AIBU to think drivers should do a cycle test before being allowed to drive?

[bicuriousgeorge]

Sorry thread about a thread but there are good and bad cyclists and good and bad drivers.
Unfortunately bad drivers are likely to do far more damage than bad cyclists.

Bonebackjefferson

TFL have a massive campaign going to make cyclist aware of the dangers of getting along side HGV's.

IME the danger times are when all traffic has come to a stand still, lights are red and cyclist legally carries on down the narrow gutter cycle lane passed cars and starts to pass the HGV. Half way through the passing the HGV the lights change and HGV starts moving unaware there is a cyclist half way along side him.

TFL have been campaigning about the dangers and you will see more often nowadays cyclists stopping behind the line of the HGV whether there is room to move forward or not.

It would mean I'm not allowed to drive, because I can't ride a bike.

TFL have also introduced free or subsidised cycle training

www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/cycling/11689.aspx

Endoplasmic

There of course would be exemptions and a simulator could be used for those who simply can't cycle for whatever reason.

bicuriousgeorge

By posting the other half of the issue it shows that it is not just HGV's and buses that are at fault but the cyclists as well. All of the campaigns must be balanced to show that there are issues on both sides of this.

Linking this to KidLorneRoll making drivers more aware doesn't stop cyclists from doing stupid things, training the drivers doesn't solve the entire problem, it just ignores half of it.

My DGS (aged 5) walked out of my drive once onto the pavement to wait by his dads car. A young lad on a bike (approx. 12yrs old) went whizzing past our drive on the pavement just as DGS was exiting the drive. Knocked DGS clean off his feet and there was a sickening crack as DGSs head hit the pavement. He was rushed to hospital with suspected fractured skull and severe concussion. Luckily he had no lasting damage and was fine but could 've been very different.

I appreciate some mums will actively encourage their DCs to ride on the pavement especially where it's wide , because it is so dangerous on the roads these days. But please if you must do so , don't do it where there are driveways - so dangerous.

No, it doesn't. If you look at the statistics the vast number of accidents involving cyclists and cars, horses and cars, peds and cars are the fault of the motorist.

A huge number of drivers simply do not know, or don't care, how vulnerable these road users are. They don't know why cyclists don't cycle in the lane, or why horse riders don't immediately direct their animals into the nearest ditch.

I could probably ride a tricycle (it's the balancing that's the issue).

It ignores the issues of bad road usage by anyone, how does making the driver more aware of vulnerable road users, stop those road users from putting themselves in a bad position?
How does it stop pedestrians stepping out from behind a parked car?
How does it stop a cyclist coming out of a junction in to traffic without looking?
How does it stop a cyclist from jumping on and off the pavement?
There are many others but by focusing on the driver you are missing a lot of the problems that are not caused by drivers.

YANBU

I regularly drive along a road with a long twisty hill that is very popular with cyclists at weekends. There is a large group who use this route: often 12-18 of them (I have counted!). They ride taking the full width of the lane. They do this through the village leading to the hill, then they do it up the hill. By the time they are at the top of the hill they are doing about 7 mph. It is IMPOSSIBLE to overtake them as the bends are all blind. They are fully aware of the effect that they have, as they turn around to look at the queue they cause.

Surely if the bends are blind then you shouldn't overtake them even if they're single file? I frequently ride two abreast with my friend taking up most of the carriageway. We're legally entitled to do so, organisations such as SkyRides recommend it and its safer for us. If we go single file then cars try and squeeze by even if there's oncoming traffic when there isn't space. A car should give a cyclist as much room as they would a car when overtaking, ie go onto the other side of the road.

I'd go single file if the road was really wide and there was space for two cars and a cyclist to safely pass.

ukcyclelaws.blogspot.co.uk/p/the-laws-according-to-highway-code.html

That first paragraph is a quote btw of a previous post.

more than two thirds of accidents involving cyclists and cars the motor vehicle was at fault

A vulnerable road user is less likely to put themselves in danger than they are to have something done to them. Of course there will always be idiots on bikes/ those who make a mistake.

Viva

From your link 1/5 of accidents are caused by cyclists, do you believe as Kidlorne does that they shouldn't be targeted by campaigns for improvement/safety?

I said that driver targeted training would be the best way to improve road safety, not the only way. Given that there is always limited funds for these things, however, the sensible thing would be to go after the bigger problem.

Boney, not at all. Like I said there will always be some idiot cyclists.

By all means have a campaign targeted at cyclists but there needs to be a campaign aimed at drivers who cause the other four fifths of accidents.

It would also make sense to go after the 1 in 11 drivers who have no insurance (never mind those who have no MOT or license). Why don't we have insurance disks displayed by law on the registration plates, as in some other European countries?

Yet theres thread after thread on here about how much mumsnetters hate cyclists.

My friend's mother was the cyclist who was killed by the driver who managed to kill two cyclists, in two different incidents. She was in her seventies, and still fit and active, and put many younger people to shame, yet attitudes like the OP's I think contribute to people like that driving carelessly and recklessly.

What on earth would drivers have to fear from being trained to be better drivers. Resistance to that is bonkers.

I don't think MN 'hates' bikers at all. A lot have no opinion, and some idiots like to come out with cyclist-threatening stuff (though I've yet to see anyone being deleted for it.) But mostly it's symptomatic of a lack of understanding about other's needs.

Just caught up with some of the thread. Seen the demand that cyclists should always wear hi-viz.

Sooo should all vehicles be painted light lime green, or yellow? You know, so drivers can see each other, as the number of car accidents that happen...

Viva Would you go two-abreast up a looooooong hill knowing that you were causing a tailback of cars, including those who were behind you for a mile or so before you even got to the hill?

IME the danger times are when all traffic has come to a stand still, lights are red and cyclist legally carries on down the narrow gutter cycle lane passed cars and starts to pass the HGV.

This is something that should be made illegal. Even vehicles have blind spots and cycles (and motorbikes) that come barreling down through the line of traffic can literally come out of your blind spot just as the lights change and you go to accelerate. You want drivers to be more aware of their actions around cyclists, but cyclists themselves don't want to get more awareness of how to be safe around vehicles by passing a test (as per the other thread).

Just caught up with some of the thread. Seen the demand that cyclists should always wear hi-viz.

Sooo should all vehicles be painted light lime green, or yellow? You know, so drivers can see each other, as the number of car accidents that happen...

Rather a silly statement really.... Cars have 2 head ligthts and 2 tail lights which in many cars come on automatically. In my experience it is rare to see a cycle light during daylight hours.

Pan
"What on earth would drivers have to fear from being trained to be better drivers. Resistance to that is bonkers."

As is resistance to train cyclists to be better cyclists.

Viva
from your own link its 2/3rds of the problem

An interesting article on the BBC website about a new type of cycle helmet:

m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25681895