelling and/or working at the centre of the universe say it’s all going to shit, it must be true…

Actual witness testimony:

“I almost dropped my Fair-trade mocha and iphone because a cyclist travelled through a red light in front of me once… That would have ruined the leather on my X-type, and meant I had to call the au-pair back from the office, they’re a bloody menace to society! Half of them don’t even have crash hats you know…”

I’m pretty sure they’re planning a cyclepath to the Soylent Green factory.

😆 I liked that…

IME more cars jump or race red lights than cyclists.

I think more car’s run through lights on amber/red, whereas cyclists probbaly stop at the red light, then pre-empt it going amber/green.

Infact I’d go as far as saying the last car to go through the lights ‘before’ they go red, is almost always pushing their luck and 25-50% of the time the last car is probably on red!

let someone “Pro-cycling” argue the blindingly obvious counter points

quite well countered yourself, bookmarked for future use 🙂

I think more car’s run through lights on amber/red, whereas cyclists probbaly stop at the red light, then pre-empt it going amber/green.

agreed tho for some reason amber/red gambling appears to be accepted whereas circumspectly RLJ or “pre-empting” is dangerous, lycra loutish and something should be done about it!!!!

Also don’t forget that a large part of the media’s job is to generate traffic and interest to their publication. Cyclist seem to be very vocal when anything is said against them so they generate lots of website traffic and mentions. Job done.

Anyway, I think there is a strong case to say all road users should have some form of registration/recognition.

Anyway, I think there is a strong case to say all road users should have some form of registration/recognition.

Pedestrians should all wear numberplates then? They are road users too after all.

Infact I’d go as far as saying the last car to go through the lights ‘before’ they go red, is almost always pushing their luck and 25-50% of the time the last car is probably on red!

If they go through on amber when they could have safely stopped (i.e. most of the time) then they are breaking exactly the same law as running a red.

But as you say, that doesn’t count for some reason.

Anyway, I think there is a strong case to say all road users should have some form of registration/recognition.

So you wan’t a system to register all pedestrians, horses, invalid carriages and bikes?

The last government tried to introduce ID cards. Failed due to monumental IT f*** up. Biometric passports? What happened to them?

The last thing this country needs is to spend billions making the country more authoritarian and a bit sh1t, through an unworkable bureaucracy that will achieve nothing and costs billions to set up and run.

Anyway, I think there is a strong case to say all road users should have some form of registration/recognition.

Well let’s hear it then?

Pedestrians too then? They are road users too after all.

Horses? Mobility Scooters? Pony & traps? They’re all road users.

Edit: Beaten to it