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.

Are you aware of the history of jaywalking laws?

90-92% of hit-and-run drivers get clean away.

Thing is, as far as I know every single cyclist that has killed a pedestrian has done jail time. Because it’s, thankfully rare. Now the number of drivers that kill pedestrians and do jail time is laughably low.

So I’m all for this law as long as we have similar punitive measures for drivers. But we won’t. Because this is an easy political point score and nothing to do with safety. If we cared about safety we’d tackle the larger problem which is pedestrian deaths by motor vehicles.

We’d have 2-3 cyclists jailed every year and hundreds of drivers cause those are the proportions.

Not forgetting the lives saved due to the improved air quality.

A member of one such group in a London park killed a pedestrian Witnesses described the group as head down, cycling furiously and well in excess of the 20mph speed limit in force.

Sorry but that's quite a lot of hyperbole there. I don't think they were angry so not sure why describe them as cycling furiously. Lets leave the emotive language out of it. Strava data showed he was riding around 25mph. Like others have said there is no speed limit for cyclists

The below is from the inquest;

Mr Fitzgerald told the inquest that he had been left with “zero reaction time” when Ms Griffiths, who had been walking her dog and was crossing the road to a pedestrian island, stepped out in front of the group from a pedestrian island, estimating that he only had 2 metres in which to brake to avoid crashing into her. A jogger who witnessed the crash, which happened on the Outer Circle close to Hanover Terrace, confirmed that in their opinion, the cyclist was not at fault.

This is very sad but ultimately if someone steps out without looking that's their fault. It doesn't sound like it would have made a difference if he'd been doing 20 or 25mph. He wouldn't have been able to avoid the collision at either speed.

There have certainly been cases of cyclists (rightly so) been charged with offences after cycling accidents. So the law is there already. Someone could potentially be charged with manslaughter under existing laws.

Cyclist charged after two others hospitalised in Richmond Park crash | road.cc

Peloton style groups involving racing bikes, some with brake systems not intended for use on public roads because the stopping distances are greater

And as others have said this is rubbish. 99.9% of bikes are either rim brakes or disc brakes - both of which are legal and the Richmond Park cyclist you go on to mention certainly had one of those. It's an offence to ride a bike in the UK without 2 efficient braking systems and nobody would go out in a group ride without decent brakes, you'd have a death wish if you tried it and the rest of the group would tell you to do one.

If you're talking about fixed wheel bikes they still must have a front brake and they are legal.

You might get the odd idiot who wanted to ride a velodrome bike on the public roads (never heard of such a case) but I guess you also get people driving about in illegal, unsafe vehicles. Someone locally caused the death of 7 people due to unsafe home mods on his vehicle and went to prison for it.

To be fair @CormorantStrikesBack not everyone can look, so there is increased responsibility on cyclists to be careful around others. Having said which as a cyclist (and I don’t go particularly fast) distracted pedestrians do step out in front, particularly those wearing headphones or on phones and so I’m careful. I have had a number of close calls and ended up in hospital avoiding a pedestrian that suddenly veered into my path. They weren’t hurt as I managed to brake sharply which unfortunately sent me over the handlebars. I certainly lost a lot of skin and had bruising and concussion. Not in the least my fault as it was a shared path, but goes to show that everyone needs to be aware of their surroundings. I’m understanding that some people have visual impairments and that the pedestrian always does have priority and I’ve no problem with that.

Absolutely, I commute on a shared path and am very cautious and slow down for pedestrians. But this case wasn't a shared path. It was a road. If she'd stepped out in front of a car it would have been the same result.

I guess there's an argument that if she didn't hear a vehicle she didn't bother looking, which is a tragic mistake. but it could have been a silent EV.....also most group rides are quite chatty so I'd be surprised if they weren't making any noise.

I suppose they just assumed she was staying on the traffic island like 99.9% of people would. I cross a main A road by bike every day and wait on a traffic island in the middle.....the cars racing by at 60mph plus don't stop in case I decide to step off/pedal off the traffic island in front of them.

I have a friend who's totally blind so yes I know some people are visually impaired but if their impairment is so bad they can't see a group of cyclists again they won't see a car. so maybe they need a guide dog to help them cross safely, or use crossings, or at least have a white stick to signify to others that they can't see so maybe then they would stop and let them cross?

Iain Duncan Smith has a habit of hanging his hat on populist ideas and this is just another one.

I note he isn't interested in the afghan veteran who was killed when he hit a pot and and thrown into the path of car?

I'm not against prosecuting dangerous cyclists but i think when you drag children into criminal law, you have to be extremely careful how such laws are drafted and this one is isn't.

One if the offenses people have previously been charged with is called "wanton or furious" it's not hyperbole it's part of the legal definition.

I think the regents park case lately is pretty shocking and I wouldn't have objected to him being charged with something more serious if it was available.

I don't care particularly if they bring in this law of death by dangerous cycling because it thankfully hardly ever happens anyway

And yes for sure it's that, looking for the anti cycling vote

Charging cyclists is not straight fwd, with a car you ve an mot, min tyre depths, a licence and insurance plus a calibrated speedometer.

Bicycles have none of these, apart from 2 working brakes, the cyclist jailed for knocking down a pedestrian wouldn't have been had he had 2 brakes, he only had his fixed wheel "brake"

The Richmond cyclist had no warning, the poor lady stepped out in front of him, relying on witnesses for his speed is not evidence and neither is Strava, if he was doing 25mph, he could have been within the tolerance for speeding.

Perhaps a park is simply not suitable for any vehicular traffic and a total ban on all vehicles is the answer.

I know there is an offence using that terminology, however he wasn't charged with it. So it is hyperbole to say he was cycling furiously. He was cycling normally. But emotive language makes it sound worse doesn't it?

He wasn't charged with anything because he didn't do anything wrong.

You can't go round charging either cyclists or motorists who are behaving legally and someone steps out onto the road 2m in front of them without looking. Independent witnesses said it was the pedestrian's fault.

About time and I hope when it happens. The behaviour of those cyclists that ride around with impunity either modify their behaviour or are funded etc, etc

My friend - FYI, I'm the initiator of this thread and the fact is, I am NOT "anti" anything and that is a fact

The fact is I, like millions of others in England, want to put a stop to the cyclists that flout the rules on a regular basis, and in turn, make our roads and footpaths safer for everyone.

Well hopefully you want to put a stop to all road users including motorists who flout the rules on a regular basis. It's a fact that more deaths and injuries are caused by motorists so maybe if you want to get involved in road safety issues you can focus there.

No my friend, you are just an entitled driver who thinks the road is for cars alone.
Hence you drive fast saloons and SUV's, treating the roads like your own little race track.

How dare those pesky cyclists slow me down!

Because thats what its all about isn't it? you, just like Iain Duncan Smith, want the law changed so you no longer have to share road space.

IDS even wants the law changed over a guy who actually did nothing wrong.

If it were about safety, you and IDS would be focusing on the approx 1800 people inc 100s of children, killed by drivers, each and every year, you home in on all cyclists by trying to introduce rules and regulations that would in effect, make cycling on the UKs roads impossible.

Only half an hour ago I was walking along the pavement. I met a group of 3 - 2 ladies with an elderly gentleman with a stick between them. I walked to one side to let them by then had to swerve back in front of them because a cyclist on an electric bike came round the side of them and nearly hit me. I nearly knocked one of the women over

Riding a bike is good. Riding a bike on the pavement without due regard for pedestrians is dangerous. It's the 2nd time this month I've nearly been hit by an electric powered vehicle on the pavement - last time it was an e-scooter which just came up behind me.

In London the (new) cycle lanes are fit for purpose and they get used.

But elsewhere, I can think of places where the cycle lanes are really good but they still won't use them. They don't like it if someone is on them with a toddler and they have to slow down (they somehow don't see the irony of that).

They are annoying to use when you have to keep giving way to cars though. And they can be completely useless or suddenly disappear.

For the avoidance of doubt, I see no need for special legislation to deal with cyclists. Both the people who have died in the high profile cases just walked out in front of bikes - pedestrians need to take care as well. The only thing that might need to be reviewed is if someone is using an e-bike or e-scooter. I'd prefer much stiffer sentences for dangerous drivers (and for those who park on pavements).

Well hopefully you want to put a stop to all road users including motorists who flout the rules on a regular basis. It's a fact that more deaths and injuries are caused by motorists so maybe if you want to get involved in road safety issues you can focus there

Exactly this.

The fact is I, like millions of others in England, want to put a stop to the cyclists that flout the rules on a regular basis, and in turn, make our roads and footpaths safer for everyone

The easiest way to make our footpaths safer for everyone is to ban pavement parking and require dogs to be on short leads on shared use cycle and footways.

@CormorantStrikesBack
Well hopefully you want to put a stop to all road users including motorists who flout the rules on a regular basis.

Hello
Trust me friend, I would never use the word "hopefully" as my stance is clear re rules and the law - no one should be above it.

Take care

You forgot cyclists

Number plates for pedestrians then?

What a ridiculous comment🙄

FYI, I've yet to meet any "pedestrians" that run on the pavement close to 30mph or travel through people crossing on zebra crossings and the like