Laws on 'dangerous cyclists' to be updated
Discussion
Tigtening the law specifically against cyclists isn't going to make the roads less safe but it does strike me as displacement activity. If you were writing a list of things to do to make the roads safer, it wouldn't make the first page if you based it on actual risk. Hit & runs in London for example run around 20 per day by the last data..
https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-a...
https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-a...
Solocle said:
Louis Balfour said:
Fine. If there's a pavement and they are in the road and pissed: Same penalties.
So now it's illegal to cross the road when drunk... even if done entirely safely.You really need to think this through more.
funinhounslow said:
Louis Balfour said:
I think that everyone who uses the road, regardless of the vehicle, should be subject to the same laws and punishments.
E-bikes motors cut out at 25km/h. Should we fit 70mph limiters to other motorised vehicles?
There are bikes now which look a bit weird - sort of chunky Brompton-shaped things with balloon tyres and usually with fitted with panniers or other stuff-carrying equipment, which seem to be able to cruise almost silently at 20-30mph continuously with no pedalling by the rider. I guess they are the modern equivalent of the old motorcycle despatch riders, where time was money and no s
ts were given.mikey_b said:
They are probably supposed to cut out at that speed, but I can 100% assure you that every day when (motorcycling) through London I see numerous e-bikes which can/do travel at the same speed as me without the rider pedalling at all.
There are bikes now which look a bit weird - sort of chunky Brompton-shaped things with balloon tyres and usually with fitted with panniers or other stuff-carrying equipment, which seem to be able to cruise almost silently at 20-30mph continuously with no pedalling by the rider. I guess they are the modern equivalent of the old motorcycle despatch riders, where time was money and no sts were given.
Thing is, if it doesn't cut out, it's not an e-bike, it's now an electric motorcycle.There are bikes now which look a bit weird - sort of chunky Brompton-shaped things with balloon tyres and usually with fitted with panniers or other stuff-carrying equipment, which seem to be able to cruise almost silently at 20-30mph continuously with no pedalling by the rider. I guess they are the modern equivalent of the old motorcycle despatch riders, where time was money and no s
ts were given.gazza285 said:
Biker 1 said:
Perhaps they should put in a further amendment stipulating that if there is a cycle lane running adjacent to the road, cyclists MUST use it & not ride on the road. Punishment = death. Typical example the A24 dual carriageway north of Dorking.
Every single cycle lane I know in my local area has cars parked in it.Plus, some may be doing 20 mph plus, can’t do that on a bike path usually, do sort of negates the point. And also you get in a lot of case quarter of a mile of dedicate cycle path, not much point going onto it if on a longer ride as it’s like less than a minute.
And many are, as mentioned strewn with debris or have people pushing prams, walking dogs etc so you make a judgement call based on what you are riding and how.
This is the kind of “waaah cyclists” comment made by people who have t ridden a bike since 1969 or in some cases, ever.
mikey_b said:
funinhounslow said:
Louis Balfour said:
I think that everyone who uses the road, regardless of the vehicle, should be subject to the same laws and punishments.
E-bikes motors cut out at 25km/h. Should we fit 70mph limiters to other motorised vehicles?
There are bikes now which look a bit weird - sort of chunky Brompton-shaped things with balloon tyres and usually with fitted with panniers or other stuff-carrying equipment, which seem to be able to cruise almost silently at 20-30mph continuously with no pedalling by the rider. I guess they are the modern equivalent of the old motorcycle despatch riders, where time was money and no s
ts were given.Louis Balfour said:
I think that everyone who uses the road, regardless of the vehicle, should be subject to the same laws and punishments.
Louis Balfour said:
Crossing the road fine. Walking in the road pissed when there is a footpath: same penalties.
Make your mind up. It’s either one rule for all or not.
heebeegeetee said:
Pedestrians are road users too.
I can fully understand why different classes of vehicle have different laws.
That’s called critical thinking - where you can understand that regulation is risk related. Motorised vehicles are highly regulated because they cause death, injury and destruction on a massive scale. Bicycles are not because they do not. I can fully understand why different classes of vehicle have different laws.
Louis Balfour said:
Chris Boardman was on the Beeb this morning. He was saying that only three people per year are harmed by cyclists, so there is no need to legislate.
I suspect that the families of those killed by cyclists riding carelessly or dangerously would disagree with him.Legislation and penalties are there for two reasons - to persuade people to keep to the rules and punishing those who break them.
Now there might not be too many cyclists whose careless or dangerous riding kills people, but I would quite like those few cyclists who do kill people by their careless or dangerous riding to be punished for it.
heebeegeetee said:
I think we can be sure of one thing - it won't make one jot of difference to life on the roads for anybody.
The thing that puzzles me- to the best of my knowledge, with one exception every cyclist prosecuted over the death of a pedestrian has gone to jail, and that is a very different situation to drivers. So I'm not even sure what the (very few) campaigners for this are expecting to achieve.
An hour and a half before we got our first "yeah but car drivers...". Slacking. The thing that puzzles me- to the best of my knowledge, with one exception every cyclist prosecuted over the death of a pedestrian has gone to jail, and that is a very different situation to drivers. So I'm not even sure what the (very few) campaigners for this are expecting to achieve.
Sporky said:
SpidersWeb said:
I suspect that the families of those killed by cyclists riding carelessly or dangerously would disagree with him.
Which is exactly why the law isn't made by the victims of crimes. Biker 1 said:
Perhaps they should put in a further amendment stipulating that if there is a cycle lane running adjacent to the road, cyclists MUST use it & not ride on the road. Punishment = death. Typical example the A24 dual carriageway north of Dorking.
If you built them like this, then people would be onboard with you:However, they mostly look like crappy after thoughts:
JQ said:
Louis Balfour said:
I think that everyone who uses the road, regardless of the vehicle, should be subject to the same laws and punishments.
Louis Balfour said:
Crossing the road fine. Walking in the road pissed when there is a footpath: same penalties.
Make your mind up. It’s either one rule for all or not.
Catweazle said:
If they just cycle away though unlikely to get caught Vs a car where someone at least might have the plate.TX.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff