To think in many cases the problem is that Motorists don't look for cyclists, rather than not seeing them?

[BoysofMelody]

Went out for a bike ride and with crushing predictably, I had a near miss thanks to errant motorists.

First one, reversed from a parking space at high speed onto the road I was traveling along missing me by a fraction. Similarly about 15 miles into the ride another, motorist swung across my path to get into their drive way, without indicating or looking around them.

At the time, conditions were clear and not overly sunny, I was wearing a hi Viz orange jersey and had flashing auxilary lights front and rear.

Given that I was riding at a sensible speed and in a defensive manner and there was little else I could reasonably do to make myself more visible to motorists, that the problem more often than not is that Motorists don't look for, rather than not seeing cyclists? Bike lights after dark are a legal requirement and absolutely essential, but why are cyclists and cyclists alone held expected to dress up in all sorts of garish shades to protect themselves from motorists' inattention? If a cyclist gets runs over, the all too predictable cry of 'why weren't they wearing hi Viz and a helmet goesup'' in a similar case where a HGV totals a car, no one would castigate the driver for having a dark grey car that was difficult to see at dusk would they?

[IntrusiveBastards]

There are cyclists (I'm not one of them), who have a one metre long thin pole sticking out from their wheel on the right hand side, with a nail on the end of it, so that if a car does try to pass too close, then their paintwork gets scratched shock

Holy shit what twats! What if they get too close to a pedestrian!

[IntrusiveBastards]

Oh Sarcomere I am sorry

[PenguinOfDoom]

I tend to think it's often six of one and half a dozen of the other. I've been nearly hit while driving in central London in my car because someone just hasn't seen me, so sometimes it's just that people look but don't see.

I do get massively fucked off with cyclists sometimes though. I cannot tell you how many times I've been on the pedestrian crossing by my office and they ride straight through. The other day, one cunt had the temerity to wink at me as he rode about two feet across me as I was crossing on a green light. Then the same day, I nearly got flattened by another one riding fast up the pavement.

The minority of shit cyclists tar the majority, just as the minority of shit drivers do the same.

[QueenofEsgaroth]

I see a lot of fault by drivers and cyclists so would like to see all road users having to sit regular tests and be held responsible for their actions therefore identifiable.

So effectively a road user test not just a driving test, and a license plate for all not just cars. Cyclists and drivers should be prosecuted for mobile phone use, red light jumping, causing danger to other road users and pedestrians.

I think cyclists should have solid on lights colour coded for front and rear like cars and they should have mirrors. The biggest near collision cause I see where I live is cyclists pulling into traffic without looking first. There also seems to be a huge amount of ignorance around blind spots.

Not pedestrians because they use the pavement and should be treated with extreme caution by all road users. As a frequent buggy pusher in a busy city I have my buggy lit up like a christmas tree for visibility and recommend all wheelies do the same

[PenguinOfDoom]

I don't think it's unreasonable for cyclists to have to pass some kind of test and have insurance.

In central London, the increase in cycling is great, but a lot of the people who have taken up cycling don't have driving licences and therefore don't necessarily know/understand the Highway Code or generally safe use of the roads for cycling.

It's not their fault as such - they have been told that they can get around London by bike for next to nothing, so that's what they're doing. But they are sharing the roads with HGVs, taxis, buses, cars, all of whom have had to undertake a test to certify them as fit to drive on roads. And all of whom can be fined or imprisoned as a result of any accident they are involved with on the road.

In London, all boroughs are not the same. There are different regulations for driving across most of them, except there are no signs to indicate this is the case. There are also a multitude of other signs, many of which are misleading. Often this is lack of coherent road strategy, but sometimes it's deliberate and local authorities want motorists to break the rules so they can fine them. And the are pretty sneaky about it. IIRC, Islington, Westminster and Camden have been pulled up for arranging cameras on box junctions in a way that essentially took advantage of poor road layout/signage to penalise motorists.

I think for cyclists the perception is that motorists have carte blanche, but that definitely is not the case.