Cyclists who act like they own the road should pay towards it

[dreamingofsun]

So cyclists get priority on the roads, and are happy to ride two abreast so they hold all the car traffic up. Shouldnt they at least pay towards the upkeep of the road?

I've fallen of my bike and hit my head twice in my life. Once I was wearing a helmet and the other time I was not. Once I ended up in hospital with concussion, they kept me there all day and once I was ok. Whilst at the hospital the doctor looked at the smashed helmet and said well that didn't stand up to much...I fell at approximately 10mph certainly no more than that and wearing a BS helmet - it did jack shit. Both times I fell they were almost replica incidents

The only reason I wear a helmet is, if I am killed by a driver I don't want my dds to suffer the police and public saying "oh if she had worn a helmet" A helmet will not protect me against a driver in a car

@MikeRafone

well

a. That was before aps and newer systems to be fair, so on line payments rescue the admin costs hugely.
b. Public services cost and cyclists should have insurance at the very least.
c. Yeah dogs should have a license too.

@Castall

The links earlier show the outcome of the government on the petition for your suggestion

@MikeRafone

you point being?
people don't agree?
ie the vested interested who sign those petitions ?

that's why we have the HOP

shame about the current party in there

i get you don't like my ideas.
that's a shame but your views on keep the status quo I feel are rather outdated and rely on common sense which appears lacking currently.

i get you don't like my ideas.

I have insurance, Its renewed every year - what difference would it make to me if my bikes were also registered?

Its not a case of not liking your idea, I'm pointing out that its been answered by government as to why they won't do this and if a tory party of the rich will not do it - can't see a Labour Party doing it

@MikeRafone

i get you don't like mine.
well done for having insurance.
and thank you for telling us all and I am glad you are that responsible.

Castall

i get you don't like mine.

I don't know yours, are they nice?

Possibly depends were you live. That's not my experience. I find the majority of drivers round here are pretty considerate and there's not a lot of traffic anyway, but on our largely unlit rural roads I think it makes sense to be as visible as possible.
Obviously if you come into contact with a car at any significant speed the likelihood is that you will have multiple injuries and a helmet is not going to make a blind bit of difference to most of those - death is most likely to result from chest/abdomen/pelvis trauma and/or absolutely catastrophic head/neck injury. Therefore helmet wearing won't make any major impact. But isolated head injuries are fairly common in cyclist vs the ground incidents, and there is evidence of injury severity reduction in those circumstances. That's the reason why helmets are mandatory in racing and presumably why you wear one on your MTB?
I'm more concerned about the deteriorating state of the roads (and indeed cycle paths) than drivers where I live to be honest. My only significant accident cycling on the road in the last 30 years involved a pothole, not another vehicle, and the resulting injury was a relatively small traumatic sub arachnoid haemorrhage but that could well have been a life changing head injury in the absence of a helmet. If the only type of collision I was likely to sustain on the road was one with a car or other vehicle then I would agree that a helmet is largely pointless. But my experience is that that isn't the case.

If we turn this into a helmet debate it will rumble on with no significant outcome.

It’s not the law to wear one in the UK, and most other countries. End of

That's up to the cyclist to decide. Not the impatient driver who can't be bothered to wait behind them until it's safe to pass.

As I said above, a helmet won't help me if a car squashes me anyway. Hi-vis is a lot more important (and should, in my view, be worn by pedestrians as well once the clocks go back in October).

@MikeRafone

ps we could make the fee 40£ which would be enough as that one do the fees the info commission charges to companies etc

so perhaps it can work.

and yes I made my suggestions clear and they are the ones you reacted too and I am sure a man with your intersect will not have forgotten that so soon ?

I don't mind those who use the roads for a commute but I don't know any other sport you're allowed to do on pu lic roads!

How do you feel about people driving for leisure? Presumably you don't like those people either?

Run
Walk
Hike
Ride a Horse

More cyclists on the road benefits everyone.

Lower congestion. Lower pollution. Lower wear on the roads. All the health benefits of encouraging exercise. Lower number of accidents.

We absolutely should not put cost barriers in the way of that. Mandatory insurance/registration for cyclists is a terrible, terrible idea.

The clue is in the word ‘public’

Or those who drive to the gym or exercise class?

0.8 seconds? When you're behind a cyclist on national speed limit roads for more than a mile? Give over.

What I don't understand is... cars can be pulled over and FINED for driving too slowly.
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/motors/can-you-fined-driving-slow-24265651
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/uk-news/drivers-warned-lesser-known-rule-27515187

Ergo, something going too slowly is a hazard.

How does it being a bicycle as opposed to a car magically make it not a hazard?
Seeing as you have to treat the former as the latter now by giving the same amount of room to overtake.

Also to add OP I work near the countryside, cyclists regularly stick more to the side of the road allowing cars to overtake which I'm grateful for. On narrow country roads they pull in.
Very civilised people.

The REAL solution is of course to re-architect entire areas with sufficient roads, public transport etc but that would be too expensive! It's easier for gov to pay lip service by pushing cyclists onto the same roads as cars, making up stupid rules and let the plebs fight over the scraps.

Has anybody done a study as to the increase in pollution caused by tailbacks behind cyclists?

https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/traffic-calming-measures-damage-environment-by-causing-tailbacks-6619809.html

That's not for cyclists - but tailbacks increases pollution.

It's a matter of scale here... If the entire road was cyclists, it's better than if it was all cars. But if it's a long line of cyclists holding up a long line of cars then I highly doubt that the pollution levels are lower.

And while you go on about the health benefits at the end of the day cycling is limited to those who live a certain distance away, don't have loads of stuff and it's only one person. As much as I for example would LOVE to cycle to work that would take me 2 hours! Not to mention carrying 3 laptops and assorted chargers.

There are around 100,000 accidents involving cars, all of whom are supposed to be licenced and insured, so that clearly isn't the answer, a car driver is far far more likely to jump a red light (check the stats?)

I did a charity ride yesterday for Devon Air ambulance, i was with a group of 9 cyclists, i do understand why car drivers might get delayed but they get delayed at roadworks, tractors, people who never go over 35mph.. & of course congestion/shear volume of traffic.

btw we were very quickly on some lanes and got delayed by a tractor, then a horse rider... live and let live?

Might be better to try and reduce the total number of vehicles on our roads?

I’m sorry but the delay is really minimal and ‘tailbacks’ is ridiculous.

More motorised vehicles in the roads is what causes tailbacks and most delays are caused by the volume of motorised vehicles and parked cars. But drivers see that as ok. Fine to be held up by a car parked in their carriageway but not a slower moving bike

On my commute cars zoom past me and then 1 mile up the road in the next village have to stop to give way to oncoming vehicles because they can’t fit through. I then have to stop too and wait, even though I could fit through.

Cars hold me up more when I’m cycling than cyclists do when I’m driving.

I ve zoomed in but cannot see the cyclist on the M25 tailbacks you ve posted.....

I used to drive about 35k to 45k miles per year, i can count on one hand the number of times i was held up by a cyclist in over 37 years, in towns, most cyclists can go faster than a vehicle.

I clearly stated that it was about pollution from tailbacks - not specifically by cyclists. Nobody has studied it yet but musing on it was the point of the post.... first sentence. Great reading comprehension skills.

As I ALSO stated the cyclists I encounter on my daily commute are excellent. No complaints there. But I have driven in other places where they hold you up for miles, or as people said large groups treating the road as a race track. I find that it's non-countryside people who have a sense of entitlement, as other slow moving vehicles like tractors for example pull in but cyclists somehow are incapable of doing so. IN the places where they are rude, unlike where I work.

That's why as ridiculous as it to say 'all cyclists are X Y Z' it's also ridiculous to pretend that SOMETHING going very slowly on a road causes no issues. I see that strangely nobody has replied to the seeming contradiction in whether or not something slow is a hazard as posted upthread.

The govt isn't pushing anyone anywhere. Bikes were on the roads long before cars. Cars have been pushed onto cyclists, not the other way around.