The Times cycling campaign
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
I read a report about what was then a new bit of legislation in a continental country that made is the driver's fault if they hit a cyclist. One of the reasons behind this was to try and encourage drivers to look for cyclists. Like it or not - probably not I know - it would appear to be working. Now it is going to cost drivers money, they see the bikes.
I'll mention our regulations at pedestrian crossings.Keeping it simple, on foot absolute priority over vehicles, so if as a driver you are approaching a crossing and there is a pedestrian even near, don't have to be looking as if they are going to cross, just close enough then you keep a very wary eye out, and the slightest thought they might be going to cross, you stop.
A cyclist, pushing the bike and on foot same priority as a pedestrian, but cycling, then they have no priority, and have to wait for the vehicle.
Yet have seen cases where cyclist going like hell down the pavement, drop a foot off the pedal, make a strategic dab or two, and then claiming they are now a pedestrian, launch in front of vehicles, but of course now effectively back in full cyclist mode.
Stupid will always be stupid, and you cannot legislate for idiots amongst any subset.
F i F said:
I'll mention our regulations at pedestrian crossings.
Keeping it simple, on foot absolute priority over vehicles, so if as a driver you are approaching a crossing and there is a pedestrian even near, don't have to be looking as if they are going to cross, just close enough then you keep a very wary eye out, and the slightest thought they might be going to cross, you stop.
.
Nope.Keeping it simple, on foot absolute priority over vehicles, so if as a driver you are approaching a crossing and there is a pedestrian even near, don't have to be looking as if they are going to cross, just close enough then you keep a very wary eye out, and the slightest thought they might be going to cross, you stop.
.
Foot on crossing. Onus on pedestrian to clearly telegraph intensions before a motorist is required to stop.
Here is the provision: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/regul...
Note no mention of pedestrian before they step into the road. Upshot is, if you suddenly walk out onto a zebra crossing and get run over - it's your fauilt.
cwis said:
F i F said:
I'll mention our regulations at pedestrian crossings.
Keeping it simple, on foot absolute priority over vehicles, so if as a driver you are approaching a crossing and there is a pedestrian even near, don't have to be looking as if they are going to cross, just close enough then you keep a very wary eye out, and the slightest thought they might be going to cross, you stop.
.
Nope.Keeping it simple, on foot absolute priority over vehicles, so if as a driver you are approaching a crossing and there is a pedestrian even near, don't have to be looking as if they are going to cross, just close enough then you keep a very wary eye out, and the slightest thought they might be going to cross, you stop.
.
My explanation of the foreign regulations following on from Derek's comment is as written above.
If the "Authorities" are serious about cyclists' safety, the one thing that must be engaged is driver education, or re-education.
The British car driver, along with the Australians, have an almost uniquely appalling record of indifference towards cyclists and their safety. Only a public awareness programme and draconian punishments will change it. Presumed liability will be a good start.
The British car driver, along with the Australians, have an almost uniquely appalling record of indifference towards cyclists and their safety. Only a public awareness programme and draconian punishments will change it. Presumed liability will be a good start.
The main danger to cyclists in cities are large lorries turning left. Paris has much less accidents as these lorries are banned from the centre of town during the day. London bans them at night due to noise.
There seems to be a confused message about whether people want segregated or shared road space for cyclists. I think the Danes have miles of dedicated cycle paths but speedy london hipsters want shared road space so they can go race each other.
Either way I don't expect there is going to be millions spent on altering junctions and cycle lanes for people who make 2% (I guess) of all road journeys.The best result would be changes to laws regarding responsibility in accidents and improving driver awareness.
There seems to be a confused message about whether people want segregated or shared road space for cyclists. I think the Danes have miles of dedicated cycle paths but speedy london hipsters want shared road space so they can go race each other.
Either way I don't expect there is going to be millions spent on altering junctions and cycle lanes for people who make 2% (I guess) of all road journeys.The best result would be changes to laws regarding responsibility in accidents and improving driver awareness.
Derek Smith said:
In Hove they used to put three PCs and a sergeant stopping cyclists using the promenade around 8 am which took them off a very dangerous road. You can guess how many parents and childen, with buckets and spades were around that time of the morning yet the LA told the police to stop it. It is about time that attitudes changed in this country.
Don't you think that attitudes have changed, or at least are changing? I notice that you said "used to" - how long ago? Last week, last year, a few years ago?In my experience of cycling quite a lot around the country I generally find that things are much better now than they were, say, 10 years ago.
and probably head off in the wrong direction.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff