Licence or ban cycling in London
Discussion
A500leroy said:
Whilst I agree everyone has the potential to be a Muppet on the road, the one thing that is different is cyclists have no insurance.
When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
That's the only change that really needs to happen ( oh and a bit of courtesy from all parties)
Not strictly true, a lot of cyclists carry 3rd party insurance. A perk which comes with British cycling membership at only £35 a year. When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
That's the only change that really needs to happen ( oh and a bit of courtesy from all parties)
Whether or not that should be made mandatory is a different discussion. Where do you draw the line though? A 5 year old riding to the shops alongside his walking mother. Should he also be insured?
A500leroy said:
Whilst I agree everyone has the potential to be a Muppet on the road, the one thing that is different is cyclists have no insurance.
When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
That's the only change that really needs to happen ( oh and a bit of courtesy from all parties)
The biggest danger to me on the London part of my cycling commute from Colliers Wood to Waterloo is pedestrians stepping out in front of me without looking.When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
That's the only change that really needs to happen ( oh and a bit of courtesy from all parties)
Please could you arrange for them to all have insurance to cover any injuries to me or my bike?
Meanwhile, to answer the OP's question, the only logical option is to ban private cars in Zones 1-3 other than for disabled users. There is absolutely no need for them whatsoever, they're slow, dirty and get in everyone's way.
Moving the able bodied to foot or bike would save the NHS an absolute fortune, and you wouldn't need to spend money on changing the infrastructure for cyclists, as they could just use the one there currently for cars.
I suspect truck drivers and cabbies would also be infinitely more patient towards cyclists and pedestrians, as they wouldn't be battling with the background stress of having to share the roads with all the selfish t
ts in cars taking up about 8 times as much space as they'd need on a bike...stuttgartmetal said:
Why are we spending millions promoting cycling in London?
Like NewYork, London is too busy and dangerous
When were you last in NY? Like NewYork, London is too busy and dangerous
http://www.nycbikemaps.com/maps/manhattan-bike-map...
Manhattan’s Bike Paths, Bike Lanes & Greenways cover more than 240 miles and include the iconic Central Park, as well as the incredibly popular Manhattan Waterfront Greenway.
Kermit power said:
The biggest danger to me on the London part of my cycling commute from Colliers Wood to Waterloo is pedestrians stepping out in front of me without looking.
Please could you arrange for them to all have insurance to cover any injuries to me or my bike?
Meanwhile, to answer the OP's question, the only logical option is to ban private cars in Zones 1-3 other than for disabled users. There is absolutely no need for them whatsoever, they're slow, dirty and get in everyone's way.
Moving the able bodied to foot or bike would save the NHS an absolute fortune, and you wouldn't need to spend money on changing the infrastructure for cyclists, as they could just use the one there currently for cars.
I suspect truck drivers and cabbies would also be infinitely more patient towards cyclists and pedestrians, as they wouldn't be battling with the background stress of having to share the roads with all the selfish tts in cars taking up about 8 times as much space as they'd need on a bike...
The biggest danger to every road user is a pedestrian stepping out in front of them!Please could you arrange for them to all have insurance to cover any injuries to me or my bike?
Meanwhile, to answer the OP's question, the only logical option is to ban private cars in Zones 1-3 other than for disabled users. There is absolutely no need for them whatsoever, they're slow, dirty and get in everyone's way.
Moving the able bodied to foot or bike would save the NHS an absolute fortune, and you wouldn't need to spend money on changing the infrastructure for cyclists, as they could just use the one there currently for cars.
I suspect truck drivers and cabbies would also be infinitely more patient towards cyclists and pedestrians, as they wouldn't be battling with the background stress of having to share the roads with all the selfish t
ts in cars taking up about 8 times as much space as they'd need on a bike...In general the pedestrian has the'right of way' whatever and the road user ( car lorry cyclist etc) must anticipate them doing it and drive/ ride accordingly
Apologies in advance for editing your quote.
Easy enough to turn round anonymous said:
[redacted]
The biggest danger to me on the London part of my cycling commute from Colliers Wood to Waterloo is pedestrians stepping out in front of me without looking.
What about drivers who don't even bother with shoulder checks before changing lanes?
A500leroy said:
The biggest danger to every road user is a pedestrian stepping out in front of them!
In general the pedestrian has the'right of way' whatever and the road user ( car lorry cyclist etc) must anticipate them doing it and drive/ ride accordingly
Dangerous for the pedestrian and cyclists. If I ran someone over it would be very unlikely that I would be hurt.In general the pedestrian has the'right of way' whatever and the road user ( car lorry cyclist etc) must anticipate them doing it and drive/ ride accordingly
If the risk of being killed by not paying attention while walking/cycling isn't enough of a deterrent, I doubt insurance or licencing would make much difference.
(at least round here anyway).A500leroy said:
Whilst I agree everyone has the potential to be a Muppet on the road, the one thing that is different is cyclists have no insurance.
When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
That's the only change that really needs to happen ( oh and a bit of courtesy from all parties)
You, we and all of us are in exactly the same position as pedestrians. We use the roads, we can do some serious damage if we step out in front of a car, we can be drunk if we wish, yet we are uninsured.When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
That's the only change that really needs to happen ( oh and a bit of courtesy from all parties)
Here's a couple of vids of pedestrians entering the carriageway without looking at all:
http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/11240189.Helmet_ca...
https://www.yorkmix.com/life/transport-life/how-a-...
You'll notice in the second video the pedestrian just walks off - not for a moment is she going to consider liability, or exchange address or anything like that.
So can you explain why you use the roads uninsured but expect other non-motorised road users to insure themselves, please?
Another point - as someone who runs a small garage we are asked to deal with minor damage caused by cars to car on a regular basis. Often the other party is agreeing to pay, just as often the guilty party has scarpered. However for small amounts of damage everyone agrees that they want to avoid going through insurance. The innocent party often has to go through quite a deal of inconvenience, in getting quotes and then being without their car while it's being repaired, and this inconvenience is never compensated for.
I've never been asked to repair any damage caused by a cyclist, indeed after 40 years of motoring I don't even know anybody who has had damage incurred by a cyclist, not so much as equivalent to a door ding or anything.
But for some reason motorists want cyclists to ensure themselves, when it's perfectly common behavior for motorists to have such repairs carried without involving insurance.
Which for me is just another example of the bonkersness of the mindset of the ordinary motorist.
A500leroy said:
Whilst I agree everyone has the potential to be a Muppet on the road, the one thing that is different is cyclists have no insurance.
When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
I have third party insurance from British Cycling membership. So does every other BC member. When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
Any other sweeping falsehoods you'd like to bring to the debate?
A500leroy said:
Whilst I agree everyone has the potential to be a Muppet on the road, the one thing that is different is cyclists have no insurance.
When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
What about when a pedestrian takes out a cyclist?When a car/lory/bus driver gets it wrong and takes out a pedestrian/cyclist his insurance will cover the accident.
When a cyclist takes out a pedestrian ( which would hurt) or damages a vehicle when they misjudge something nothing happens!
P.S. lots of cyclists have insurance.
Yipper, brilliant sarcasm, well done!
OP - what about the uninsured car and Van drivers? Or those who drive cars with no licence? Those who are drunk or drugged up? Those whose vehicles are not safe? Those who think the roads were built for cars? Those who have no consideration for others?
Have you tried riding a bike in London? Maybe you would learn something? Might even enjoy it...
OP - what about the uninsured car and Van drivers? Or those who drive cars with no licence? Those who are drunk or drugged up? Those whose vehicles are not safe? Those who think the roads were built for cars? Those who have no consideration for others?
Have you tried riding a bike in London? Maybe you would learn something? Might even enjoy it...
Daveyraveygravey said:
Might even enjoy it...
Steady on. Then again a taxi driver of my acquaintance for whom cyclists were the scum of the earth recently started cycling with his wife in an effort to gain some fitness. There followed a conversion that made Paul on the road to Damascus look half hearted and he's now shopping for ever better bikes, ever better clothing, and ever longer rides.One of the reasons I aviod truck jobs in London is the feeling that eventually I will have an incident with a cyclist .
In my experience most London cyclists are an accident waiting to happen .
Most seem to ignore many of the dangers around them and have little instinct for self preservation.
Most of my contact with them involves them riding unchecked into the mirrors on my vehicles and not one has ever apologised or checked if they have caused damage.
In my experience most London cyclists are an accident waiting to happen .
Most seem to ignore many of the dangers around them and have little instinct for self preservation.
Most of my contact with them involves them riding unchecked into the mirrors on my vehicles and not one has ever apologised or checked if they have caused damage.
Digger said:
I doubt that riding a powered bicycle (as you do) is significantly quicker during rush hour for the route that you mention, compared with a semi-competent cyclist?!
Now who's the mug?
By the way, a pointless thread!
Of course it is, except when he abides by the letter of the Highway Code as he expects cyclists to do.Now who's the mug?
By the way, a pointless thread!
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff