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.

That is quite nasty of you to brand over 4000 readers of the Daily Mirror like that just because the vote went against those who oppose the public to easily identify cyclists that break the law.

You would never have said that if the vote went in your favour.

How many cyclists that ride on pavements, jump red lights, etc etc have you reported? Yes, we all know the answer - you can't as they have no number to identify them.

I’ll take your refusal to answer that you have reported no
drivers, yet are desperate to want to report cyclists “for the safety of pedestrians”. If you were half serious you’d be reporting drivers too.

It's a red top tabloid. Like I said, we already know what the education level is of people who read red top tabloids. I'll listen to experts from Utrecht University's Human Geography and Spatial Planning department rather than listening to Pete down the pub whose Facebook profile states that he went to the "University of Life, School of Hard Knocks".

Do you think that Boaty McBoatface is a suitable name for a research vessel? The experts clearly didn't because they overruled the public vote and named it RRS Sir David Attenborough.

You still haven't answered whether you approve of 20mph being the default limit in built-up areas. I thought that you were concerned about pedestrian safety?

If you were even remotely serious, you'd be reporting cyclists as well.

I was just jesting friend, I know you won't report cyclists as you damn well know the police won't bother chasing up law-breaking cyclists that can't be easily identified.

I don’t have a dashcam. I can’t even remember the last time I saw a law breaking cyclist. Must be lucky.

Your desperation to report cyclists must mean you have a dashcam though.

Perhaps you need to open your eyes a bit more, unless you are telling me you only drive on motorways!

Where did I say in this thread I has a "dash cam"?? To save you time, I did not and that is a fact.

So how many dangerous cyclists have you reported?

Btw, did you read the link of the cycle rider filming the Range Rover driver and the after math?

If you don’t have a dashcam, how are you going to provide evidence of law breaking cyclists with their hi-viz licence number?

@DistingusedSocialCommentator i feel I’m slightly wasting my time here. Once again, OP the Mirror link is proof only of what Mirror readers think. Most certainly not a true representation. You’d get a very different result if you asked Cycle Weekly. Also not a true representation of what most people/vast majority of people think. A few posts back I asked you to do your own googling. You haven’t. I can tell you that largely in a YouGov poll which is indicative of the general adult population 71% support penalty points for cyclists who break road laws. This is highest among car drivers, conservative and leave voters interestingly. But actually has a slight majority support from cyclists too. Cyclists, as has been demonstrated time and time again on this thread don’t actually think they should get away with breaking the law. The vast majority of people think the law would be adhered to. Then the question becomes interesting when we think about cost benefit, experience and potential harm.

Cycling UK’s official position is also that cyclists should have lights and not ride on the pavement.

But we are all saying that better infrastructure is a better and more effective solution than punitive measures which rely on huge resources to police and prosecute and given we’re not policing or prosecuting the far larger number of motoring offences this seems a silly place to start when we can design roads and cycle ways that make it less attractive to be on pavements in the first place and make it safer for cyclists and so get people out of cars.

also in many of the examples here from people who’ve had negative experiences from pavement cyclists it’s been a young person, ie not a adult that’s caused the harm, so how are you prosecuting them? They don’t have driving licences by and large. So even if we did have number plates and so on, what would you actually do with 15 year olds? I know let’s have them all be driven everywhere and cause more traffic. They aren’t mowing down hundreds of people every day, so whilst it does happen and is deeply upsetting for people it’s not actually a huge problem compared to other types of accidents, congestion, pollution etc.

Here’s the poll since your browser only works for Talk TV and the Mirror it seems.

as for the other link, the driver was in the wrong, shouldn’t have been on the phone but has got an advisory letter so it seems that link just shows how often, despite very clear evidence, number plates and footage how drivers get away with breaking the law. Was that your point?

Bikes are cheap. The administrative time and cost of setting up and maintain a national system of registration and licensing would be non sensical.... How do you deal with children? And children's bikes? Bikes that are shared or sold or passed on.

I was thinking about this thread when I remembered in some towns and cities paramedics and police use bikes to get around in places it is hard for other vehicles to get around easily and quickly. Paramedics have a lot on their bikes so it would be impossible for anyone to see any registration number.

There was also a well publicised case of a police officer apprehending an offender by commandeering a member of the public's bike. I suspect this isn't the only time the police have done this. This law would mean the police would be unable to do this so potential offenders would simply get away.

@Runssometimes
"" i feel I’m slightly wasting my time here. Once again, OP the Mirror link is proof only of what Mirror readers think. Most certainly not a true representation.""

I feel as though I'm definitely wasting my time, but it needs to be said, again
Pro cycle people often slag off the Daily Mail. The Daily Mirror provided the poll and it is a clear message where over 4 thousand people voted in favour of some type of number on a bike - I suggest its better on Hi-Vis.

People like you would have been patting yourselves on the back and bigging up the Daily Mirro poll if it went in your favour

It is incredible why many adults who ride a cycle and are fully aware of how some of their fellow riders breach the law and put at-risk pedestrians on pavements, FGS.

Hopefully, the press will pick up on this thread.

WTH is wrong with you lot?

You've lost it now. Where's the evidence that pro cycle people often slag off the Daily Mail? Lots of people slag off the Daily Mail tbh. And how is slagging off the Daily Mail anything to do with a poll in the Mirror? I'm confused?

If you are making statements like 'many' or 'most people' you need to use balanced polls that show the views across the general population, not a small subsection and that includes the readership of MAMIL Weekly (if that were a thing) just as much as the Mirror as a readership that has a skew is not a fair representation and cannot be expanded to say that most people. It can say most Mirror readers but not extrapolated to say that's what most people think. The PP has given you a source that is balanced and shows the variance across various groups.

As far as I can see nobody at any point said that cyclists should be mowing down pedestrians left right and centre and getting away with it? I think most people walk around at some point and would be annoyed they if got hit by a cyclist whether they are themselves a cyclist or not. In the way that drivers are annoyed if their car gets hit despite them also driving a car.

And aren't drivers also aware that other drivers put people at risk, I mean when I see someone driving through a red light, not stopping on a crossing, speeding, not indicating and pulling out I don't think that's alright then, it's cool. I think they are selfish twunts, possibly dangerous twunts. I'm pretty safe in my car, and haven't thankfully been involved in an accident but that's not to say that I haven't had to slam on the brakes or avoid someone else doing something stupid. I'm aware of it, I would like more of them prosecuted so they don't hurt someone. Being aware of the behaviour of the same group you're in doing someone doesn't mean you agree with it. I don't know how you are making that argument, frankly.

But I also know, as thankfully, those in charge do, that any number plating of bikes would increase barriers to cycling and is actually pretty unworkable as has been outlined by others before me. And as has been pointed out many times on this thread we need more people cycling not fewer to get cars off roads, get people healthier and ease congestion on streets for the minority of people that really do have to drive all of, or some of the time, particularly in cities and towns where space is at a premium and where other ways to get around exist.

You are not a balanced person, nor even a particularly good debater as you just spout off opinions as facts, conflate arguments and simply ignore any facts that don't fit with your assertions. Go to the press, it's been done before, start as petition as a PP suggested, write to your MP. Nobody is stopping you doing any of those things at all.

That's right - the Daily Mirror poll in favour of cyclists having some form of easily identifiable number on the rider/bike is not for those that only favour polls that go in their favour. The Daily Mirror is left-leaning

How about this - will this convience those that do not favour my proposals - Rock on Italy. I hope it helps as its not the Daily Mirror

I'll let you have the last word as it looks like you will need it,

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1784592/uk-insurance-number-plates-cyclists-poll-result-spt

@DistingusedSocialCommentator I suggested earlier that you undertake to cycle all journeys under 2 miles for the next month and then come back and tell us if you still feel the same way.

I'm not trying to be goady, it's a genuine suggestion. I think it would give you an alternative perspective. Would you be prepared to try? If not, why not?

Oh dear…

https://road.cc/content/news/italian-deputy-pm-backpedals-draconian-laws-cyclists-301797

What is "draconian" is the fact the government voted in b the majority of the votes are not lisitening to the massive majority that drive/ride within the law and who want to see dangerous, lawbreaking riders have number plates/etc, insurance, bells and lights along with a hi-vis jacket. That is what is "draconian."

😂

So you are ignoring police officers - who may use a member of the public's bike to fight crime - , paramedics and children in your scheme.

How many more exclusions are you going to make?

Even a respected police officer speaks out in favour of easily identifiable numbers for cyclists.

Sadly, over Gov be it labour/tory are only interested in what is best for them and everyone else comes last.

As I said, it will take some massive event where some very wealthy and or famous person/s relative etc is mowed down on the pavement in order to get the politicians to do something about cycle riders and how to find them and also ensure they have insurance, lights, bell and wear hi-vis for our and their safety.

It looks like the law-breaking riders are fearing accountability,

https://road.cc/content/news/former-met-police-chief-call-cyclist-number-plates-305277

What is "draconian" is the fact the government voted in b the majority of the votes are not lisitening to the massive majority that drive/ride within the law and who want to see dangerous, lawbreaking pedestrians have number plates/etc, insurance along with a hi-vis jacket. That is what is "draconian."

Too right Disgusted! Those law breaking peds going out stabbing, mugging, vandalising, trespassing, littering, fouling and walking carelessly bumping into people and cars and causing accidents!

If we are prepared to ignore all the practical, financial and moral issues in favour of sticking it to cyclists then too right we should stick it to pedestrians, too many of them get away with breaking the law, amirite?

If we're talking about facts, here's a survey

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/new-survey-shows-public-back-action-encourage-cycling-and-public-transport-remain-attached-their

44% of the public (presumably a more representative sample than a mirror poll) would like to cycle more than they currently do

71% of the public would support actions to encourage more people to walk or cycle

64% of people think it's too dangerous to cycle on the roads

As far as I can see nobody at any point said that cyclists should be mowing down pedestrians left right and centre and getting away with it?

You know what group of people actually go out of their way to hit vulnerable road users? SUV drivers.

Yep, someone did an experiment to see if people were more likely to hit a rubber turtle, snake, tarantula or a leaf (as a control group). 89% of those who hit the fake animals were SUV drivers, often veering into the opposite direction lane to do so. Those guys are actually psychopaths.

In the Netherlands super fast electric bicycles do have to have a licence plate and insurance, like e-scooters and mopeds. That's bicycles that can go up to 30 miles an hour. I think that's reasonable and possibly also what the Italian minister meant.

Sounds reasonable. If they are powered and can do 30 then they are basically mopeds without the leaf-blower sound effects.

The OP however would prefer to victimise Doris bimbling off to the shops - low-impact exercise helps her remain fit and independent in her old age.

I’d agree with that too, 30mph is a fair speed