AIBU to think cyclists should pay tax and insurance?

[Pumpernickel10]

I'm probably digging a big hole here but I really feel that cyclists should pay road tax and insurance. This is why...
My SIL had a smash yesterday in her car, caused several thousand pounds worth of damage and had whiplash, this happened cause a cyclist rode through a red light causing her to swerve and hit a tree. The cyclist just carried on riding not knowing the damage he had caused. SIL will now lose 12 years no claims cause of this fucking idiot cyclist. He's got no number plate as they don't have them so there no telling who he is. This just doesn't seem right.
AIBU?

We can all behave badly on the roads sadly

Piglet

Where's the quote?

YABU.

Road tax does not pay for the use of roads. It's excise duty and goes to pay for anything and everything. Cycling is as environmentally friendly as it gets and we should encourage more people to exercise. Number plates for bikes? No... even daft Boris dropped that idea.

ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/bike-licensing-doesnt-work-just-ask-boris/

Most of your lycra louts will have their £3000 Pinarellos insured. Either through British Cycling memebership or the BTA.

As for riding two abreast, it's fine and often easier for cars to overtake a group rather than strung out single cyclists.

www.bikeradar.com/fitness/article/technique-road-positioning-197/

Try being a cyclist and look at it from their perspective. There are more nutter car drivers around.

There is no excuse for bad cycling, or bad driving, and it is reasonable to be annoyed by BAD cyclists, just as they get annoyed with bad motorists.

The Independent has tried to put some balance back into this debate, qwuelling the ramblings of Jeremy Clarkson and that idiot James Martin who advocated running cyclists over.

step I already gave the same link further up the thread and explained about vehicle tax and why as it is based on emmisions cycles don't have to pay as their riders don't fart enough to count

Two of my friends have permanent injuries caused by pedestrians stepping in front of them while they were cycling along the road. I think that's a good reason for pedestrians to have number plates and insurance

i live in a town where there are more bikes then cars. (or so it seems)

I recently had to get my bike out because my car is poorly :(

Bicycles are a pita when they are swerving all over the road etc but then there are cars that dont know how to act when in front of a bike.

I have taken to riding my bike on the pavement for my own safety because of the idiotic drivers in this town. you are BU OP.

or behind a bike for that matter. the amount of cars that sped up so they can turn in the next junction to avoid waiting for me to pass it and iv had to stop dead to wait for car to turn.

I don't think they should pay tax for the reasons stated. However they need to abide by the rules of the road. Every bloody Sunday I see them out (I admit I don't like a lot of them) going through red lights, popping onto the pavements when it suits them (usually to avoid a red light/pedestrian crossing), riding two/three abreast. It is bloody selfish and dangerous and should be cracked down on.

The cycle lane thing is a great idea in theory but space is limited to do it in most places.

DH gets really mad when he sees cyclists on the road rather than driving on the great big blue cycle lanes in London. No reason for it. Twats.

I am sure most cyclists are very good on the road and yes there are lots of bad drivers but it is not ok for them to do whatever they like on the road.

Angryfeet

Your DH needs to calm down! Cyclists on the road, how dare they? The cycle path doesn't mean they have to go there, esp. as it's often full of drains, debris, parked cars, etc (and two abreast is legal and advisable).

I do think that there is anti-cycling tendency among some people (esp. people who don't cycle, but then they're the ones losing out)

I ride horses and we abide by the laws,so cyclists should too. I know its only country roads I ride on but its still the same.

Pumpernickel - do you ever break the law when you drive (i.e. drive faster than 70, etc?)

I try not to no,but I think we are all guilty of going over 70 on a motorway,I know I have.

Has anyone pointed out that your SIL could have been making it up? Any chance she just swerved thru lack of attention, tiredness ( glass of vino at lunch...) etc either there was no cyclist or cyclist was behaving perfectly correctly and she messed up at the lights?? Bit convenient that the alleged cause of accident wasn't around after...

That's exactly the point though. The majority of cyclists try to stick to the law, and occasionally digress. I know if I'm at a pedestrian crossing (not a main road junction) with no-one there, I might go through a red light (depending on my mood).

What you're saying is well all transgress a little, most cyclists and drivers stick to the rules (although most cyclists have experience of being a driver, rather than vice versa, and are typically are bit more aware of their surroundings).

The cyclist in your OP was clearly at fault. But generally, cyclists on the road aren't the problem

Would not think so stripes thats not her style to make things up plus shes t total. I know my SIL and shes no liar and is a careful driver.

I would add to stripes' point, it does seems your sister must have been driving a little inattentively, coming up to a junction, to hit a tree - how fast was she going?

I tried to get fully comprehensive insurance for my bike (same basis as car insurance) - but it doesn't exist. I don't cycle on the roads as i don't want to be uninsured.

How in hell's name can you say she was being inattentive, Bennifer? The cyclist jumped a red light, and Pumpernickel's SIL avoided him/her - that, to me, shows she was paying attention. Surely, if she was being inattentive, she wouldn't have noticed the cyclist in time to avoid him/her??

I wasn't there so I can't know, just speculation. Assuming it was an urban area, driving at 30 mph, approaching a junction, keeping an eye out for traffic that might jump red lights, and you have to swerve so drastically to hit a tree?

LOL. So now the OP's SIL is a drunk driver who wasn't paying attention and must have been speeding and made up the bad cyclist?

Cyclist allegedly jumped light - she must have been revving some to lose control and hit a tree like that.

SoupDragon, yeah! Am just saying who knows, i know plenty of people who have had prangs but neveradmit fault. it's always the other guy, right??

bennifer she swerved to avoid hitting him hence why she hit a tree. Would you rather she hit him or a tree??? she was the reponsible one and the quick thinking one to swerve to avoid hitting him,he was the one that ran a red light,not her!

I would say it is quite easy to over steer when trying not to kill a cyclist and hit a tree. Perhaps she should have aimed for the cyclist, not the tree.

stripes your talking out your ass. I know her and in the 25 years she been driving shes never had an accident.