What road traffic law would you introduce?

[jamei303]

Sad Ken said:

I'm sure this won't be popular, but hey ho. I'd like to see a basic cycling test/license introduced, and if you haven't passed one you can't ride on the road. Given half the cycle paths round here are just a line painted on the pavement, I'd also like to see the non-professional cyclists restricted to the pavement. Obviously an element of common sense is involved here (get off your bike if the pavement is busy, don't ride so fast you can't stop if someone comes out of their front door etc), so I can't see it ever taking off lol.

Let's have pedestrian tests too. No walking near roads unless accompanied by a full pedestrian licence holder.

[BarbaricAvatar]

Jaguar drivers forced to attend a week-long course with people from other "social backgrounds" in order to learn acceptance and compliance toward others.

[Moonhawk]

jamei303 said:

Let's have pedestrian tests too. No walking near roads unless accompanied by a full pedestrian licence holder.

Given the number of pedestrians I see round by ours walking in the road on the inside of an unsighted bend, at night and wearing dark clothing - that may not be such a bad idea.

[Sad Ken]

jamei303 said:

Let's have pedestrian tests too. No walking near roads unless accompanied by a full pedestrian licence holder.

And forum posting tests....no posting unless you can wind the sarcasm in a notch or two

[BarbaricAvatar]

Moonhawk said:

Sad Ken said:

I'd like to see a basic cycling test/license introduced,

They do have cycling proficiency at school (I did it over 30 years ago) - but it's not mandatory. Again if the HC was on the national curriculum - cycling proficiency could form a mandatory part of the testing/examination process.

On a serious note. As a sometime-cyclist myself, i find it insane that people aren't mandated to do this and just any old oik can cycle on the road if they choose to. Granted cycling around a housing estate and occassionally on a main road in a group doesn't show an individual all the potential perils of cycling on a B-road but it does teach the cyclist how to behave and how to properly signal when amongst traffic.

[Atomic12C]

Bennet said:

Atomic12C said:

An addition to this rule would be to ban lane changing at the exit point of a roundabout - which stupidly the highway code currently promotes/allows.

Pretty sure the highway code only allows this in as much as it allows any lane change - i.e. with the proviso that the lane you're changing in to is clear.

There are two critical safety points on a roundabout. First is entry, Second is exit.
Most accidents occur at those points.

I don't see the highway code promoting a lane change as you enter a roundabout, and I think its easy to see why.
On a similar basis why it doesn't prevent lane changes at the exit point is a mystery.

My office over looks a busy roundabout with a stupid 3-lane system.
No joke, every other day there is a collision of some degree. Most commonly at the exit points where people in lane 2 exit in to lane 1. People in lane 3 also seem to exit in to lane 1 or 2.
Every couple of minutes there are horns blasting as near misses occur all the time.
As they are generally low speed, its only occasionally there is a serious injury, which I why I think nothing has been done about this particular roundabout.
But its a very typical roundabout that you see up and down the country and I presume such occurrences happen every day on such roundabouts.

Exiting from lane 2 to lane 1 on a roundabout is in my view, silly and should not be encouraged - not only is the driver to look at the exit signs for correct exit, they are to keep looking forward for traffic in front, also pedestrian crossings, cyclists etc., but they are also to look in their mirror on what is often a tight curve to check for traffic that may be alongside, often in the blind spot....... most do not do it, and if they do there is a likelihood there is not enough time or visibility to process and react.
Much simpler to not promote this lane change at this critical point IMO.

[Sad Ken]

BarbaricAvatar said:

Moonhawk said:

Sad Ken said:

I'd like to see a basic cycling test/license introduced,

They do have cycling proficiency at school (I did it over 30 years ago) - but it's not mandatory. Again if the HC was on the national curriculum - cycling proficiency could form a mandatory part of the testing/examination process.

On a serious note. As a sometime-cyclist myself, i find it insane that people aren't mandated to do this and just any old oik can cycle on the road if they choose to. Granted cycling around a housing estate and occassionally on a main road in a group doesn't show an individual all the potential perils of cycling on a B-road but it does teach the cyclist how to behave and how to properly signal when amongst traffic.

Yep, although I've found that whenever I suggest some sort of basic training/test the majority of responses aren't positive. I can't see how it can be a bad thing, given how a cyclist is among the most vulnerable users of the road.

[Tomo1971]

Shuvi McTupya said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Isn't explicitly illegal.

When I lived down south I used to probably undertake more cars than I overtook.

I found you made better progress sticking to the slow lane on the M1 and just popping out to the middle lane to overtake trucks and the like.

This, I travel from Luton to Huntingdon and seem to get their quicker if I stick to L1 (or hard shoulder when its open) than I would in L3/4.

[Y16 SES]

I can't think of a law I would want to introduce but I'm here to point a couple of things out:

Re-test every few years? 99.99% of people would fail, including the vast majority of you (myself included).
Staggered power for young drivers? Load of crap! Bet it was suggested by someone who is middle-aged and this not affected...

[Tomo1971]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Probably due to the fact that filtering is only deemed as legal (case law) when done when the traffic is at low speed, yet some bikers insist on filtering at motorway speeds.

I have no objection to, and positively encourage bikers to filter in low speed traffic (ie, i will move over when needed) but at a higher speed, drivers will be paying more attention to what is in front of them, rather than constantly looking in their RVM for idiots on bikes whom want to 'filter'.

Because the 'law' is rather 'vague' and open to interpretation, many think that filtering at any speed is acceptable.

[Pica-Pica]

Woody John said:

Indicators fitted mandatory on all German marques.
Distance sensors fitted to all German marques to ensure they stay minimum 2 seconds behind the vehicle in front.
Black box fitted to all German marques.

Mine has indicators, and I use (or choose not to after observation and assessment of need) them. I prefer to drive 3 seconds from car in front. No need for black box, and funnily enough, my insurance is reasonably low. Nice try though.

[Pica-Pica]

Sad Ken said:

jamei303 said:

Let's have pedestrian tests too. No walking near roads unless accompanied by a full pedestrian licence holder.

And forum posting tests....no posting unless you can wind the sarcasm in a notch or two

And spell in British English.

[Sad Ken]

Y16 SES said:

Re-test every few years? 99.99% of people would fail

A good thing then? All the crap drivers off the road and onto public transport (yeah yeah, public transport can barely cope as it is, details details lol)

[TooMany2cvs]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

So you're saying that what's already illegal should be made illegal?

[PSH]

I would like to see random roadside eye tests, it seems to me that a vast amount of drivers are blind....also better checks on the elderly...when I see someone struggle to move around a car, get in and then drive it's clear that they should never be allowed behind the wheel..I am talking the infirm, not disabled due to missing limbs, their actions are usually quick enough..

[Pica-Pica]

3 or 5 year driving tests, and enforcing current laws would be my choice. I would also like more public information broadcasts on the usual foibles of drivers (indicating, MLHogging etc).

[Y16 SES]

Sad Ken said:

Y16 SES said:

Re-test every few years? 99.99% of people would fail

A good thing then? All the crap drivers off the road and onto public transport (yeah yeah, public transport can barely cope as it is, details details lol)

My intended purpose of that was to make sure the vast majority of the people on this page know they aren't driving gods and would also suffer the consequences of having retests. On that point; all these tailgating people, all of them tailgate and if they say they don't then they are 100% lying.

[Pica-Pica]

crofty1984 said:

Motorcycle thieves to be set on fire.

Sorry, Winnie Mandela has passed on, your wish for ‘necklacing’ will go unanswered.

[PSH]

Y16 SES said:

Sad Ken said:

Y16 SES said:

Re-test every few years? 99.99% of people would fail

A good thing then? All the crap drivers off the road and onto public transport (yeah yeah, public transport can barely cope as it is, details details lol)

My intended purpose of that was to make sure the vast majority of the people on this page know they aren't driving gods and would also suffer the consequences of having retests. On that point; all these tailgating people, all of them tailgate and if they say they don't then they are 100% lying.

I can honestly say that I never 'tailgate' ..ever

[Pica-Pica]

motco said:

"Thou shalt not simply stop at random whilst progressing down the highway in a stream of normal moving traffic to let someone out of a side-road simply because you are a nice person"

"Thou shalt not do an emergency stop just because an emergency vehicle with blue lights and a siren is vaguely in the vicinity"

"Thou shalt not pull out from a side-road in front of a fast moving vehicle and not move thine arse smartly along the carriageway"

"Thou shalt not do thy weekly shop in the Tesco Express at the local petrol station whilst occupying a place at a pump"

...and numerous others...

You forgot ‘Thou shalt not exit a fuel station, by its entry’