To think that cyclists should no longer be treated as ‘exempt’ from the law?

[Amch]

I’m in no way trying to be difficult, but this is a situation that I find is getting rather problematic, dangerous and very unfair.

In my opinion, ALL road users should be identifiable and able to be held accountable for any wrongdoing.

I am in complete support of cyclists, but the fact that it is lawless for them is very unfair. Sometimes, like all road users, cyclists decision making and actions are unjust, these actions can cause and has caused serious harm.

I’ve had various personal experiences where on multiple occasions cyclists have completely ignored red lights, they’ve narrowly missed pedestrians whilst crossing roads. Just recently a cyclist knocked on the rear window of a car in front of me (the car had stopped due to traffic) in order to try to get the car to move over for them to squeeze through.

This particular cyclist had a camera on their helmet, as a lot of them now do and I do believe it’s a great move for them to wear cameras on their helmets. Of course other road users can also cause harm, drive aggressively, competitively and can cause harm to cyclists who are clearly more vulnerable in the sense that their mode of transport offers nil protection.

However, it seems very one sided that cyclists cameras are able to identify and report other road users, yet cyclists themselves cannot be in any way be held accountable for any wrongdoing on their part.

I’m interested in hearing other opinions, from all points of view.

For the people talking about Amsterdam - yes, it's great that there's more bikes. less cars. It's a much nicer city because of it, but it's also not particularly pedestrian friendly because of it, particularly for people with reduced mobility and the like.

The cyclists there are very much keen on the idea that they are 'in charge'. They don't obey traffic lights, don't give way and they don't slow down.

On our most recent trip there, I saw groups cycle right through red lights into the path of oncoming trams and buses several times, had to jump out of way repeatedly, and actually crossing a road was hair-raising. A dinging bell isn't nearly enough warning for someone elderly or disabled (if they can hear it in the first place) and I really didn't see very many people who fit that description at all. There's also a vanishingly small number of helmets/hi-vis in action.

It also bears mentioning that the demographics of the Netherlands and Amsterdam are very different to the UK, as are the population densities. London has 8x as many people as Amsterdam; Manchester 2.5x, Birmingham 2x etc

Cycles present a different risk to pedestrians because they're small and silent. You can't hear them coming and they can come from gaps with no warning.

Great question. Here the car is king.
Look how many people on this thread have complained about cyclists doing exactly what they are entitled to and should be doing as written in the Highway Code - taking the lane? There's an ingrained belief that cyclists shouldn't have the right to be on our roads. We are still completely tied to our cars. See schools at pick up and drop off, where we can't possibly make our little darlings walk 15-20 mins and possibly get slight damp. The horror!
Of course some cyclists behave like dicks, just like people in every other demographic do. But it pisses people off disproportionately because they fundamentally do not believe that cyclists have the right to be out there where CARS should be.

@ginnybag I would prefer the cyclists to be in charge generally speaking, although I know they are not perfect.

Ive been to Amsterdam and had a few hair raising moments, agreed!

Have you been outside Amsterdam? The Netherlands as a whole is a cycle-friendly nation. It’s normal to see elderly people on bikes. It’s normal to see parents towing kids in trailers. These are not people cycling en masse at top speed in the direction of disabled folk on pavements. It’s a very orderly kind of cycling. I like it very much.

Agree 100% . Great post.

Isn’t it? I’ve seen teenage predestrians deliberately walk out in front of cars to scare them and then duck away laughing.

I’ve seen adults, multiple multiple times, decide to cross a 4 and 6 lane road near me, which is 40mph though of course everyone drives at 60mph. Because the crossing is a bit too far down at the lights.

I’ve seen parents multiple times letting their tiny children walk or scooter 100m ahead and cross a 40mph on their own, absolutely oblivious to the danger it causes.

None of those people needed their responsibility as pedestrians.

Shall we licence people to walk down the street and require adults or parents of minors to take out 3rd party insurance?

As a car driver, it is my responsibility to watch out for other road users.
As a cyclist, it is my responsibility to watch out for other road users.
As a pedestrian, it is my responsibility to watch out for other road users.

As someone who uses public highways in whatever mode of transport, it's my respinsibility to know and follow the highway code.

Cars are easily identifiable and have a lot of legislation about driver training, licenses and insurance. I'd rather prioritise dealing with the significant proportion of drivers who don't follow those rules/ laws and place all other road users at significant risk before making cycling even less practical an option than it is already.

I don't live in a cycle friendly place with safe connections to other parts of town so most of my cycling is recreational and either off-road or carefully chosen routes. If cycling is made expensive and beauocratic, mine and my family's bikes would be scrapped.

Most MAMIL types of cyclist have driving licenses anyway.
The all-in-black teenage/ young man ninja cyclists are often engaged in drug running or other anti-social behaviour, so legislation would have zero effect on their safe cycling skills. I tend to think of them as idiots on bikes rather than being cyclists in the same way that dashing to a bus stop =/= to being a jogger.
All it would do is eliminate casual recreational cyclists and prevent the next generation from learning to cycle when their parents are put off.

They aren't exempt from the law, it's just that they completely ignore it and nothing ever seems to be done.

Yes, we did, and I agree. It's a lovely, lovely place and much quieter and cleaner for the reduced car use. I also agree that they should have 'charge' of roads. I just also think there might be a place for enforcing things like red-lights and higher visibility to better balance needs, especially in a city where the footpaths are often so narrow and cluttered that the 'road' isn't a road so much as a shared space.

I saw the kids in trailers, yes, including some very cool looking ones which must be great fun, and truthfully, ten years ago, I'd have just hired a bike myself and joined in. These days, I've a spine issue which means that's a no-go. I may just be slightly jealous :-) ( I was most definitely jealous of the public transport)

Absolutely this. I was struck by how unfriendly the cyclists in the areas we stayed in were to pedestrians - bikes may have priority over cars, but the cyclists certainly don't show pedestrians any respect. I also witnessed several bike crashes - one bad one - and the overall standard of cycling wasn't great. There were also roads were cyclists just didn't go as they were too fast and busy - my friend from the Netherlands who cycled all her life back home is astounded by the cyclists she sees holding up traffic on busy A roads here, she says you don't see that nearly to the same extent there as cyclists are more aware of the road conditions and cycle accordingly.

I’d pass a law that all cyclists have to wear helmets. I hate how many don’t and how much more vulnerable they are making themselves if there is an accident.

Thanks for responding. 😊👍

Why? Do you ride a bike or are you just wanting to impose your rules on another group?
There is evidence that helmet wearing is less safe as drivers do not give as much space when overtaking

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/policy-positions/all/all/our-position-on-the-use-of-cycle-helmets

In particular, “The studies above, however, only access the effectiveness of helmets following a collision. Some studies suggest wearing a helmet may be associated with an increased likelihood of having a collision and helmets can contribute towards greater injury in the event of a collision.
Another interesting Dutch study found that 13.3% of cyclists hospitalised in the Netherlands were wearing helmets, despite it being estimated that less than 1% of Dutch cyclists wear helmets”

Helmet wearing should be left to individual choice and circumstances. The risk is that forced helmet wearing would lead to a decrease in cycling (although given that almost no road traffic laws are enforced anyway, I’d take the risk of continuing exactly as I do now)

I do ride a bike but my motivation was from thinking how vulnerable heads look when cycling and a belief (that I’m very willing to have challenged) that helmets are safer. I’m aware of the devastating effects ABI can have.

Thank you for the links, I will read them through later.

A friend of mine was seriously injured as a cyclist when a pedestrian stepped in front of her with no warning…
So better make sure all pedestrians are licensed and identifiable too

The pedestrian was knocked down on a pedestrian crossing. Not the same thing at all.

However, if the cyclist had had insurance when they fell off their bike as a result of the pedestrian stepping out and them not being able to stop in time then the insurance would have paid for medical bills, time off work etc.

Right……
Pedestrian injured by cyclist disobeying the Highway Code so bring in the pedestrian’s space
vs
Cyclist injured by pedestrian disobeying the Highway Code so being in the cyclist’s space
How very different!

or perhaps we should accept that ALL Road users need to take responsibility and act responsibly (together with the practicality that pedestrians and cyclist won’t be licensed, which doesn’t mean they don’t have rules they should follow)

Your bit about insurance is irrelevant. In this case, the cyclist did have insurance to cover those things. Didn’t stop their injuries from causing them significant pain as well as inconvenience

Pedestrians are allowed to be on the road - unless you mean that the pedestrian saw her and purposely stepped in front of her on a dedicated cycle path? The HC changed recently, there is now a hierarchy of road users and 'those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility to take care and reduce the danger they pose to others'. The issue of insurance is relevant - whilst it doesn't stop them from being injured it's very unusual for a cyclist to have insurance, which was my point in one of my previous posts and which is something many posters on here have also been calling for.

I do think some cyclists are dangerous and I’d like to see the law applied . I thought the cyclist who knocked down and killed a lady in a park should have been punished as clearly going to fast without regard for pedestrians.

Your right but nobody has the balls to.implement it.
Its madness, a cyclist can mow you down, and ride off and nobody knows who.

I agree with OP. Cyclist can be a menace. They don't follow the rules of the road.

Thieves' Guild. Worked for Vetinari.

Motorists can be a menace if they don't follow the rules of the road. And their vehicle will weigh 1ton or more

Actually, horse riders aren't legally required to wear helmets - only children riding horses. Horses are higher than bikes, can gallop at 30mph (yes, some cyclists may be able to go this fast but a child horserider may not be able to stop a horse), a horse is heavy if it lands on you and a horse has hooves and can kick you in the head. If cyclists should have to wear helmets "because riders do" maybe drivers and pedestrians should have to wear helmets too?

Car drivers can be a menace. Many if them don't follow the rules of the road. This appears much more dangerous given the fatalities reported in the news on a regular basis.

I am speaking as someone who is a mainly a pedestrian. I have never been knocked over by a car but I have been knocked by cyclist twice. I have plenty of near misses - there too many who do not pay attention to the rules of the rules. A lot of cyclist cycle too fast and cannot slow down fast for pedestrians. Cyclist are menaces to other users.