Even more cyclists now breaking the law

[DistingusedSocialCommentator]

Most drivers and pedestrians will be aware of this as many have seen or been victims of a cycle rider.

Watching Talktv this morning there was a lady who had lost her mother due to an e-scooter rider on the pavement. The show had a lawyer on talking about what I agree with, IE cyclists are very hard to identify if they get away from an accident.

E-scooters we all know are against the law unless provided for by your local council in central London. Several times over the years, me and the family have had close calls with them on pavements and parks as they zoom down, you cant hear them and they often dress in all black clothing.

Push bike riders are travelling faster and faster as many more have those battery packs on them

With the introduction of 20mph zones in vast areas of London, even more, push bike riders are now breaking the law, EG travelling well over 20mph in a 20mph and passing slower cars travelling at 20mph We are all aware how some push bike riders have ignored the rules for years, EG jump red lights, ignore pedestrians on crossings, cause accidents and walk of or rise off and now, much more able to break the speed limits off 20mph with almost 100% impunity and some that at red lights get o the pavement and cross a red light that way or some just ride on pavements

For the record, note, Its some cyclists not all but we have all seen them more so as going to work, or dropping off children at schools the speed of some of these riders

The Talktv debate also talked about those who kill people while riding a push bike/scooter, I think they said the maximum prison sentence was two years (I may be wrong) but the laws needed vast improvements.

This had been talked about a lot before but nothing happened.

AIBU proposes that all cyclists have number plates/easily identifiable markings, all have insurance, all have a bell and lights, and all wear a helmet and hi-vis jacket (This would in my judgment make many more riders more responsible for their actions and our roads/pavements safer for all)

The police need to be more proactive on e-scooter riders. However, as cyclists are almost impossible to identify, my proposal as above will aid the police and hopefully, modify the dangerous behaviours of those cyclists that are now regularly breaking the law, EG, travelling at more than the speed allowed, jumping red lights, putting pedestrians at risk on crossings and pavements.

Yes, I don't doubt that the figures for young men in car accidents and young men in bicycle accidents probably correlate. The 80% figure however is distorted by the low number of women who cycle at all.

Yanbu. They need to pay road tax too.

Why? Motorists don’t.

No such thing as road tax.

As zero emissions vehicles, bicycles would pay zero vehicle tax.

Upkeep of roads is paid from general taxation which we all pay. Given that cars need far more infrastructure and cause far more wear, cyclists are the ones subsidising drivers.

Our taxes also, of course, help support the NHS and emergency services which deal with the thousands of people killed and maimed by drivers each year.

The thing is, if you're a cyclist you'll know that the roads are designed for cars. There's the highway code but it's not always clear cut what you're supposed to do on a given stretch of road.

You need to risk assess the whole time, work out what the road layout thinks you should do then decide if it is in fact safe.

Eg near me there's a busy 3-lane road with a stretch of bike lane. Bushes along the bike lane that are badly maintained so they'd whack you in the face if you cycle there. Is it safer to veer out in 3-lane city traffic or go on pavement?

The system of rules is not so clear cut as it is for drivers.

Then you'd have the issue of licensing a bike you might have in the shed and lend out, or it could get nicked and how would you prove who was riding, you'd have to fix on the number plate and that might interfere with lights, pannier racks etc. Plus what are you even licensing? The frame? What if you switch a part out? Is it the rider that is licensed or the bike? Is someone else allowed to ride the bike? What about passengers on cargo bikes, or children?

These are some of the reasons. I suspect another reason is that cyclists know a large proportion of the population has an irrational hatred of us and we don't want to have a 'let's crack down on cyclists' measure that would just put people off cycling.

Plus irresponsible cyclists would just take the plates off and police don't have the resource to bother with cycling offences. It's just a way to try to harass cyclists because you don't like them.

As zero emissions vehicles, bicycles would pay zero vehicle tax.

The tax could be based on the CO2 emitted by the person propelling it.

Interesting that the poll on the op is almost at 50:50

But after all, half the people in any one place are below average intelligence and don’t realise they’re being played by the dregs RW media that we’ve had for years in this country (like talk talk shite tv and Geebeebies)

So they froth, get angry, come up with bullshit solutions and opine endlessly on a pointless thread on SM instead…

Merton has a few of those death trap cycle lanes.

I was showing my DD one that was situated right next to a flooded part of the road other week, while explaining how she can't cycle in every cycle lane.

You posted
"You clearly haven't actually thought this through!"

ROFL, you are having a larf! Number plates are easily removed (2 little screws) and easily replicated and just go to an auction site and you will see many that do not ask for a log book aka V5

Have you not seen police tv shows where they stop a car of low lives and they have a boot full of reg lates, lol.

Clearly you are not a driver and nor have any idea of what is happening o our roads.

Indeed another fact one of many onn this thread

A few banged on about more cycle lanes etc- To those that more cycle lanespaths, FGS use the ones that are there!!

In London, the majority of cycle riders avoid cycle lanes

Because they are:

1. Dangerous due to their poor design. Examples including one with a picture have been given on this thread.
2. Have glass or other debris in them that would slash your tyres
3. Are put on roads which you would only cycle on if you had a death wish due to the design of the road.

The best post on the thread!!

A big thank you, indeed!!

Tbf I’m sight impaired. I cannot see well enough to get out of the way if one is going fast on the pavement. It’s bloody dangerous

People don't use the cycle lanes that are built because they are unusable.

Look at the Dutch city of Delft, it doesn't have a couple of painted gutters cycle lanes, it has a proper network. Residential streets have been traffic calmed; arterial roads have wide cycle paths running parallel with them, segregated from the pedestrian footpath; the cycle paths cross those arterial roads on proper crossings, no "cyclists dismount" signs like you'd get in the UK; between cities there are cycle highways, again without pedestrians getting in the way.

At signal-controlled junctions and crossings the system won't make you hang around for ages after pressing a beg button - in some cases the signals are always green for bikes/pedestrians and only change if a car actually shows up. If you are cycling parallel with the road you won't have to stop and give way at every single side road (never mind at every single entrance to a roundabout), you have priority. Any cars entering or leaving a side road, or entering or leaving a roundabout must give way to cyclists and pedestrians continuing along the main road or around the outside of the roundabout.

You can get from anywhere to anywhere without finding yourself on a fast road.

Sticking some blue signs up on a short stretch of pavement (the signs usually only commencing after the dropped kerb that would have provided access if you'd known the path was there) which then dumps you onto a dual carriageway is not good enough.

This. Cars are killing machine's and there are too many of them with maniacs at the wheel who shouldn’t have passed their driving tests.

Lets not get distracted by cyclists on pavements.

Those that have nothing to hide and ride within the like just like drivers that drive within the law have no problem with number plates, easy to identify but you are against it, why???

Now stop the feeble excuses its going to be " bureaucracy, hugely expensive"
stop beingselfish and face the facts that someone with a visible ID be it a number plate or numbers on the back of a hi-vis jacket stands a much better chance of getting caught when they hit and injure or worse a pedestrian.

Those who have nothing to fear will not fear following any new rules about wearing a hi-vis with a number on it while riding a bike and this number could easily be transferred from one bike to the next and checked by cctv/number check cams just like cars are checked to ensure the riders are insured ad taxed.

No sensible person would disagree with my judgment that having on display and easy to read will, definitely result in more a lot more care shown by bike riders and in return less accidents with pedestrians and hit-and-runs. It would also cut down pavement riding, jumping red traffic lights and speeding across zebra crossings when children, adults and the frail are crossing roads The repat rule breakers just like drivers will end up with points/bans and more expensive insurance. That would be a good incentive for many to ride more dsafely

YOU STATED " Plus the people who push this kind of nonsense tend to be impatient, selfish and self absorbed drivers."

I will say to that, Plus the people who push this kind of nonsense tend to be impatient, selfish and self absorbed push bike riders.

so my husband should be run over because of insufficent lanes?

Are you still pushing this crackpot "hivis with a number" idea?

Only one country in the world mandates registration plates for bicycles. North Korea. Not one of the other 192 UN member states does it. What does that tell you?

Getting more people onto bikes saves lives. It means fewer people driving 2-tonne killing machines, it means a healthier population. With nutty plans to register every last bike on the road, Dave who has an old bike in his shed can't just take it out for a spontaneous trip to get some milk. He'll drive. Adding to the carnage, congestion and sedentary lifestyle-caused public health problems.

Experts have said that this is a bad idea. Grant Shapps thinks that it's a good idea. Enough said!

Are you responding to a particular post? Or just pretending that posters said something which they didn't?

Yes. And as you said I have nearly been hit by cyclists and Motorbikes over the years. It is appealing especially cyclists who are on pavements and not authroised to do so.
I wonder how many injures / deaths are needed before the law is applied to them.

No sensible person would disagree with my judgment

froth away if you think it’ll do any good

fwiw I haven’t ridden a bike in 18 months and I drive 10k miles a year so I’m not the militant cyclist you’ve framed me to be!

But I am aware that some drivers with their shitty and entitled I am right attitude - that you and this thread so perfectly display, is the root of the real problem. That attitude kills hundred of cyclists and pedestrians a year and yet you’re crying out for fkn number plates on cyclists? Jesus wept.

Shoosh yourself, be patient to other road users, stop trying to ban them and please stop starting idiotic threads referencing Talk shite tv and also be more considerate on the roads we all share.

That’s all.

Why are you so upset and so anti ID for cycle riders?

Surely, when these riders jump red lights putting pedestrians at risk, riding on pavements putting children/adults at risk, riding through zebra crossings when the frial, children, and adults are crossing, if cycle riders wore an easily identified number, I bet you many people would have taken their number and the dangerous cycle rider most likely caught and banged to rights. So, why are you so ani ID for ush bike riders? (Please, no more feeble excuses like your previous efforts)

Why are you so upset and so anti ID for cycle riders?

sigh

Like I said, half the population are below average intelligence. I’m not expecting you to get it. There are only so many resources available, for policing and enforcing any such pie in the sky ideas that you’re grasping at. They’ll make no difference anyway in the scheme of injuries or deaths on our road, will they. Not in any meaningful way.

I bet you many people would have taken their number and the dangerous cycle rider most likely caught and banged to rights.

Hilarious. The police hardly ever prosecute dangerous drivers. What makes you think they'll have time for this? If when a dangerous driver does kill someone, they can expect to be given a smack on the wrist and a suspended sentence ("just be good for a couple of years...")

Can you, perchance, give a single example of a cyclist using the pavement adjacent to an empty cycle lane?