Laws on 'dangerous cyclists' to be updated
Discussion
andyeds1234 said:
Quite.
Hopefully the same time will be spent on addressing the deaths, injury, and blinding, from deliberate popping of champagne corks each year.
O/T - I once watched a mate get poleaxed by the cork from a bottle of German Sekt, a sparkling wine! Hit him on the temple! The guy holding it had removed the wire but not actually twisted the cork, and had the bottle at an angle while he read the label! The poor sod who got hit when it just 'popped', hit the deck and had no idea what had hit him. Neither did we at first, he just 'dropped' He got a 'hangover' before drinking a drop of it! Hopefully the same time will be spent on addressing the deaths, injury, and blinding, from deliberate popping of champagne corks each year.
sorry to interrupt!
Cycling is an aid to pedestrianism and as such bicycles can be pushed along footpaths and pavements. They are not required to have speedometers so all this business about being dangerous because they are speeding is nonsense a bicycle cannot break the speed limit in law. A bicycle has an inherent right to use the roads and were on the roads before cars were even invented.
Bicycles are used by children and adults alike and there is no requirement to pass a driving test to use a bicycle and nor should there be. They are impossible to register as the ability to customise and respray the bike and the fact that there is nowhere to put an number plate sufficiently large that it could be read is laughable that intelligent people have been suggesting all week on the radio that bicycle should be registered, these people are supposed to have brains!
They are basically free to use at the point of operation which encourages their use and they should be accessible for all people to use should they wish. They are good for mind body and spirit and would help the country tackle the health issue, environmental issue and congestion issues. As far as the government is concerned cycling is full of positive benefits and is being encouraged at all levels. Our take up of cycling in the UK is still very poor so there is much work to be done and you are not going to see a roll back of cycling friendly initiatives anytime soon. Cycling infrastructure is very poor in this country for badly planned cycle lanes through to bikes being difficult to take in trains and busses when they would be perfect to integrate with public transport.
Everyone should own a bicycle and be encouraged to use it for fitness, fun and nipping to the shops or dare I say it even riding to work or schools. Once you have ridden a bike then you may comment other wise I have heard too much from peop,le who haven’t ridden a bike for 20+ years who haven't a clue
Bicycles are used by children and adults alike and there is no requirement to pass a driving test to use a bicycle and nor should there be. They are impossible to register as the ability to customise and respray the bike and the fact that there is nowhere to put an number plate sufficiently large that it could be read is laughable that intelligent people have been suggesting all week on the radio that bicycle should be registered, these people are supposed to have brains!
They are basically free to use at the point of operation which encourages their use and they should be accessible for all people to use should they wish. They are good for mind body and spirit and would help the country tackle the health issue, environmental issue and congestion issues. As far as the government is concerned cycling is full of positive benefits and is being encouraged at all levels. Our take up of cycling in the UK is still very poor so there is much work to be done and you are not going to see a roll back of cycling friendly initiatives anytime soon. Cycling infrastructure is very poor in this country for badly planned cycle lanes through to bikes being difficult to take in trains and busses when they would be perfect to integrate with public transport.
Everyone should own a bicycle and be encouraged to use it for fitness, fun and nipping to the shops or dare I say it even riding to work or schools. Once you have ridden a bike then you may comment other wise I have heard too much from peop,le who haven’t ridden a bike for 20+ years who haven't a clue
Meanwhile…
Tribute to 'beautiful' baby who died in church car park https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqvnvpxejv8o
Note.. the headline is never about the driver.. always about the “car” doing the damage in an attempt to disassociate the driver from any blame.
Tribute to 'beautiful' baby who died in church car park https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqvnvpxejv8o
Note.. the headline is never about the driver.. always about the “car” doing the damage in an attempt to disassociate the driver from any blame.
Crippo said:
Cycling is an aid to pedestrianism and as such bicycles can be pushed along footpaths and pavements. They are not required to have speedometers so all this business about being dangerous because they are speeding is nonsense a bicycle cannot break the speed limit in law. A bicycle has an inherent right to use the roads and were on the roads before cars were even invented.
Bicycles are used by children and adults alike and there is no requirement to pass a driving test to use a bicycle and nor should there be. They are impossible to register as the ability to customise and respray the bike and the fact that there is nowhere to put an number plate sufficiently large that it could be read is laughable that intelligent people have been suggesting all week on the radio that bicycle should be registered, these people are supposed to have brains!
They are basically free to use at the point of operation which encourages their use and they should be accessible for all people to use should they wish. They are good for mind body and spirit and would help the country tackle the health issue, environmental issue and congestion issues. As far as the government is concerned cycling is full of positive benefits and is being encouraged at all levels. Our take up of cycling in the UK is still very poor so there is much work to be done and you are not going to see a roll back of cycling friendly initiatives anytime soon. Cycling infrastructure is very poor in this country for badly planned cycle lanes through to bikes being difficult to take in trains and busses when they would be perfect to integrate with public transport.
Everyone should own a bicycle and be encouraged to use it for fitness, fun and nipping to the shops or dare I say it even riding to work or schools. Once you have ridden a bike then you may comment other wise I have heard too much from peop,le who haven’t ridden a bike for 20+ years who haven't a clue
Yes, and hopefully you would agree that riding irresponsibly and causing harm to others should carry consequences.Bicycles are used by children and adults alike and there is no requirement to pass a driving test to use a bicycle and nor should there be. They are impossible to register as the ability to customise and respray the bike and the fact that there is nowhere to put an number plate sufficiently large that it could be read is laughable that intelligent people have been suggesting all week on the radio that bicycle should be registered, these people are supposed to have brains!
They are basically free to use at the point of operation which encourages their use and they should be accessible for all people to use should they wish. They are good for mind body and spirit and would help the country tackle the health issue, environmental issue and congestion issues. As far as the government is concerned cycling is full of positive benefits and is being encouraged at all levels. Our take up of cycling in the UK is still very poor so there is much work to be done and you are not going to see a roll back of cycling friendly initiatives anytime soon. Cycling infrastructure is very poor in this country for badly planned cycle lanes through to bikes being difficult to take in trains and busses when they would be perfect to integrate with public transport.
Everyone should own a bicycle and be encouraged to use it for fitness, fun and nipping to the shops or dare I say it even riding to work or schools. Once you have ridden a bike then you may comment other wise I have heard too much from peop,le who haven’t ridden a bike for 20+ years who haven't a clue
Rufus Stone said:
gazza285 said:
It already does.
Sufficiently?As a for instance, take the cases of Auriol Grey or C. Alliston, it is my firm conviction that no driver would have got those sentences; particularly the Grey sentence, for a driver to get 3 years there would have had to been prolonged or excessive law breaking, and not a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Edited by heebeegeetee on Friday 17th May 07:07
heebeegeetee said:
They get bigger sentences than drivers ime. In my experience of following this topic for over 40 years, it's as if drivers have access to a different legal system.
As a for instance, take the cases of Auriol Grey or C. Alliston, it is my firm conviction that no driver would have got those sentences; particularly the Grey sentence, for a driver to get 3 years there would have had to been prolonged or excessive law breaking, and not a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Its also clear that drivers are completely
I seriously doubt that.As a for instance, take the cases of Auriol Grey or C. Alliston, it is my firm conviction that no driver would have got those sentences; particularly the Grey sentence, for a driver to get 3 years there would have had to been prolonged or excessive law breaking, and not a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Its also clear that drivers are completely
Auriol Grey has nothing to do with this discussion, she was a pedestrian not a cyclist or driver. I don't know anything about the other person and Google reveals nothing. What's that about?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/16/compet...
Yes, there’s an agenda here. The Telegraph is publishing these type of stories more frequently.
Yes, there’s an agenda here. The Telegraph is publishing these type of stories more frequently.
Steve vRS said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/16/compet...
Yes, there’s an agenda here. The Telegraph is publishing these type of stories more frequently.
I would call 52 in a 20 zone irresponsible.Yes, there’s an agenda here. The Telegraph is publishing these type of stories more frequently.
Rufus Stone said:
heebeegeetee said:
They get bigger sentences than drivers ime. In my experience of following this topic for over 40 years, it's as if drivers have access to a different legal system.
As a for instance, take the cases of Auriol Grey or C. Alliston, it is my firm conviction that no driver would have got those sentences; particularly the Grey sentence, for a driver to get 3 years there would have had to been prolonged or excessive law breaking, and not a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Its also clear that drivers are completely
I seriously doubt that.As a for instance, take the cases of Auriol Grey or C. Alliston, it is my firm conviction that no driver would have got those sentences; particularly the Grey sentence, for a driver to get 3 years there would have had to been prolonged or excessive law breaking, and not a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Its also clear that drivers are completely
Auriol Grey has nothing to do with this discussion, she was a pedestrian not a cyclist or driver. I don't know anything about the other person and Google reveals nothing. What's that about?
There is no way, no way at all that a driver who showed momentarily misjudgement would have got 3 years.
The Alliston case is the one constantly cited to show how dangerous cycling is, the irony being of course, cycling is so dangerous that an 8 yr old case have to be used to prove it.
My opinion has always been, I have no opinion on the cases themselves, other than no driver would have got those sentences. In the Alliston case, all a driver would have to do is state they didn't see the pedestrian and stick to that story, they might not even be charged.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41028321
Rufus Stone said:
I would call 52 in a 20 zone irresponsible.
If it was real. The article mentions that the speed was recorded on Strava. It's important to note that anyone can record a ride or run and upload it to Strava. This means the recorded speed could be from a moped, motorcycle, car, unrestricted ebike, or any vehicle, as long as the session is started as a cycle on a fitness watch.
It's possible that the person was riding a bike and wearing a fitness watch, then jumped on a bus or car, leading to the recorded extreme speed. For context, amateur and professional cyclists can reach speeds of 40+ mph downhill, and the average speed in the Tour de France is between 22-24 mph.
A much bigger problem than cyclists is the use of illegal unrestricted ebikes that are essentially motorcycles.
heebeegeetee said:
Obviously the Grey case is relevant, she's a road user, I'm comparing driver sentencing to other road users, no other type of road user gets the incredibly light touch sentencing that drivers get, so yes their punishments are enough.
There is no way, no way at all that a driver who showed momentarily misjudgement would have got 3 years.
The Alliston case is the one constantly cited to show how dangerous cycling is, the irony being of course, cycling is so dangerous that an 8 yr old case have to be used to prove it.
My opinion has always been, I have no opinion on the cases themselves, other than no driver would have got those sentences. In the Alliston case, all a driver would have to do is state they didn't see the pedestrian and stick to that story, they might not even be charged.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41028321
Seriously, you are using that an an example of over zealous enforcement?There is no way, no way at all that a driver who showed momentarily misjudgement would have got 3 years.
The Alliston case is the one constantly cited to show how dangerous cycling is, the irony being of course, cycling is so dangerous that an 8 yr old case have to be used to prove it.
My opinion has always been, I have no opinion on the cases themselves, other than no driver would have got those sentences. In the Alliston case, all a driver would have to do is state they didn't see the pedestrian and stick to that story, they might not even be charged.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41028321
What was he sentenced to in the end?
redback911 said:
If it was real.
The article mentions that the speed was recorded on Strava. It's important to note that anyone can record a ride or run and upload it to Strava. This means the recorded speed could be from a moped, motorcycle, car, unrestricted ebike, or any vehicle, as long as the session is started as a cycle on a fitness watch.
It's possible that the person was riding a bike and wearing a fitness watch, then jumped on a bus or car, leading to the recorded extreme speed. For context, amateur and professional cyclists can reach speeds of 40+ mph downhill, and the average speed in the Tour de France is between 22-24 mph.
A much bigger problem than cyclists is the use of illegal unrestricted ebikes that are essentially motorcycles.
Or it could be real and they were just cycling furiously. The article mentions that the speed was recorded on Strava. It's important to note that anyone can record a ride or run and upload it to Strava. This means the recorded speed could be from a moped, motorcycle, car, unrestricted ebike, or any vehicle, as long as the session is started as a cycle on a fitness watch.
It's possible that the person was riding a bike and wearing a fitness watch, then jumped on a bus or car, leading to the recorded extreme speed. For context, amateur and professional cyclists can reach speeds of 40+ mph downhill, and the average speed in the Tour de France is between 22-24 mph.
A much bigger problem than cyclists is the use of illegal unrestricted ebikes that are essentially motorcycles.
I would call 52mph either fabricated or done whilst driving a car or motorbike. The amount of stupidity, made up facts and ignorance on this subject is off the scale, its just another tory ruse to rile up the useless mail and telegragh boomers to ensure they secure their vote. Go and and read these morons comments, people should go around with sticks apparently and try and to throw them through cyclists spokes was one gem, another suggested throwing tacks down - clearly too dumb to realise that would just as likely puncture car tyres as well
More people are killed tripping up on poor pavements than are killed by rogue cyclists, lets put speed limits on walking speed whilst were at it and maybe stop people running as well, they’re a menace to the blue rinse brigade barging through crowds and knocking over grannies left right and centre and how about we make a law to stop people paddle boarding because they might piss in the river and poison a swan
More people are killed tripping up on poor pavements than are killed by rogue cyclists, lets put speed limits on walking speed whilst were at it and maybe stop people running as well, they’re a menace to the blue rinse brigade barging through crowds and knocking over grannies left right and centre and how about we make a law to stop people paddle boarding because they might piss in the river and poison a swan
Rufus Stone said:
Steve vRS said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/16/compet...
Yes, there’s an agenda here. The Telegraph is publishing these type of stories more frequently.
I would call 52 in a 20 zone irresponsible.Yes, there’s an agenda here. The Telegraph is publishing these type of stories more frequently.
ks and st stirring, gutter press reporting from the Telegraph.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff