To think cyclists should allow cars to overtake them?

[Twitterqueen]

If you're cycling and you know a car is behind you and wants to overtake, should you let them / facilitate the overtake or deliberately refuse and shout 'wait' at the car? When the road ahead is straight and clear for well over half a mile, when the car has been patiently waiting for a safe, straight stretch, there is no other traffic but the road is just that little bit too narrow for the car to want to do it without some kind of affirmation from the cyclist, ie stop pedaling for a few seconds and move a bit closer into the side of the road?

Nearly 20,000 accidents a year, around 5000 of which fatal or serious

www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/cycling/facts-figures.aspx

what about the drain on NHS services that causes

Just because it can hold five people doesn't mean it usually does. Even if you are talking about a taxi carrying two people that is still replacing one bike, not two, the taxi driver wouldn't be making that journey without the customer.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/358035/rrcgb2013-00.pdf

The key findings from the RRCGB 2013 report include:
? Road deaths in 2013 decreased by 2 per cent compared to 2012, to
1,713. This is the lowest figure since national records began in 1926.
? The number of people seriously injured decreased by 6 per cent to
21,657 in 2013, compared to 2012.
? The total number of casualties in road accidents reported to the
police in 2013 was 183,670, down 6 per cent from the 2012 total.
? Vehicle traffic levels have remained broadly stable with a small
increase of 0.4 per cent between 2012 and 2013.
? Pedal cyclist deaths decreased by 8 per cent to 109 in 2013,
compared to 118 in 2012.
? Pedal cyclist deaths have seen a long-term fall, but have fluctuated
between roughly 100 and 120 over the last six years. Since records
began in the 1920s, the highest annual figure seen for cyclist deaths
was 1,536 in 1934. The lowest annual figure for pedal cyclist deaths
was 104 in 2009, 93 per cent lower than the 1934 high.
? Our best current estimate, derived from the NTS data, is that the total
number of road casualties in Great Britain annually, including those
not reported to the police, is within the range 630 to 800 thousand with
a central estimate of 720 thousand.
? The latest estimates of drink drive casualties are for 2012 and
show that there were 230 drink drive deaths in 2012, not significantly
different to the previous two years

A bike can never carry more than one adult. Bikes do not reduce congestion in London. People should use public transport if at all possible.

Maybe everyone should be forced to drive everywhere at 12mph and then our roads would be far safer and cyclists could be safe in their ideologies.

For a collective who at every turn has refused point blank to entertain carrying insurance or identifying themselves on the road via number plates, there is a lot of self-righteous fervour from the cyclist community.

If anyone has ever had a cyclist scratch past their car in traffic, or clip their number with their peddle as they swerve around your car, it is fair game to side swipe the idiots with a little turbulence or a near miss with a wing mirror. Until cyclists are willing to play fair on the road, and so long as they are happy to be the anonymous vandals that they are in the city, who cares? They need to either okay the laws of the road and put themselves and their property up as assurance (as motorists do)' or they need to grow thicker skin and pad up and take the tumbles.

Yes Gemma, but 20,000 cycle accidents in 2014.

Your report discusses cyclist deaths which is relatively low (fortunately) but not cyclist accidents as a whole.

most of very central London is perfectly walkable - dh walks from Waterloo to Oxxford circus and back every day. But plenty of people couldn't even run for a bus, and expect to drive, or be driven everywhere - hence the traffic. And it's those sorts of people who are going to be a drain on the NHS not fit and healthy people! Cyclists live on average 2 years longer than non cyclists.

elephantspoo, I love the way you equate hypothetical minor damage to a car with deliberate manoeuvres that could kill or injure another human being.

If you actually do this rather than fantasise about it on the internet the you should be locked up.

I do sometimes run into work. All those pedestrians really piss me off, obviously, clogging up the pavements. The thing I don't get is that me, or anyone else on this thread cycling really doesn't impact on anything, so I have no idea why you seem intent on forcing me onto a bus!

Back to your Armageddon theory of cyclists gridlocking the city. Obviously if EVERYONE using any one mode of transport suddenly migrated onto another, eg all tube users suddenly took the bus, or all cyclists suddenly drove instead, then of course the city would be in trouble. But how likely do you really think it is that 2 million Londoners are going to hot foot it to Halfords this weekend to buy a bike and bring the city to its knees on Monday morning? Really? In one of the most sedentary and obese countries in Europe? I'd say the drain on NHS services due to that is pretty high. And how exactly would you police your cycle free zone? A gated enclosure around zone 2. A total ban on bikes for residents in central London? Utterly bonkers.

If you really want London to be a safe and healthy place to live then forcing cyclists onto public transport isn't going to achieve that. Cutting emissions though. Now there's a thought.

I'm making the point that until cyclist are willing to okay the laws of the road in the same manner as other road users, they cannot justifiably expect to be taken seriously by the majority of society. And until they are willing to carry insurance and identify themselves as honest and responsible road users, they remain in the category of the self-righteous pests that a large proportion of them are. We all know decent courteous and considerate road users in all modes of transport, and we have all come across real AHs, but the AHs on peddle bikes are the only ones who are granted the privilege of anonymity and virtual immunity to prosecution. The fact that as a group some of them sustain injuries or fear on the roads is akin to a collective karma; they have the privilege to do as they please, but must incur the greater risk of injury and peril that those privileges bring with them.

I am sure that if bicycles had number plates and insurance policies, many of the cyclists on the roads would be far more considerate, lest they be identified and sued in the courts.

If a cyclist is knocked off his bike because he cycled up the inside of a line of cars and a car turns left it serves him right for being so very, very stupid.

Serves him right = basic human empathy fail, no matter what a cyclist's real or imagined crimes.

It's not about the Highway Code. It's about simple consideration for other road users, and doing what you can not to impede other people's journeys.

It's about safety, which is so frequently compromised in the pursuit of not having one's journey impeded. Having said that, when I'm cycling I often stop pedaling for a few seconds and move a bit closer into the side of the road as the OP bids, because I know how impatient people can be when they're driving, and I'd rather have impatient people in front of me.

I used to dash through London in a car but those days are over because of increased use of cycles.

Some might call that a result, but I could never be so cruel.

WillkommenBienvenue, if you ever get the chance to become mayor of London, I beg of you, please don't ban me and my bike, else the NHS will be obliged to treat me for melancholia.

Elephants poo I have never refused point blank to have insurance or number plates on my bike. It's not a legal requirement. Bring it in and I'll happily comply. Of course I don't expect you to drive at 12 mph, though I doubt you'd manage to go faster than that in London anyway.
I drive. I cycle.
As a cyclist I've had enough sodding drivers put me in danger but I wouldn't dream of swiping their mirror or kicking their car. I don't see cyclists or drivers as some "collective" that I can make sweeping generalisations about.
Just as I don't make sweeping generalisations about other groups in society.
It's called being reasonable. Some of you should try it.

@anotherbloodycyclist - one solution to the NHS problem would be to force people to pay for self inflicted lifestyle injuries. I won't roll out the usual smoker analogy, but let's say one over eats, and as a result incurs a blood problem, or some such. Why not require the patient to pay a portion of the costs of their treatment? Why does everyone in this country believe they should be entitled to everything for free? Regardless of how much abuse they give themselves or their carers?

We do it with teeth... We bill people a portion of their dental treatment and the more you look after yourself the less you pay in dental treatment. So why does everyone believe their entire NHS burden should be free?

It's not like 95% of us will ever pay into the system more than we intend to take out. Let's say a couple both work and have two kids. Mum and dad work for 80 years between them paying 9% of their income in NI, and let's pretend that ALL that goes only to the NHS. On 30K a year for both of them, they will pay into the system £216K. In realist your average couple works less that 80 years on £30K a year, and they expect pensions from their NI contributions too.

But the birth and care of their two children to age 18, and the burden of even the most sturdy of clean living pensioners from 65 through 85 is going to cost upwards or £200K in the wages of all involved and the associated paraphernalia.

And that's assuming everyone works and contributes to the system. They don't. So those who do have to pick up the tab for those who don't.

You cannot run any system and keep it working, giving away everything for free, when 95% of people take more than they give. Clearly for most people it's not their fault, they just do what they're told to do, but they do vote, and they don't vote to pay more, EVER. And they complain like F if they're told they can't have their God given free ride through life.

@anotherbloodycyclist - I've only ever driven in London for a short while, and that was pre-congestion charge. I don't remember having as issue with cyclists as most seemed to stick to pavements and smaller streets. I did not know the shortcuts. My experience is mainly with arterial routs in and out of some of our less glamorous cities. In my experience cyclists do tend to expect traffic to drive at 12mph, even goin so far as to cycle two abreast to ensure that people must queue and crawl along the road at their chosen pace. And I have often had my rear bumbler whacked as some AH decides to mount the pavement behind me at a junction, or decide to slip up the inside at a roundabout. You cannot legislate against AHs on the road, but what you can do in the first instance is decree all road users equal in the eyes of the law, and the deal with all AHs the same.

Jollygoodthen I like your style, a bit of an adrenalin junkie at heart, it often goes with melancholia (there is something scientific that connects the two).

I have no problem with occasional cyclists in London - especially at weekends it makes absolute sense but daily commuting is another thing - it just leads to congestion and more accidents.

I'm sure there's something suitably blood curdling that you can take up in the country, I know a lot of adrenalin junkies and it's just something they need to keep topping up. Tricky when you have dependents though.

Why not tax all road users, and begin a roll out of dedicated cycle ways throughout the country? there is an ongoing programme of maintenance anyways, so it found be incorporated into the ongoing works, and I'm sure it would be disjointed and complained about for a while, but then, I doubt cyclists would be willing to pay towards the road networks, and I expect the cost of policing cyclists behaviour would far outway any benefit to licensing and number plating them.

As it is, the system seems to work for most. Those who get injured do so knowing the risks they take. Very few prosecutions are that successful of either party in a collision, and the cyclist pays with time to mend while the driver pays for the repair of his vehicle.

I'm sure when all is said and done, karma wins out in the end.

I think you'll find most road users inc cyclists are taxed already.

As I'm sure you know elephant there's no such thing as road tax.

However most cyclists are also car owners so will already pay vehicle emissions tax. Even the non car owners will probably pay other taxes such as income tax, stamp duty, they'll certainly pay VAT. All of which are taxes which go towards the road network and indeed cycle paths.

And it's only better for you until you get squished. Good luck with that.
crumbs.....that's a bit chilling, Willko. Thanks for that reminder, a thing I absorb every day.

I'm making the point that until cyclist are willing to okay the laws of the road in the same manner as other road users, they cannot justifiably expect to be taken seriously by the majority of society

elephant - your naivety is breath-taking. I see drivers break the laws of the road all the time - red lighting, speeding, texting, stopping in the bike box, swerving across lanes, parking infringements - plus the drink drivers, no insurance etc - you'd think possibly that you don't actually have any experience of driving at all.

'I'm sure there's something suitably blood curdling that you can take up in the country, I know a lot of adrenalin junkies and it's just something they need to keep topping up. Tricky when you have dependents though.'

two things - cycling in London isn't actually that blood curdling, if you have the experience, the skills and knowledge to ride safely. It is sad how many woman do feel pushed off the road, and I volunteer with British Cycling leading rides with women to get more women out there cycling safely.

If everyone followed the rules of the road, everybody would be safe. But unfortunately both cyclists and drivers err.

I actually get my adrenaline kicks mountain biking red trails in the forest. As for my dependants, they cycle with me. Yep, they fall off once in a while, but we are a damn sight healthier and fitter family for it!

Speaking of kicks, beware the gateway drug for adrenalin junkies.

Elephantspoo can you clarify if you actually deliberately drive too close to cyclists?
If so you are a potential murderer. Either way you are a twat.

Chopstheduck, agree, it is sad that there aren't more women cycling. I think it's two fold, not just the fear but also the intimidation. The amount of times I am called a c**t for doing something perfectly legal like getting into the centre of the road and turning right, or riding wide in a street with parked cars. And if you have a driver revving and honking behind you it is hard to hold your ground and not put yourself in a vulnerable position. I've been car door-ed once because of a very irate van driver forcing me over. It won't happen again. It was an unpleasant experience for both me and the poor driver of the car who was incredibly upset at knocking me into the road.

"I'm making the point that until cyclist are willing to okay the laws of the road in the same manner as other road users..."

Just wait a sec whilst I try and stop laughing...

OK. Think I can just about hold it together now. Have you ever driven on a motorway at 70 mph? If so how often does someone overtake you? Ever noticed the number of cars trying to beat the lights and going through on red? Or seen cars turning into side streets forcing pedestrians to stop crossing when it is the pedestrian who has right of way? And surely no one is ever on their phone when driving. How about stopping in the cycle box at lights? Of course tailgating never happens either. Pedestrians never step out into the road without looking, oh no.

I suppose this isn't the sort of behaviour you expect cyclists to follow?

I doubt many people think that cyclists are perfect, and yes some do do stupid and dangerous things. The big difference though is when they do something stupid the person they are most putting at risk is themselves. A driver is putting other people at risk.

This is a great blog post about cycling; all drivers should read it in my opinion: www.ctc.org.uk/blog/victoria-hazael/drivers-need-know