Reducing casualties on the road

So cougar its pointless having speed limnits? Presumed liability works well in Europe. At the moment the cyclist is penalised for car drivers mistakes. lets rebalance it a bit

Have you ever cycled in Europe?

stumpy01 – Member

Your original post was not about reducing cycling deaths though, specifically. It was about reducing casualties on the road……….

Indeed – it wandered a bit although the assumed liability and empty streets / shared spaces concept helps pedestrains as well. Empty streets /shared spaces concept reduces car accidents

The majority of motorists in my opinion think that motorised vehicles have priority on the road. They don’t see that a cyclist on the road is a legitimate road user, but a hindrance to their journey. If this never changes, then things won’t improve in my opinion.

this is why we need the assumed liability. You don’t get this attitude in places with it nearly as much

All accidents should be investigated objectively & thoroughly, regardless of whether cyclists are involved.
If a cyclist is involved, it should be investigated just as thoroughly as any other accident & if the motorist is found to be at fault, then appropriate punishment etc. should be given.

Who is going to do this? At the moment its usually a fight between a insurance companies lawyers and a lone cyclist to apportion blame – teh use of assumed liability rebalances this. Minor injury accidents simply do not get investigated thoroughly

Having read the woonerf link I can see how sensible this is. Here pedestrians and cyclists have legal priority over motorists. In the UK motorists think they have priority over peds/cyclists.

Scares the life out of me being a pedestrian in Holland when we were there in the summer. Bikes going in both directions on the cycle lanes on both sides of the roads. THEN the chuffin’ mopeds and scooters that go on them too.

Anyway, my point to reduce casualties on the roads is to take all incidents as seriously as the airlines do: Road Accidents Investigation Bureau like the AAIB. A report with serious clout with a fine if someone is negligent and recommendations that have to be adhered to, including updates for all drivers.
Not sustainable economically, but maybe the fine levied on the overturned lorry on the M25 and the disruption it causes ought to be related to the loss of GDP the congestion causes. That’ll larn em.

Well lots of us ride cheeky trails in places where it might not be safe,

You’re going to have to quantify this. What do you mean by “cheeky trails” and “not safe”? If you’re riding on a footpath where cycling is prohibited and get hurt, I’ve little sympathy.

and “nutcases” with guns are actually legal and proficient shooters shooting in woods where they have ownership or rights. It is still the shooters responsibility to ensure he does not shoot anyone.

Situation 1. You ride along a public bridleway and get shot by a farmer. Who’s at fault?

Situation 2. You climb over a gate with a sign saying “warning, shooting in progress, do not enter” and get shot by a farmer. Who’s at fault?

I’m not disagreeing that drivers need to take more care, and that in most cases it is the driver’s fault. I’m arguing against the idea that it is always the driver’s fault unless you can prove otherwise.

You say the pavement is not where you would expect to get run over, but the road is a shared space, peds and cyclists are allowed to cross, so it should be the operator of the lethal machinery who has responsibility to not hit peds or cyclists.

It’s a shared space with rules to allow different users to coexist. These rules are oft flaunted by (some) cyclists. If I’m driving through a junction controlled by traffic lights and a cyclist runs a red light at speed straight into the side of me, is it still my fault unless I can prove he ran a red light? No witnesses and he’s saying “no I didn’t, they were amber.”

I would like to see a change in sentencing that allowed for the loss of driving licences for longer periods up to a life ban in cases of clear dangerous/neglectful driving.

If I’m driving through a junction controlled by traffic lights and a cyclist runs a red light at speed straight into the side of me, is it still my fault unless I can prove he ran a red light?

Clearly his fault not yours as he rode “straight into the side of me”

Could you take the presumed liability further then?

A small car is very vulnerable if it has an accident with 50 tonne truck – only going to be one winner

This happened[/url] down the road from me on Monday, close to the same spot where my next door neighbours daughter was killed in similar circumstances some years ago

uplink – indeed you can – thats how it works by my understanding

uplink teej, yeah I think its a good idea.

So cougar its pointless having speed limnits?

I didn’t say that. It’s not pointless to have speed limits, but it’s simply naive to think that changing a sign from (30) to (20) is going to magically reduce the number of accidents. It’s far more complicated than that.

Presumed liability works well in Europe.

You keep banging this drum. “Europe” is a collection of countries with very different road systems to our own. What works for one doesn’t necessarily work for another, and in any case, even if it does work are we happy to prosecute a number of innocent people for the greater good? Hey, why don’t we do that for all crimes? “Ok sir, we don’t know if you did it or not, so we’re going to assume you did.” That’d have a massive effect on crime. And it’d probably work in Europe too.

I don’t understand why you can think that any assumption of guilt is a good idea. If there’s a fight in town and it’s not clear who started it, do we just blame the biggest bloke?

At the moment the cyclist is penalised for car drivers mistakes. lets rebalance it a bit

No arguments here.

Have you ever cycled in Europe?

No. Have you ever driven in England?

CBAsed

OK, I’ll add that I have cycled in Europe and am a Frenchy and have still never heard of presumed liability there though it may exist but I am sceptical that in itself it drives behaviour.

Regardless, the reason that the attitude to cyclists there is typically better than here is because cycling isn’t seen as something wierd to do. That said, given traffic, etc, I’ve seem plenty of behaviour as bad as anything here – things break down once it’s affecting people’s journey to work and so on. TJ, I don’t really recognise the utopia you paint. Better, particularly in the countryside but not always and noticeably less so in more built up/busier areas which I’m guessing is where a lot (the majority?) of the serious cycling accidents happen in the UK.

the attitude to cyclists there is typically better than here is because cycling isn’t seen as something wierd to do.

You know, I’ve wondered this. I think part of the problem is simply that drivers aren’t used to seeing cyclists on the roads. This does seem to be changing, as there appears to be an exponential increase in the number of people getting out and pedalling in the last two years.

don simon – Member
CBAsed

Doesn’t this mean beaten and looking for a way out? 😆

I think there are people on here that clearly believe that toys, hence the never ending threads some like to indulge in… 😉

It means that I can’t be arsed, read into it what you want.

I believe that tests shouldnt be made much harder but yes they need a shake up. The first thing i would do is introduce some sort of shock factor. For example in a safish environment do something to REALLY disturb the driver like chucking a dead child doll in front of the car and see how they react. Ive seen so many drivers drive into a dangerous situation and just lock up or do nothing. The only time i was nearly hit by a car seriously was a girl driving and she literally just accelerated instead of braking whilst screaming !

ban all non ncap 5 vehicles.

come on DS I’m only joshing. We have all said what we need to say, what more can be done. Nice interesting discussion though.

Toys, some of it is interesting, some of it isn’t. I’ve got a 13.30 appointment to go to.
Hasta luego!

reducing casualties on the road?

it’s cars innit – make them move less quickly when they’re around people (not on major trunk roads / motorways)

[holistic hippy crap] be the change you want to see – start by driving slowly yourself…[holistic hippy crap]

ban all non ncap 5 vehicles.

Quite the opposite; take away all the driver airbags and replace it with a 6″ spike in the centre of the steering wheel. Then we might see some defensive driving.

(-: