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.

No one is defending irresponsible cyclists. We're saying that irresponsible cyclists are very much a minority (much as irresponsible drivers are a minority, except that the latter are capable of far more harm); that the OP's batshit scheme won't make the blindest bit of difference to the irresponsible ones (just you try asking a yobbo to put a numbered hi-vis on, see how many stitches you end up needing); and that irresponsible cyclists do occasionally get caught and punished, probably at about the same rate that the law catches up with dangerous driving.

The title of this thread ("Even more cyclists now breaking the law") said that it was about cyclists - though curiously we never saw anything to back up the titled claim. The content of the OP however wittered on about e-scooters (they're not bicycles) and electric bikes - those are legally motorbikes and should conform to those regulations if used on the road. The one these kids (below) were illegally riding was an off-road electric scrambler, do you think that these kids and their families give a shit about the law? You won't find them attaching numberplates. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12130807/Electric-bike-boys-riding-killed-Cardiff-early-birthday-present.html But the OP would rather that police resources were used pulling over Jane the schoolteacher to see if her drop-frame bicycle is insured than deal with feral low-life families.

And no, it's not whataboutery to be more concerned about a far bigger cause of death on our roads. If the OP posted a thread wailing about the dangers of wooden spoons, don't you think that many responses would point out that she should be more careful with the carving knife? Would that be whataboutery?

So what do you think will happen when a bystander reports a bicycle committing a crime with no other evidence than their word? Because I take it pedestrians will not be walking around with dash cams.

Nothing is the answer.

Honestly this "problem" of the renegade cyclist only seems to exist in some users heads.

@DdraigGoch

that irresponsible cyclists do occasionally get caught and punished, probably at about the same rate that the law catches up with dangerous driving.

I very much doubt that the rate is the same although I do welcome any offenders from either camp being caught and punished as neither should be on the loose to create havoc for others.

@CuteOrangeElephant

"Honestly this "problem" of the renegade cyclist only seems to exist in some users heads"

......unless you have actually been a victim of a "renegade cyclist" which I'm guessing you haven't. Yes, they are in the minority but do they exist? Yes, they very much do! I would willingly give my dash cam footage to the police (in much the same way as cyclists do with camera evidence about motorists) but without ID evidence, it's so much harder than simply identifying motorists from their number plates.

This argument that cyclists are unlikely to do any harm really gets my goat. Try mixing a fully grown male on a metal bike travelling at speed through a pedestrian crossing (with pedestrians having the green light) and a pedestrian with a toddler, pram or pushchair or an elderly person with mobility issues and tell me no one will be harmed. Yeah right!

As a motorist, I encounter bad drivers at least once on pretty much every journey.

As a pedestrian, although it is not regularly, I can honestly say that my issues have been not with motorists but with cyclists who ride on pavements, fail to stop at pedestrian crossings or whizz around you as you are crossing at junctions etc.

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

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

Again, thanks

You are pulling my legs???

It's NOT the bike 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.

OP, please remind me again why "cyclists" need to be treated as a homogenous group ("you lot" I think wa the phrase a PP used) but drivers are special snowflakes who can't be expected to accept additional risk-basesd controls for the greater good simply because many other drivers are a risk?

The figures support that cyclists are a lot less likely to seriously harm a pedestrian than a car is.

Cyclists themselves are likely to get hurt in a collision with a pedestrian too, unlike motor drivers.

I would be in favour of alcohol locks in all cars. That would probably lower casualties a lot more than bicycle identification.

I’m not deflecting. The OP said “it’s not the car matey, it’s the driver” simple physics means that a lighter, smaller, less powerful car would have stopped or slowed down at the first barrier.a smart car would not have caused that damage. It’s the driver, sure but the type of vehicle has an impact. That’s why HGVs require more training. I personally would argue heavier cars should too. Or better still, should be banned from cities altogether.

i am beyond disgusted that these children lost their lives when they should have been safe at school and that driver is walking free. Beyond disgusted that 512 children aged 7 or younger lose their lives on roads every year. And they are not being killed by cyclists. Have you ever seen an image of a child’s height versus the grill of a Range Rover? The most vulnerable part of a child’s body versus a 2,634kg vehicle? That is what is disgusting. and wrong.
ive had a near miss myself with a range rover at at t-junction coming up the wrong side of the road, driver looking at her phone, the safety features only stopped when I jumped my bike and put it side on. It was level with my chest. My child would be dead if he were with me.
Of course the car makes a difference. That tragic case demonstrates it does. OP is the one deflecting and being disingenuous.

,

If you read my posts @Puddleduck5 you’ll see I don’t defend dangerous cyclists at all. I have quoted stats to show where they do get FPNs in the face of assertions they get away with everything. They don’t. And shouldn’t. The cyclist without brakes that crashed into and killed a pedestrian on a crossing a few years ago got the maximum sentence. And quite right too. But the the OP and several others are presenting anecdotes as facts and implying that cyclists present more of a danger to others than they do. Cyclists, myself included, are tired of being demonised and abused and I’ve been yelled at, slapped, close passed and punishment passed, beeped at by a HGV repeatedly for taking the safer primarily position because of this prevailing attitude that we all think we are above the law.

There are irresponsible cyclists, of course, but they’d be more dangerous to others in a Range Rover because some people do behave like entitled dicks wherever they are.

Your last sentence says it all. Not some cyclists but “cyclists” cause we are all the same. That is the attitude we are objecting to because it puts us in danger as the vulnerable road user.

myself and other cyclists are putting evidence to show why the OPs proposals won’t make people safer compared to tackling larger dangerous and you seen them incomprehensible arguments. They are not. The Highway Code was updated to reflect the larger risk, and it’s not from cyclists or pedestrians even those some of them obviously do behave like idiots.

So do you think that the only people that ever get prosecuted for any crimes are those who commit a crime and them immediately get into a car registered to them?

Well, @DistingusedSocialCommentator I'm not sure why you responded to my question when you'd said you were going to let me have the last word, but you've completely missed the point.

Of course it's motorists that are responsible for bad driving, but the difference in injury caused by a Range Rover as opposed to, for example, a Vauxhall Corsa, is very stark.

If you live in an urban area, which I suspect you do from some of your other comments,there is almost certainly no reason for you to drive a Range Rover. My question was about your supposed concern for pedestrian safety which seems at odds with driving around in a RR.

I don't think that the PP you quoted believes that. The OP appears to though.

No.

But do you honestly think the police is going to prosecute cyclists running a red light?

Cyclists are already prosecuted when they hurt someone, this batshit registration scheme is not needed for that.

Person driving around in huge metal box that protects them from most dangers gets pissed of by vulnerable cyclist that has no protection. Just don't get it. You're the safest.

And an E scooter is a scooter, it's not a bike.
The two issues are not linked!

Every single bike runs a red light huh?

Amazing. Because I cycled a busy cycle route on Saturday (that was too narrow, inconsistent, full of Amazon vans, parked cars, business signs and broken glass) and didn't see any bikes jumping a light. Where there was a SHARED cycle path, or the rare bit of pavement dedicated to cyclists and separated from pedestrians by grass/markings, I couldn't use it because of pedestrians on their shitting phones with headphones.

Me thinks you might be talking shit. As far as I can see the number of bikes running a red is about the same as cars rushing a red at the last minute.

Again, I'm a cyclist and a driver, and I walk with small children. I use the road in every way, cyclists are frequently risked unnecessarily by cars.

@OCDmama not only do we all run red lights, but according to the OP we all cycle at over 20mph in 20mph zones.

Yes, some cyclists disobey the highway code. But the majority of us don't because we're not idiots.

I am just back from cycling to the hospital for an appointment. I saw:

7 other adult cyclists. All on cycle lanes or lawfully on the road, none on their phones,
3 drivers break red lights at a busy roundabout.
2 drivers open car doors in front of me without seeing I was there. One apologised.
one driver wave me on when I had priority anyway but notable as many ignore that.
10 drivers on their phones sitting in traffic as I was filtering up alongside them at a busy junction with buses, school kids and trucks about. Some of these cars were not stationary but they all broke the law.
One kid on a bike on the pavement on the way to school. It is a primary school so a younger child.
i was close passed twice. One of these the driver - driving a van- also turned in left in front of me and I had indicated left.

one driver pulled out from parking in front of me with no signal, pulled back in again, no signal to park further up near the school. I yelled at her.

and finally just near my house I turn right into a cul de sac, the road I turn off curves to the left. There’s a one way road directly ahead with a give way sign so I have priority as I’m on the larger road turning right. Driver drives straight at me like I’m not even there.

thats 20 minutes of cycling, vastly more cars than bikes so not a like for like comparison but yes, apart from the kid on the pavement all the lawbreakers I saw were in cars or vans. And many of those incidents could have hurt me if I wasn’t paying as much attention as I was.

You’d wonder reading all that why I’d bother to cycle at all. But due to how long the bus takes, due the route and the traffic and how long driving takes - due to traffic- and finding and paying for parking it’s about twice as fast on a bike. The cycle parking is beside outpatients entrance and free. High incidence of bike theft there admittedly but my bike isn’t expensive. So as long as I’m paying attention it’s just vastly more convenient.

Children are 8x more likely to die when struck by an SUV compared with an average passenger car

Occupant death rate in SUVs is 6% higher than conventional cars, 8% in the biggest cars

SUVs cause around 500-700 deaths in the UK each year (remember approx 1 pedestrian dies from cycle impact annually) either by being killed as driver or passenger in an accident (one third) hit by one (one third) or killed by excess fumes and air pollution (one third)

SUVs use more fuel, lug more weight around, release more particulate matter due to tyre wear - and they're not even safer for occupants. They take up valuable space in cities and they're wider, giving less space for other road users.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/nov/05/monsters-of-the-road-what-should-the-uk-do-about-suvs

So it is the car OP, and how you have the audacity to make out that cyclists are a priority problem to be sorted when you drive one of those behemoths is beyond me.

The kid wasn't a law breaker as they are below the age of criminal responsibility.

There as to drive a motor vehicle you have to be above the age of criminal responsibility.

Edited to say: Oddly the OP wants to exclude children from her scheme. While younger children cycle on the pavement for safety reasons, most of the cycling "law breakers" in my area are children between 11-15 who cycle on the pavement either to secondary school or to deliver papers. However they get off the pavement or stop completely if they are anywhere near a pedestrian.

The kid wasn't a law breaker as they are below the age of criminal responsibility.

To be pedantic about it, children can and do break the law. If they’re under 10 they just can’t be prosecuted. Neither does that mean that actions can’t be taken against child criminals. The actions aren’t those of the criminal law though.

Anyway, I take your point. I am not suggesting that eight-year-olds on bikes on the pavement be arrested, charged and held on remand in Belmarsh. In fact I’d much rather see small children cycling off the road. It’s too much of a hazard otherwise.

I enjoy the occasional bike ride but always off road. It does puzzle me though, how some cyclists (not all) wax lyrical about the health benefits of cycling but then go on to complain about being run off the road or cut up by huge SUVs, being almost knocked off their bikes by drivers opening doors without looking, not feeling safe due to drivers' incompetence, being pushed and slapped, spat at and being verbally abused, having to ride over broken glass or having to navigate numerous hazards on cycle lanes. One PP has cited hazards into double figures on just one 20 minute bike ride which could have hurt her. Physically there may well be benefits, but my mental health would be battered after that!

Yes that’s what I thought too, @Reugny I thought that it was against the law to cycle on a foot way that wasn’t a shared path regardless, but really a kid couldn’t be prosecuted and a careful young peuple was vanishingly unlikely to be prosecuted. And that’s what I tell me 12 year old who does ride on the foot way for part of his ride to school as there’s not really a safe option other than dismounting for part of it and TBH it’s easier for me to tell him he’s not supposed to be there and he has to be extra considerate to others.

he is a confident cyclist and does go on the road when we are there too, but in some cases it’s safer for him not to and I’ll use my judgement to balance that risk. But in short id prefer him to be on a segregated cycle lane if it were available

This is why we campaign for safer infrastructure.

In the Netherlands after a journalist wrote about the loss of his six year old daighter on her way to school there were mass "stop de kindermoord" (stop the child killing) protests. Since then the NL has introduced traffic calming measures in residential areas and built dedicated bike paths on arterial routes. Junctions have been redesigned to give priority to pedestrians and cyclists and many streets have been bisected by a "knip" (cut) so motor vehicles can't rat-run, they have to use the ring road. It worked, fatalities (particularly those involving children) plummetted.