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.

I ve explained why in words of one syllable, that you cannot understand or even provide a shred of evidence/costings to back up your crazy ideas is your issue not mine.

Your plans will never happen.

You might as well argue that we should put reg plates on pedestrians or dogs.

@DistingusedSocialCommentator many people have explained what they have against your batshit proposal. It’s the practicality rather than the concept people object to. A suitably readable number plate cannot be attached to all bikes in a way that would make producing said number plate cost efficient. It is impractical to mandate a certain hi-viz jacket. You’d need to find one to fit everyone from a 5yr old to a very overweight person, be suitable for a commuter over a thick jacket whilst wearing a rucksack and an elite cyclist needing aerodynamic fit and technical material to train at maximal effort on a hot day. This holy grail let me tell you does not exist.

Putting to one side the impracticality of administering such a stupid idea, I’d be more than happy for your so called registration number if you wanted it be stuck as approved frame protection material eg invisiframe on my downtube, but this would only be readable side on if my leg was not in the way and would only permit the numbers etc to be circa 15mm tall. I have no issue ‘Being identifiable’ as you call it, as I don’t routinely break laws and I don’t regularly ride in a city it would have fuck all benefit for the cost but whatever. If it means that every single car driver now accepts we have exactly the same rights as them (it’s actually more as drivers use the roads by revocable licence but this falls repeatedly on deaf ears) and never makes any dangerous pass, moans we are using the available lane, shouts at us about insurance/lights/whatever else then cool, go for it.

Currently you have not got a solution that works and does not in any way hinder safety or performance for the rider in any riding circumstance (including off road MTB trails with obstacles etc, cyclocross that involves flying mounts and dismounts and carrying your bike on your shoulder and in road and track racing which things attached to bikes are strictly regulated and distinguishable team kits are mandatory). On the logistical side, drivers don’t have to fit the number plate either, it comes with the car, so I’d not be expecting to do any work or experience any cost whatsoever to fix a sticker to the side of my bike, a government official would need to come and do it, times however many million bikes there are in the country.

Meanwhile in the real world, law breaking cyclists can still be stopped by police as the MET data posted above shows, should police forces actually give a shit and the problems be frequent and severe enough to warrant the resources, and they can also be identified via the CCTV network and witness appeals in the same way people on foot who commit burglaries, arsons and murders are, without having any sort of additional scheme whatsoever.

Accepting it’s not a worthwhile solution yet?

More. Cyclists. On. The. Road. Good.

Putting. Barriers. In. The. Way. Of. That. Bad.

When the Welsh limits changed my local council installed one of those signs that tells you how fast you are doing. It's a short stretch of downhill but even then I have to put some effort in to reach 20mph. 15 is a more natural speed. The hatchback behind me on the other hand was doing 33 - more than 1.5 times the limit. Outside a school and everything, but I suppose that the OP would be more concerned if I did 21...

Some of us have to work shifts, not enough time to read and reply to everything.

I was waiting for you to come up with some stats. I'm tired of being the only one concerned with actual evidence.

If 192 countries have all decided that something is not worth doing - in some cases after having actually tried it - what makes you think that the UK is any different?

We're objecting because we know that the way to save lives (through a reduction in casualties, through a healthier population, AND by mitigating global warming) is to encourage more people to get out of their cars and onto bicycles. To do that cycling needs to be a convenient option. You don't have that if you make people fill in a load of paperwork and wait weeks for a response before they can even try it.

Now, let's see if you really care about pedestrian safety or if they're just a convenient proxy you can use while railing against anything that gets in the way of your juggernaut. Please answer a few questions:

1. Do you agree that the default speed limit in urban areas should be 20mph/30kph?
2. Do you agree that residential streets should have traffic calming measures and 'knips' used to prevent rat-running and stop them being used a through route?
3. Do you agree with measures to control air quality by restricting access to polluting vehicles?

What is it that you riders fear about my proposals as per my OP?
Fear? We don't fear your proposals, we're laughing at them. They are utterly ludicrous.

Some of us have earned an early retirement and can spend a bit more time on forums. You was on the thread after that and I had quoted you again as you did not offer to back up what you said about the bet

So you offered to "bet " me and I accepted - why are you so shy now?

Your "bet" was indeed, ridiculously "ludicrous" and you know it , hence wanting to backtrack!

The reason you are "laughing" at my proposals is because you fear them and its a nervous laughter from you and the others that fear an improvement in safety for pedestrians

Why are you so much against pedestrians being easily identified?
Are you not able to comprehend the fact that when walkers are easily identified the many that break the law almost daily, most of them will then realise the games up and they can't mug, stab, grafitti, litter or foul, or amble into cycle lanes without looking, or through their inattention cause innocent drivers to have accidents (apparently) with almost 100% impunity.

What is it that you fear about my proposals as per my earlier post? I mean, it's literally exactly what you are adamant will work for cyclists, so why aren't you embracing it?

Speed limits don't apply to cyclists, so there's that. Google it. Also most of what you describe has been debated ad nauseum before, but dismissed as unworkable, unenforceable, and likely to work against the environmental and health benefits of cycling by making it more difficult to take up. Bikes are almost never responsible for killing or injuring other people: cars and drivers are the real problem.

I haven't backtracked at all. I'm still waiting for you to do some research and find some reliable figures - something you've failed to do throughout this thread, it's been full of anecdotes and "MurdochTV said...".

Remember that anyone who is a club member is likely to be covered through that. Incidentally I'm covered fully-comp - it costs less than a fiver per month. Such is the tiny risk the underwriter deems me to pose. How much does your car insurer charge?

The very idea of someone who drives a two-tonne Range Rover claiming to give a shit about pedestrian safety would be very laughable if you lot weren't so dangerous on the roads. If you really cared about pedestrian safety you'd sell the cars and buy a bicycle.

Now, how about answering those questions about whether you support different pro-pedestrian policies that have proven controversial among Clarksonites?

OP, if you are so concerned about pedestrian safety, why do you drive a Range Rover?

Op, would you be OK wearing a garment with a number on it every time you used your vehicle? The idea is ludicrous. If you have earned early retirement, why take up exercise, like cycling?

Oh OP, this is Mumsnet where you aren't allowed to criticise cyclists as they are never in the wrong and everyone else is always at fault. You will see the same posters on every cyclist thread quoting their statistics and generally belittling or minimising anyone's concerns about dangerous cyclists and turning the argument onto everyone and everything else. 🥴
FWIW, I agree that there should be more accountability for those cyclists who do not comply with rules. They want to cycle on roads and bang on about their rights to do so? Well then the rules of the road should apply to them and there should be consequences for breaking these rules. It's all well and good for pro cyclists to state that cyclists are held to account for breaking the law but realistically, without the means to identify them, how exactly does this happen short of a police officer actually catching them in the act?

If it is, then I'll be seriously considering giving them my vote come the next election.

You are pulling my legs???

It's NOT the car matey but the idiot driver or rider that kills/injures people or has no one ever told you that before?? Incredible, just incredible that in 2024 ill thought out questions like this are still put about.

I'm sure you will never forget that now,

Thank you for the heads up. I was wondering why a simple solution about catching the thousands of riders that break the rules, my proposal was argued against so much. Thank you

At the very least, at the least just getting riders to have insurance would be a start. Then the police, ie one officer and several civilian helpers could stop many riders daily and give them on-the-spot fines for having no insurance and points on their licence or when they got one.

Again, thanks

Couldn't you make the same argument about an AR15? Quite a lot of Americans would. What's stopping an idiot getting their hands on a Range Rover?

Where I live has a network of cycle paths, quite often next to the pedestrian path, and I'm frequently pushed into the road due to selfish pedestrians just walking in the cycle path because they either can't read or think it's their god given right. Or I have to avoid the broken glass and cycle on the pedestrian path.

We also have many paths that are both cycle and pedestrian path so both have a right to use it but quite often I'm given the filthiest look when I cycle on them.

As for insurance, it wouldn't ever happen.

So you think the weight of the car has no bearing on the damage it can do?

if a bike had veered off the road and crashed into this school do you think two children would be killed? Do you think the driver should be released under investigation? So walking about whilst families are shattered and children are traumatised? A bike would simple not gave caused this damage. You are an idiot if you think this is remotely comparable

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/wimbledon-school-crash-the-study-prep-driver-arrest-selena-lau-nuria-sajjad-met-police-b1136332.html

and several civilian helpers could stop many riders

They could tackle them to the ground, and place them in headlocks, until the full weight of the law was brought down upon them in a mighty and crashing fashion. And the scourge of anarchist cyclists will be once and for all banished from our highways, leaving huge rage rovers (sic) to rage their roads in peace, without hideous unidentifiable cyclists to be seen anywhere.

No, I can’t see any problem with that, OP.

We don't fear your proposals, we're laughing at them

This thread is funny. Keep em coming op, another 20 odd pages to go. I’m having fun😂

@Runssometimes
Deflecting from the original post? I would hope that I'm not alone in being totally disgusted at your use of this link for that purpose. Have some respect! 😩

Puddleduck, not sure how pointing out the dangers of oversized cars, is deflecting

No one can deny the catastrophic effects of motor vehicles in the hands of incompetent drivers but the OP was about cyclists, not car drivers. Why does every cyclist thread have to go down the route of, "what about when car drivers do.....?" This, in my opinion, is an attempt to deflect from the fact that there are (just maybe) some irresponsible cyclists out there 🤷 I cannot understand why cyclists on these threads seem to close ranks and protect all cyclists with an endless array of incomprehensible arguments. As a motorist, I accept that there are many awful and dangerous drivers out there and I don't ever feel the need to justify their actions. On the contrary, I would hope that they receive whatever punishment they deserve. Cyclists, on this thread, don't seem to feel the same about fellow cyclists!

I don't think any cyclist on here is saying that no irresponsible cyclists exist.

We are saying that any registration scheme like the one proposed by the OP is extremely expensive for something ultimately unworkable.

Police already have the powers to stop cyclists that are breaking the law. That's not going to improve by forcing cyclists to register.

UABR about the bell and lights - in fact they are legal requirements.
UABR about wearing hi viz and helmets.
UABVVU about insisting all cyclists have insurance and number plates. We as a society have an obesity problem, a major traffic congestion problem and also a major climate problem. Encouraging more people to cycle willl help with all of this, so we don't want to put people off, least of all children. Plus there is literally no safe place to put a number place on a bike that I can tbink of.

@CuteOrangeElephant

Police already have the powers to stop cyclists that are breaking the law.

And that's great but it does require the police to actually witness the event when a cyclist is involved. On another Mumsnet cyclist thread, a cyclist was positively gleeful about how many motorists she had "done" each week by reporting them for not giving her enough clearance whilst overtaking her. She had recorded them on her camera (by taking vehicle registration) and reported them even though no collision had occurred and she had not suffered any injury etc. The point of the OP is that in circumstances where cyclists commit dangerous acts (such as running red lights at pedestrian crossings etc) that there is no way that Joe Public can report such incidences as there is no means of identifying the cyclist. Cyclists can and have killed pedestrians!