to think cyclists ought to sit a test before being allowed on the road?

[SantanaLopez]

I live on a route popular with amateur cyclists. Yet again this morning another group of folk were causing absolute havoc on a two lane road. They aren't dressed properly, they don't signal, they don't even look where they're going. One man was weaving along instead of cycling in a straight line!

So while I have a cup of tea and a cake (for medicinal reasons)- aibu to think that they should have to be tested before being allowed on the road? I know drivers are the biggest hazard, but safety works both ways!

Also, curious to know in what way the cyclists encountered by the OP weren't dressed properly? Were they naked or something? Not sure what other special clothing they'd need in daylight.

I'm in Scotland, it's still dark up here in the mornings. And I think a helmet is pretty non-negotiable.

Yet more typical British culture of resentment.

Why not resent people cycling unsafely? They're putting themselves at risk and they're putting me at risk!

It isn't always the motorist at fault.

When I was a child a cyclist turned left out of the road opposite our house without stopping / looking to see what, if anything, was coming. Unfortunately for him he cycled straight under the wheels of a lorry and was killed instantly.

It wasn't the lorry driver's fault at all, yet he will be living with that for the rest of his life.

Coming across the grim scene (I won't go into details as it's disturbing) as an 8 year old is something I will never forget. Ever.

Yes, there are awful motorists who cause accidents, but there are also cyclists who take risks with their own safety, and that of others.

No doubt some will take this as bashing cyclists. It's not.

All road users need to take responsibility for the safety of others and themselves. Sadly there's a percentage of all road users, on whatever method of transport, who aren't very good and seem unable to use the road responsibly and safely.

I think much more could be done to promote the basics of road safety for cyclists. Cycling proficiency was offered at primary school when I was young - I guess this is not still standard? Perhaps some kind of government-supported, optional online test not unlike the driving theory test. A lot could be done to encourage cyclists to be more conscientious about their use of the road - I have been hit by cyclists several times and all of them were flouting safety basics: twice, crossing at a pelican crossing when the light was in my favour (the second time I was seven months pregnant); once by someone cycling on the pavement, at night with no lights, no high-viz clothing and dressed entirely in black; once on a pedestrian-only footpath. If there was more publicity around cycling safely, the people who ploughed into me could not plead ignorance.

Santana you would get rid of the hugely popular "boris bike" scheme in London then?

I think a lot of people calling for x, y & z are maybe only thinking of the type of roads and cycling and behaviours in their own neck of the woods, and are not considering all of the implications of their suggestions.

Hungryhorace that could just have easily been a pedestrian though. Cars and other motor vehicles are very dangerous, and while they are on the roads people will be killed, and not always due to someone making a mistake.

I don't think that penalising all other people on the streets because motor vehicles are inherently dangerous is teh right approach.

Again, it has been shown that the more people are mixed together, and teh more different types of transport are there, the better people behave.

If there are few bicycles on the roads, people are not used to them and are not in the mindset of expecting them to be around & looking out for them. If there are lots of bikes everywhere, then people are used to them and it all gets by a lot better.

That is my experience as well in real life in the area I work.

YABU. Learner motorcyclists are allowed on the road under a certain engine size and with helmets. How else are they supposed to get experience? The same goes for cyclists in my book.

They could have insurance, registration and a test and compulsory protective clothing but it would cost money and put people off cycling, which is quite a good thing. So seeing as they're the ones taking the real risks, I'm not that fussed.

Motorcyclists are generally considered the best road users because they realise they'll come off worst in an accident with a car. I can't see why most sensible cyclists wouldn't be the same.

I don't ride a motorbike or a pushbike btw. I'm not brave enough to take my chances with the dozy car drivers I see - myself sometimes included. I try, but I can't say I've never made a mistake.

BTW I also smile when I see packs of rollerbladers going through the streets. Near me it seems to be something like the last Friday or first Sunday in every month or something. It's seems like a fun and harmless thing to do and the roads are for everyone.

Some car drivers get enraged by it though the inconvenience is minuscule, if any.

Santana you would get rid of the hugely popular "boris bike" scheme in London then?

Why would a test affect this?

I don't think that penalising all other people on the streets because motor vehicles are inherently dangerous is teh right approach.

I think that cyclists have to take some responsibility for their own safety though. I don't think that taking a test to prove your competence is a punishment or penalty.

m.sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/commentary/cycling-most-dangerous-thing-you-can-do-in-singapore

One of the radio stations in Singapore had a feature on cycling recently and a driver said "In an accident between a cyclist and a car, it won't be the drivers name on the obituary...."

Singapore has plans for bike lanes.

Oooh I couldn't agree more! Or they should at least face the same penalties as drivers for skipping red lights etc grrrrrrrrrr!

Yes, Tabard, it could have been a pedestrian. But it wasn't.

I was responding to those people who seemed to suggest that where a cyclist dies it's the motorist's fault. I was just showing that it isn't always the case.

Even a simple online Highway Code / hazard perception test would be better than nothing at all. That wouldn't cost a huge amount but would probably benefit those cyclists who don't drive cars.

I don't subscribe to the helmet wearing being compulsory, to be honest. Though why some cyclists don't have lights does beggar belief.

Cycling proficiency still exists in schools, it is called bikeability. But it is up to parents to teach their children how to ride a bike. However there was a thread on here recently where that was considered unreasonable also. Most of these threads are started.by people who never ever get on a bike.

4 times as many pedestrians die a year in road accidents than cyclists so would you suggest that pedestrians need to prove their competence and complete a test before setting foot on the road?

Do you really think that cyclists aren't concerned (and thus take responsibility) for their safety?

Not all, but some, yes.

The example I made in my OP- a cyclist was in front of me. It was impossible to overtake him because he was weaving about in some sort of figure of 8. I know these roads like the back of my hand- there are no potholes. He was not wearing a helmet.

I also was stuck behind three cyclist riding abreast (is that the right term?), even although they knew that I was coming up behind them. It was impossible to overtake them because I would have had to have gone into the right hand lane. This was going up a hill and approaching the corner, so that was impossible to do safely.

This is just one morning!

I think the driver that pulled out of junction into me on my bike because "she didn't see me" (me being the only other bit of traffic in the vicinity) should have sat some kind of test before being allowed on a road - oh no, hold on, she did...

There are alway going to be crappy road users everywhere, drivers, cyclists, pedestrians etc etc. and no amount of testing etc is going to stop idiots being idiots. But we should all try to get along and use the roads together for as long as we have to - this vilifying of certain groups helps no-one and just makes me even more nervous than I already am about going out on the road again.

4 times as many pedestrians die a year in road accidents than cyclists so would you suggest that pedestrians need to prove their competence and complete a test before setting foot on the road?

A pedestrian should not be on the road to begin with.

Unfortunately pedestrians do need to cross roads or in some places pavements simply don't exist. I physically can not get to a local shop without having to walk on a road. It is not a choice.

no amount of testing etc is going to stop idiots being idiots. But we should all try to get along and use the roads together for as long as we have to

No, but I think we can all agree the roads would be in a far worse state if drivers were just let loose with no test. I really believe that a cycling test would help to minimise the risks.

I cycle around 30 miles a day solely to get around, my bike is my transport.
In my experience, it is honestly the MAJORITY of drivers who act selfishly, are inconsiderate and just plain dangerous. On the country road I was cycling down yesterday, I took a more dominant position in the road and was beeped at by 3 cars who wanted me to move (into the hedge? the ditch?) It seems like many drivers think they're more entitled to use the road than cyclists.

I rarely get given enough room when cars are overtaking me which really does scare me. I've been told by drivers a few times to get onto the cycle track when there is one (rarely) even though pretty much all cycle paths in England are shit, bumpy, slow and have broken glass on etc.

Cycling doesn't pollute the environment and you're very unlikely to hurt anybody....

SantanaLopez, pedestrians shouldn't be on the road?! Many roads don't have pavements, didn't you know that? What about when pedestrians are crossing the road..?

Some cyclists aren't concerned because they do not realize they are doing anything dangerous.

I have had conversations with intelligent people who're good friends, who do this. I had a mate all indignant she'd been stopped for turning left on the red light. It's not that she's a complete idiot who doesn't care, and I'm not excusing her failing to check the rules of the road, but she didn't do it thinking she was doing something dangerous.

You can't compare a cyclist to a pedestrian, that's ridiculous.

Are there no traffic lights or crossing zones? These help to minimise the risks.