So what do you think would improve safety for cyclists?

things could be improved far more if the same ideals were applied to drivers too. Because by far the worst offenders in London are drivers. Blaming cyclists disproportionately for problems is just self-defeating. Drivers have to take responsibility and act more safely and considerately towards cyclists, or we’ll get nowhere.

This. 400 pedestrians were killed in 2009 as a result of drivers running red lights. If cyclists were equally dangerous then I’d advocate similar controls on them, but they’re not.

It just seems that every time this discussion comes up, the immediate response of many is to ‘educate cyclists’. Rarely do people talk of doing the same with drivers. It’s the assumption that cyclists, by their mere presence, cause problems that I find frustrating.

I like the aussie approach to things; direct and to the point, designed to make you really think. I remember a billboard which said ‘Drink and drive? You’re a bloody idiot’. Massive, across a motorway.

i’ll try to post a picture of one I saw recently:

We need stuff like this. Emotive and thought-provoking. Reminding people if how fragile life really is.

yay it worked!

Drivers have to take responsibility and act more safely and considerately towards cyclists

Cyclists have to take responsibility and act more safely and considerately towards drivers too.

Especially those filtering up the inside of large vehicles turning left. Especially those RLJing. And those pulling out of the cycle lane on my way home to overtake other cyclists on a large multi-lane (plus tram lines) crossroads, without looking, exactly at a point where there’s a pinch-point of 2 car lanes and a cycle lane. (edit: it’s actually a shyte junction and section of road immediately after exiting the junction, and the sole reason for haveing a roadangel camera to record ALL traffic twatness, bikes+cars)

It works both ways.

It works both ways.

Sure. But the emphasis must be on the drivers, as they are potentially far, far more lethal. And their actions are far more likely to result in serious injury or death to someone else.

It works both ways.

No it doesn’t. If you can’t tell the difference between an 85kg cyclist hitting a 500 kg car, and a 500 kg car hitting an 85 kg cyclist, then…

I posted this on another thread but it’s just as applicable here. No amount of cyclist training, driver training, helment wearing will ever have any significant effect if the roads are structurally unsafe – and in the majority of cases when cyclists are getting killed or seriously injured that is the cause. It’s no good telling cyclists ‘not to filter on the left’ if that’s where the meagre facilities we have place them, or if they’re unsegregated on roads with high speeds where it’s not possible to merge with fast moving traffic and ‘take the lane’

This blogger puts it far better than I could –

“…leaving aside the fact that the effects of changing driver education (if there are ever any effects at all, and it’s not a very robustly researched field) have long lag times — as long as street lifecycles. And leaving aside the fact that there is no evidence that this sort of intervention would ever actually have any significant effect on the sort of issues we’re concerned about, such as occurrence and severity of motor vehicle/cycle crashes. And leaving aside the fact that it could have, at best, only a small effect on the arguably more important issue of barriers to cycling, which are more about subjective assessment of the comfort of the environment than about raw injury statistics, and so can make no significant contribution to solving the wider issues which cycling is tied to.”

”the definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. For eighty years or more the answer to motorists playing nice has been just a little bit more education and awareness raising”[/url]

If you can’t tell the difference between an 85kg cyclist hitting a 500 kg car, and a 500 kg car hitting an 85 kg cyclist

Big difference.
Outcome might be the same.
It’s not just drivers that need to be more considerate. Riding up the inside of vehicles turning left is inconsiderate. Purposefully overtaking cyclists and immediately turning left is inconsiderate.
A rather concerning number of deaths caused by cyclists being squished by lorries turning left (statistically concerning number being women). Sure it’s the big chunk of steel that’s going to cause the more damage, but is it the driver turning left or the cyclist riding where they really ought not to ride that was inconsiderate? I’d wager it’s close to 50-50 than 100-0 or 0-100.

edit: and there are ways to avoid the above 2 cases even being an issue.

Especially those RLJing

FFS. Now, I don’t jump red lights but what exactly is the objection of motorist to cyclists jumping red lights? Is it just an instinctive ‘dailymail’ reaction?

RLJ’ers don’t seem to be high in the casualty stats – you can be damn sure it would be reported if it was given how often ‘was not wearing a helmet’ comes up. In fact turning left on a red light gets you out of the way of those left hook vehicles that result in so many deaths (thought to be why more women than men die this way). Yes, cyclists should always give way to pedestrians (as should vehicles turning into side roads but lets not go there now) but they’re not injuring pedestrians in large numbers and certainly not killing them (unlike red light jumping drivers).

Cyclists aren’t motor vehicles, and they’re not pedestrians. What CYCLISTS should be campaigning for (and this *is* a cyclists forum) is for red lights to be considered ‘stop’ signs for cyclists – must stop moving but if route is clear fine to proceed. You’d then make your own risk assessment on whether to proceed (as you do as a pedestrian) and not pose any risk to anyone else.

Like helmets this is a complete non-issue when it comes to ‘safety OF cyclists’ which is what this thread was supposed to be about.

It’s not that I think cyclists are morally unimpeachable, it’s just that any bad behaviour by cyclists carries a massive personal risk to the person doing it, and much less potential for harm to anyone else.

The sooner we get past arguing about which user group behave the worst and get on with some pragmatic solutions the better.

Like helmets this is a complete non-issue when it comes to ‘safety OF cyclists’ which is what this thread was supposed to be about.

Agreed.

The only real safety impact seems to be that it taints drivers’ attitudes towards cyclists.

INRATStuff ^

Driving test refreshers – every 5 or 10 years. Doing my m/cycle DAS was a real eye opener… I thought i knew it all, and being a cyclist, thought I knew lots about bikes on the road – how wrong…

All new drivers (and refreshers ^) to do an equivalent of a CBT. Either on a 125 m/cycle, or bicycle. MAKE them experience the vulnerability of being a non-4-wheeled road user.

Those two would do a lot to help

And cycling proficiency refresher every 5 years?

but is it the driver turning left or the cyclist riding where they really ought not to ride that was inconsiderate? I’d wager it’s close to 50-50 than 100-0 or 0-100.

Lets blame the victim shall we? based on no evidence whatsoever? You should read this piece by Danny Williams . Now someone in the comments has made your call that ‘she shouldn’t have been there’ but that’s where the current infrastructure put a cyclist.

Where should the cyclists be on Blackfriars Bridge or on any other junction where current, unsegregated, cycle lanes put them on the left of left turning vehicles?

As a cyclist you *could* try to merge right into one of the traffic lanes but, since it’s a drag race from one set of traffic lights to the next traffic speeds are high and you’re likely to get someone forcing their way past you. You could try to get to the front of the traffic queue into the (unenforced, so likely full of motor vehicles) ASL but the cycle lane is full of cyclists.

Despite being an experienced, long term, law abiding cyclist when the traffic starts moving you can still easily find yourself on the left of a left turning vehicle (say that bus…). How inconsiderate.

Cyclists have to take responsibility and act more safely and considerately towards drivers too.

Absolutey. But I think you have to be very careful in how you present it.

There’s a lot of drivers out there, including half the people on this very forum, that already think cyclists are in the wrong much of the time. And any re-inforcement of those beliefs is damaging to the relationship between motorists and cyclists, resulting in an increasingly dangerous and growing irratibility on the roads.

You DO need to be very careful on a bike. Mainly because you’re in a very dangerous environment. Some of us could make wiser decsisions, particularly (but not solely confined to) those who are new to cycling, or indeed new to the roads in any form of transport. Education would be welcomed with open arms if presented in the right way, I’m sure.

However, it is the giant lump of mass that carries the biggest potential risks. And with that comes huge responsibility (it is your job to keep people safe from that force). So when you have someone trying to squeeze past, talking on the phone, honking the horn…whatever the circumstances, it’s not really acceptable. It’s one thing to put yourself at risk, but something else entirely to risk the life of another human. The core beliefs that lead to this behaviour need to be addressed in a big way.

I would suggest that they are two completely seperate topics. Putting them together sends mixed messages, and is confusing for everyone.

Cyclists need to know their place on the road. Not to be told that they should be:

On the pavement
In the gutter
In the door zone
In a car
Taking primary position

*Select an option*

And more importantly, it needs to be RESPECTED. That is key.

Motorists need to be aware that cyclists have a right to be on the road. And that they will take many positions on the road (and not just to antagonise you).

Cyclists are already aware that motorists think they have every right to the road, so they simply need to be aware of their surroundings and to know how to make them as safe as possible, for everyone involved.

Out driving yesterday, I was behind a roadie. And every time I come up to a cyclist I feel what everyone else feels: there’s a certain pressure to pass as quickly as possible, a collective membrane of what is not even impatience, but a ladder of self importance (that’s a bicycle, I’m a car, we belong in front, WE MUST PASS!!). It’s expected of you. And the cyclist feels it too! This one certainly did as he tried to wave me past. I hung back as it wasn’t safe (there was a gap…and a fast approaching blind corner), and I could sense the discomfort in him, unsure to just take the road or selflessly pull in somewhere and save me a few seconds.

That is the collective expectancy of behaviour on the roads. And to change that one thing would have a massive impact on road safety.

And cycling proficiency refresher every 5 years?

That couldn’t be done without introducing rider licensing – there’s no legal mechanism.

This one certainly did as he tried to wave me past… I hung back as it wasn’t safe.. I could sense the discomfort in him

Had exactly the same thing happen to me the other day. I knew I wanted to turn left shortly, so there was absolutely no point in me trying to overtake him.

It was palpably uncomfortable. I almost wanted to wind down the window and shout “Don’t worry mate. I’m one of you lot. You carry on.”

Sad that the attitudes and expectations on our roads are such that actually doing the right thing generates confusion and discomfort.

To instigate a mind shift in the driving majority the government needs to act.

Start by renaming RFL ‘Vehicular Carbon Charge’ and increase the charge by 50%.

Ensure drivers who injure cyclists are dealt with appropriatly.

Modernise the Cycling profiency test.

Tv campaign , Something like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHkOIFyC26E&playnext=1&list=PLED4DA420B7E60A5F&feature=results_video

Every Parent, Cyclist and Motorist should watch , it should be on during the Olympics Velodrome events . Possibly could be slightly more obvious, as white van man will not ‘get’ it.

How about we start by encouraging (and given some newspaper articles, even actually allowing) kids to ride to school so at least the NEXT generation grows up with some sort of affinity with life on two wheels be it self powered or motorised.

Cycling proficiency compuslory in schools for all kids who can ride bikes

More heavy handed penalties for people who absent mindedly kill cyclists or assault them (themselves or with their vehicles) just for riding along

More bike locking facilities in city centres, train stations and so on in places that are more visible to encourage more people onto bikes

Enforcable penalties for cyclists who do dumb stuff like RLJ, ride on pavements etc so there’s less “them and us” and more a laws of the road sort of feel to things

Start by renaming RFL ‘Vehicular Carbon Charge’ and increase the charge by 50%.

It’s been renamed tons of times. People still insist it is “road tax” for a “road fund” – despite the fact that it isn’t based on road usage and isn’t set aside for spending on the roads.

I’m in favour of calling it “car tax”.

It’s more accurate, doesn’t imply any special fund, and makes the answer to this question quite self-evident:
“Why don’t you pay car tax for your bicycle?”

It’s probably a bit late by the time the police are involved… but ACPO have just announced a review of their fatal accident investigation policy.

http://www.govtoday.co.uk/home-affairs/50-police-emergency/12195-public-invited-to-contribute-to-police-road-death-policy

And this is certainly something that needs to change if cyclists are going to feel protected from injury on the roads. Martin Porter QC’s summary of accidents and police responses is essential if extremely depressing reading.

http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/cycling-against-car-culture.html