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.

In the UK we do take the view that as the person requires a gun in order to kill, we should ban guns.

The GOP might disagree and say that it's not the AR15's fault that people use it, but the relative death rates speak for themselves. As the pedestrian survival rates for different shapes of car do.

You are incorrect. Both the weight and the height of a Range Rover, like all SUVs is much more likely to cause death.

Firstly, it hits pedestrians in the head rather than the legs. The impact in that zone is itself more dangerous, and is compounded by the likelihood that being hit there will send you to the floor to be run over. Lower cars like the average VW saloon will impact on the legs / hips; bones fare better than vital organs and the person will be scooped up and over the bonnet.

Add to this the weight of a RR v a regular car, and any impact at the same speed will contain more energy. More energy being imparted into the human body = more damage.

It may come as a surprise to the less intelligent MNers but that’s your fault for not trying harder in physics.

That can apply to almost anything, fact!

On average how many motor bikers you see monthly jumping red lights - Thats correct, almost naff all yet they have to have number plates.

Ask the victoms of push-bike-riders that have been injured, near miss incidents, having their mobiles stolen, almost knocked over at the lights and or crossing or knocked over on the pavement - ask them what happens when they tried to decribe the cyclist to the police

Please get real

Please get real

Now i know you re on a wind up.

This is where money should be spent. A driver in a massive SUV drove through a barrier, onto a pavement and into a school and there’s a lack of resources to investigate. Those poor parents. Meanwhile is this person still driving?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgy8nm84gyo

and yesterday another huge car crashed into a school. Nobody killed but ten minutes later that room would be full of small kids. If a perso. Riding a bike crashed into a wall, they would get hurt. The bike would get damaged. That’s it. This is about proportional risk for me. Not saying there aren’t idiots on bikes, but there’s far more dangerous behaviour on our roads, parking on our pavements and not obeying the rules of the road and disregarding others’ safety.

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1782515584929767424/pu/pl/TjkKqYtauBCQXvBI.m3u8?tag=12&container=cmaf

The good news is that the story was back in the media today - heard it on the radio and in papers

I'd vote for any political party that promised to action as per my OP

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/virginia-blackburn/1900003/cyclists-abide-rules-of-the-road

🥱

First line of Express (does anyone even read that anymore?!?) article:

”Cyclists have turned into Lycra clad maniacs”

Nice balanced piece of journalism there, OP.

And today a 1 year old girl was killed after being hit by a 4x4 driver. Should be ban all 4x4 drivers OP?

Op doesn't care about child deaths, only cutting a minute off his commute.

Most cycle lanes are not fit for purpose and are very dangerous. If they were usable, people would use them. No cyclist wants to be dodging cars or pedestrians.

What a stupid response. Of course it's the gun that kills. A maniac with only their bare hands would find it hard to kill one person let alone shoot up a school or shopping centre as happens weekly in the US.

Not to the same extent but heavier and higher up cars are much more likely to kill, all else being equal.

That so unfair. You’re completely wrong about this.

They also care about their scratched wing mirror.

Excellent idea. I think all pedestrians should be identifiable at all times, too, as they might do something wrong. We can't use numberplates as they might take them off. How about a number tattooed on the arm?

The inconvenient truth is that a law abiding SUV driver is much more likely to kill someone than even the most reckless, careless cyclist who jumps red lights and rides on pavements.

It would be nonsensical to introduce stricter regulations around cycling unless we first tackle the dangers caused by car drivers.

This is also very true. Anyway I see many SUV drivers on their phones, parked on pavements, stopped on zigzags outside primary schools. Anecdotally their driving is far worse than the average ford fiesta driver. Probably because a) they can't see properly b) they feel invincible in their car and c) the type of person who owns SUV is going to be selfish arrogant by nature

An SUV reversed right over our wheelie bin last week (on the pavement during school run). They obviously didn't even notice as didn't stop. Could easily have been a child.

I have never seen a bicycle crush a wheelie bin

In the UK, in a year

• 3 pedestrians were killed by cyclists
• 100 cyclists were killed by cars
• 385 pedestrians were killed by cars.

Now tell me which group needs tighter controls?

😂 How could I forget??

The OP is now using the Express as a source? Every time that I think that they can't sink any lower, they go there. What next, the Beano? I can't wait for them to offer Dennis the Menace as an example of a "lycra lout"...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69016715#:~:text=Causing%20death%20or%20serious%20injury,to%2014%20years%20in%20prison.

Evidently the government thinks incidents caused by cyclists are on the rise and the law needs to be addressed. I don’t think the bad behaviour of motorists can be used as an excuse not to tighten the law to prevent the types of incidents outlined in the article. The point here is that cyclists do kill and injure, and when they do it’s incredibly difficult for victims and their families to get justice. Why should dangerous or reckless cycling be treated any differently than a motorist behaving in the same way ?

I am an SUV driver - disabled and it’s the only type of vehicle that accommodates my wheelchair lift. Lots of disabled drivers use them for similar reasons. I can assure you l am neither selfish nor arrogant, and l neither feel invincible nor is my vision blocked in any way by being slightly higher up. Where is the evidence for your comparison for the attitude of SUV versus drivers of average cars ? I live opposite a school and believe me l see dreadful, selfish behaviour from entitled parents across the board not just from SUV drivers.

As anyone, at any age can ride a bicycle, what happens when a 12yo crashes into someone who then dies?

14years in jail?

Yet another ill thought out law, from IDS who gave us UC, Brexit and the latest, anti abortion laws.

The intention is to make sure no one rides a bike on the roads.

So you’re saying that the lives of those three people taken by cyclists somehow mean less than those taken by motorists ? And therefore it’s OK to leave archaic and inadequate cycling legislation in place because so few people are killed or injured by cyclists that it’s not worth changing the law to make it easier to get justice ? Not sure the families of those three people would agree with you.

Cyclists are not subject to anything like the laws applied to motorists when they are involved in an accident. Just one example of which is that if a police officer suspects drink or drugs are involved and asks them for a breathalyser test, they are entitled to refuse and also to refuse a blood or urine test. That refusal can’t be used against them in court, effectively meaning that they can cycle under the influence and get away with it even if they cause an accident as a result.

Bikes are far faster and more powerful now than they ever were when present cycling legislation was introduced. And ‘peloton’ type groups are becoming a more familiar sight on the roads, and from what l’ve seen that type of cycling is far more aggressive and IMO not appropriate for public roads where there are pedestrians - as evidenced by the death of a pedestrian in a London park at the hands of an aggressive cyclist riding head down in formation with no regard to the 20mph speed limit imposed, and whose defence on a technicality of cycling law meant he later walked free from court.

It’s time the law was updated accordingly and citing the fact that motorists are more dangerous is a ridiculous excuse for preserving the status quo.

Not disagreeing, but interesting use of language.

3 people killed by cyclists.

100 cyclists killed by cars

385 pedestrians killed by cars

We are so used to people who cycle being demonised into one homogenous group, even people who support cycling do it, presumably accidentally.