Can West Midlands police really do this????

[heebeegeetee]

DocSteve said:

This seems like a good initiative to me and my defence of it is fortified by the views of some on this thread.

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent. Additionally, if you think that drivers should have some sort of societal high ground due to paying road tax, holding insurance, licence plates, believing cyclists should use [voluntary] cycle paths etc etc then you mark yourself out as not only incompetent but ignorant.

I say this as an enthusiastic road driver and member of John Lyon's original High Performance Club, a (reasonably) competent track driver and also a road cyclist for the last 20 years.

You need to have some respect for others on the road, whether it be a horse rider, old person who may not be inclined to drive close to the speed limit, a member of the emergency services, a cyclist, a pedestrian in a rural area with no pavement, a farmer with a slow moving vehicle, a young inexperienced motorcyclist doing something unwise, a foreign truck driver missing your presence due to his position...

The list could go on and on, but the bottom line is your skill as a driver is in part marked out by your ability to deal with all of these things, including cyclists.

Well said.

[Crackie]

ferrariF50lover said:

Crackie said:

imho the car driver has the bigger responsibility because the cyclist is more vulnerable but this doesn't absolve the cyclist of all responsibility. The point you don't seem to appreciate is that there are situations / scenarios where the cyclist is culpable ??

I'd argue the opposite. As the more vulnerable road user, I'd say the cyclist bears the greater burden in ensuring safety over all else.

As with most things on the Internet, the problems faced by cyclists are vastly overblown on here. I bike to and from the office and, because I value my life and I have a brain in my head rather than an overly developed sense of 'rights', I ride like everyone is out to kill me. I have absolutely no trouble whatsoever. Those who do seem to come a cropper (it's rare, but not unheard) are typically the Lance Armstrong wannabes who ride as though the world owes them something rather than as thought they live in the same world that I do.

People are odd.

My understanding is that 'strict liability' law assumes the motorist is responsible for any collision unless they are able to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is automatically with the driver.

Imho the shift in responsibilty has moved further to the driver in recent years because so many cyclists and pedestrians are using in-ear headphones and many are so completely absorbed and distracted they are oblivious to road traffic hazards. Imho the majority of cyclists are considerate as are the majority of motorists but I understand your 'Lance Armstrong wannabes' description well. These and the distracted types makes me think its time to buy a dashcam.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 08:21

[Crackie]

DocSteve said:

This seems like a good initiative to me and my defence of it is fortified by the views of some on this thread.

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent. Additionally, if you think that drivers should have some sort of societal high ground due to paying road tax, holding insurance, licence plates, believing cyclists should use [voluntary] cycle paths etc etc then you mark yourself out as not only incompetent but ignorant.

I say this as an enthusiastic road driver and member of John Lyon's original High Performance Club, a (reasonably) competent track driver and also a road cyclist for the last 20 years.

You need to have some respect for others on the road, whether it be a horse rider, old person who may not be inclined to drive close to the speed limit, a member of the emergency services, a cyclist, a pedestrian in a rural area with no pavement, a farmer with a slow moving vehicle, a young inexperienced motorcyclist doing something unwise, a foreign truck driver missing your presence due to his position...

The list could go on and on, but the bottom line is your skill as a driver is in part marked out by your ability to deal with all of these things, including cyclists.

Best post of the thread so far

[WinstonWolf]

Crackie said:

ferrariF50lover said:

Crackie said:

imho the car driver has the bigger responsibility because the cyclist is more vulnerable but this doesn't absolve the cyclist of all responsibility. The point you don't seem to appreciate is that there are situations / scenarios where the cyclist is culpable ??

I'd argue the opposite. As the more vulnerable road user, I'd say the cyclist bears the greater burden in ensuring safety over all else.

As with most things on the Internet, the problems faced by cyclists are vastly overblown on here. I bike to and from the office and, because I value my life and I have a brain in my head rather than an overly developed sense of 'rights', I ride like everyone is out to kill me. I have absolutely no trouble whatsoever. Those who do seem to come a cropper (it's rare, but not unheard) are typically the Lance Armstrong wannabes who ride as though the world owes them something rather than as thought they live in the same world that I do.

People are odd.

My understanding is that 'strict liability' law assumes the motorist is responsible for any collision unless they are able to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is automatically with the driver.

Imho the shift in resposibilty has moved further to the driver in recent years because so many cyclists and pedestrians are using in-ear headphones and many are so completely absorbed and distracted they are oblivious to road traffic hazards. I understand your 'Lance Armstrong wannabes' description very well, there are many on the the road but there are many badly distracted cyclists too; time to buy a dashcam.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 08:02

I take it you've removed the radio from your car and always drive with the windows down?

[NWTony]

DocSteve said:

This seems like a good initiative to me and my defence of it is fortified by the views of some on this thread.

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent. Additionally, if you think that drivers should have some sort of societal high ground due to paying road tax, holding insurance, licence plates, believing cyclists should use [voluntary] cycle paths etc etc then you mark yourself out as not only incompetent but ignorant.

I say this as an enthusiastic road driver and member of John Lyon's original High Performance Club, a (reasonably) competent track driver and also a road cyclist for the last 20 years.

You need to have some respect for others on the road, whether it be a horse rider, old person who may not be inclined to drive close to the speed limit, a member of the emergency services, a cyclist, a pedestrian in a rural area with no pavement, a farmer with a slow moving vehicle, a young inexperienced motorcyclist doing something unwise, a foreign truck driver missing your presence due to his position...

The list could go on and on, but the bottom line is your skill as a driver is in part marked out by your ability to deal with all of these things, including cyclists.

I do largely agree with you, I don't do a lot of city centre driving and don't have alot of problems with cyclists day to day. However I do have some sympathy with the idea that those who pay for a service ( the roads) are apparently singled out by the law for the benefit of those who don't. It seems to go against the ideals of natural justice in the same way that people object to benefit recipients with 8 kids complain about the levels of benefits they receive, if you see what I mean?

And your final paragraph about respect for other road users, there are groups of road users we aren't required to respect,m for instance those impaired by drink, why shouldn't some the groups you mention also be in this class?

[Crackie]

WinstonWolf said:

Crackie said:

ferrariF50lover said:

Crackie said:

imho the car driver has the bigger responsibility because the cyclist is more vulnerable but this doesn't absolve the cyclist of all responsibility. The point you don't seem to appreciate is that there are situations / scenarios where the cyclist is culpable ??

I'd argue the opposite. As the more vulnerable road user, I'd say the cyclist bears the greater burden in ensuring safety over all else.

As with most things on the Internet, the problems faced by cyclists are vastly overblown on here. I bike to and from the office and, because I value my life and I have a brain in my head rather than an overly developed sense of 'rights', I ride like everyone is out to kill me. I have absolutely no trouble whatsoever. Those who do seem to come a cropper (it's rare, but not unheard) are typically the Lance Armstrong wannabes who ride as though the world owes them something rather than as thought they live in the same world that I do.

People are odd.

My understanding is that 'strict liability' law assumes the motorist is responsible for any collision unless they are able to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is automatically with the driver.

Imho the shift in resposibilty has moved further to the driver in recent years because so many cyclists and pedestrians are using in-ear headphones and many are so completely absorbed and distracted they are oblivious to road traffic hazards. I understand your 'Lance Armstrong wannabes' description very well, there are many on the the road but there are many badly distracted cyclists too; time to buy a dashcam.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 08:02

I take it you've removed the radio from your car and always drive with the windows down?

Good sarcasm for this time on a Sunday morning. Seeing as you've taken such an interest in my driving & listening habits; I only use the radio/CD when I'm out of town; there are too many distracted pedestians and cyclists in town.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 08:44

[ELD3R]

Crackie said:

DocSteve said:

This seems like a good initiative to me and my defence of it is fortified by the views of some on this thread.

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent. Additionally, if you think that drivers should have some sort of societal high ground due to paying road tax, holding insurance, licence plates, believing cyclists should use [voluntary] cycle paths etc etc then you mark yourself out as not only incompetent but ignorant.

I say this as an enthusiastic road driver and member of John Lyon's original High Performance Club, a (reasonably) competent track driver and also a road cyclist for the last 20 years.

You need to have some respect for others on the road, whether it be a horse rider, old person who may not be inclined to drive close to the speed limit, a member of the emergency services, a cyclist, a pedestrian in a rural area with no pavement, a farmer with a slow moving vehicle, a young inexperienced motorcyclist doing something unwise, a foreign truck driver missing your presence due to his position...

The list could go on and on, but the bottom line is your skill as a driver is in part marked out by your ability to deal with all of these things, including cyclists.

Best post of the thread so far

Agree completely with this. My experience from many years of riding a road bike is that those who are the most vocally critical of cyclists often have an abysmally low level of roadcraft in general.

I include in that the lady who rear-ended me whilst I was waiting to enter a roundabout and sent my bicycle and I briefly airborne. Her opening gambit was to complain that there had been enough room for me to enter the roundabout just before she had tried to do so. She had assumed I'd gone without actually checking I had and then commenced looking right for "her" gap. When it appeared, she put the foot down to enter the roundabout without actually looking forward!

[chow pan toon]

NWTony said:

I do largely agree with you, I don't do a lot of city centre driving and don't have alot of problems with cyclists day to day. However I do have some sympathy with the idea that those who pay for a service ( the roads) are apparently singled out by the law for the benefit of those who don't. It seems to go against the ideals of natural justice in the same way that people object to benefit recipients with 8 kids complain about the levels of benefits they receive, if you see what I mean?

I pay £800 a year "road tax" for my cars, is it OK for me to have full access to the roads when I'm on my bike? How about when I'm driving, can those cheapskates with Priuses etc who pay no road tax get out of my way?

[V8RX7]

chow pan toon said:

when I'm driving, can those cheapskates with Priuses etc who pay no road tax get out of my way?

Sounds entirely reasonable to me.

[ferrariF50lover]

DocSteve said:

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent.

I'm not a big fan of the word 'literally', but I think I'm safe in using it here.

You literally could not be more wrong.

[WinstonWolf]

Crackie said:

WinstonWolf said:

Crackie said:

ferrariF50lover said:

Crackie said:

imho the car driver has the bigger responsibility because the cyclist is more vulnerable but this doesn't absolve the cyclist of all responsibility. The point you don't seem to appreciate is that there are situations / scenarios where the cyclist is culpable ??

I'd argue the opposite. As the more vulnerable road user, I'd say the cyclist bears the greater burden in ensuring safety over all else.

As with most things on the Internet, the problems faced by cyclists are vastly overblown on here. I bike to and from the office and, because I value my life and I have a brain in my head rather than an overly developed sense of 'rights', I ride like everyone is out to kill me. I have absolutely no trouble whatsoever. Those who do seem to come a cropper (it's rare, but not unheard) are typically the Lance Armstrong wannabes who ride as though the world owes them something rather than as thought they live in the same world that I do.

People are odd.

My understanding is that 'strict liability' law assumes the motorist is responsible for any collision unless they are able to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is automatically with the driver.

Imho the shift in resposibilty has moved further to the driver in recent years because so many cyclists and pedestrians are using in-ear headphones and many are so completely absorbed and distracted they are oblivious to road traffic hazards. I understand your 'Lance Armstrong wannabes' description very well, there are many on the the road but there are many badly distracted cyclists too; time to buy a dashcam.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 08:02

I take it you've removed the radio from your car and always drive with the windows down?

Good sarcasm for this time on a Sunday morning. Seeing as you've taken such an interest in my driving & listening habits; I only use the radio/CD when I'm out of town; there are too many distracted pedestians and cyclists in town.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 08:44

So turning the radio off helps you to hear them does it?

[ferrariF50lover]

You're not winning this one, Mr Wolf. You can make all the "clever" comments you like, but because your audience live in the real world where using earphones and listening to the radio are related but not identical things, you'll just come across as another socially awkward Internet mong who can't quite grasp how life actually works the same way that the rest of us simply do by nature.

So many online discussions go to the dogs because of this type of intelligence-free 'debating'. We lose out on so many interesting, relevant and thought-provoking inputs because of the tedium that such a style creates and it's really not necessary.

I'm certain (seriously, no sarcasm here) that this would not be an accurate reflection of your true self, so shall we skip it and discuss on more meaningful terms?

[Crackie]

WinstonWolf said:

So turning the radio off helps you to hear them does it?

Please explain what on earth are you on about ? What is the benefit of being able "to hear them" ? The reason my radio is off in town is to limit the distraction from it, not because I want a quieter environment where I can hear cyclists and pedestrians.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 20:29

[WinstonWolf]

Crackie said:

WinstonWolf said:

So turning the radio off helps you to hear them does it?

Please explain what on earth are you on about ? What is the benefit of being able "to hear them" ? The reason my radio is off in town is to limit the distraction from it, not because I want a quieter environment where I can hear cyclists and pedestrians.

Edited by Crackie on Sunday 18th September 20:29

Do you have a limited attention span? Everyone I know is more than capable of driving and listening to music at the same time...

[WinstonWolf]

ferrariF50lover said:

You're not winning this one, Mr Wolf. You can make all the "clever" comments you like, but because your audience live in the real world where using earphones and listening to the radio are related but not identical things, you'll just come across as another socially awkward Internet mong who can't quite grasp how life actually works the same way that the rest of us simply do by nature.

So many online discussions go to the dogs because of this type of intelligence-free 'debating'. We lose out on so many interesting, relevant and thought-provoking inputs because of the tedium that such a style creates and it's really not necessary.

I'm certain (seriously, no sarcasm here) that this would not be an accurate reflection of your true self, so shall we skip it and discuss on more meaningful terms?

I don't need to win it, West Mids police are doing the job very nicely... Well done to them

[frisbee]

ferrariF50lover said:

DocSteve said:

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent.

I'm not a big fan of the word 'literally', but I think I'm safe in using it here.

You literally could not be more wrong.

Sorry mate I didn't see you.

[DocSteve]

ferrariF50lover said:

DocSteve said:

Quite simply, if you view cyclists as relatively greater hazards than most other hazards that you encounter whilst driving then you are incompetent.

I'm not a big fan of the word 'literally', but I think I'm safe in using it here.

You literally could not be more wrong.

Please feel free to elaborate.

[Crackie]

WinstonWolf said:

Everyone I know is more than capable of driving and listening to music at the same time...

Good for them, I fit into that category too. I'm better without music on though.

Apologies to the OP, and others, for moving away original West Midlands 'proximity' topic.

Edited by Crackie on Monday 19th September 07:29

[Ken Figenus]

I guess most of you have seen the Jeremy Vine cycling viral video? All about this kind of space. He insisted on a lot of space to protect his safety - driver didn't, err, quite agree! I think he could have tucked in when he had an opportunity but she should go on a Cycling Awareness Course (could be profitable...) so she becomes a better human being, let alone driver! https://www.facebook.com/1691455784407633/videos/v...

As a cyclist who had to pop his shoulder back in after a trip over a car bonnet in Holborn on my daily commute (a minging Citroën - ohh the shame) I have loads of sympathy with cyclists, but rarely see eye to eye with the militant ones. The ones that go mental when you suggest riding two abreast on a fast A road is seriously not the most safety conscious idea - whatever their 'rights'. They are always passing the buck to motorists for all issues of consideration and space sharing. I even got called a little st in French whilst on the pavement the other day as my wheeled luggage got in the way of a cyclist! Cool heads and respect needed all round not 'us and them'.

[Red Devil]

She seems a perfect candidate for whom a S59 is appropriate. Could one be issued in such circumstances given the video evidence?