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 yet to be assaulted or mugged by a car. Pedestrian registration plates would definitely have helped find the guys who punched my husband and mugged him. Doesn't my husband deserve the same degree of protection as your wing mirror?

Or do you only worry about law breaking when it's a traffic law (and it's being broken by a cyclist and not one of the thousands of instances of drivers ignoring amber lights, speed limits, pavement boundaries, zebra crossings, box junctions, etc etc etc)

So does the same apply to motorists ? In the event of an accident where police are in attendance a breathalyser is mandatory. If a motorist refuses to give a breath, blood or urine sample it’s used against them in court. Not so cyclists. Even the judge in a recent case where a cyclist had killed a pedestrian and walked free on a technicality expressed concern as to why cyclists are not subject to the same laws.

The bloke who killed a pedestrian in a London park while breaking the speed limit cycling with a group escaped conviction on a technicality. The fact that motorists kill more people in larger, heavier motor vehicles, doesn’t excuse cyclists from responsibility toward other road users, or entitle them to disregard the rules of the road. The reason we only have 2-3 cyclists jailed every year is because they are not subject to the same laws as motorists. Doesn’t make it right.

It wasn’t 25mph it was 29. The speed limit in the area was 20mph. If this had been a motorist they would have been successfully prosecuted. How is cycling at 30% over the speed limit for the road ‘normal’ ?

It wasn’t 29mph. They can’t tell the speed in the moments before, Strava isn’t that accurate. It will only give you an average for the ride, an average for the last 5km, an average for a segment. The max speed that morning been 29mph but the majority of the ride was at 25mph.

25mph is a normal speed for groups of decent cyclists in the area, or certainly not unusual, so nothing “furious” about it. I’m a nearly 50yo overweight woman and my average cycling (group) speed is 18mph and I’m the slow one amongst my friends. I don’t consider myself to be cycling furiously. For a group of men who cycle a lot 25mph is easily achievable.

There is no speed limit for cyclists so the speed limit for cars is irrelevant.

like I said earlier even if he’d been doing 20mph he was still going to hit her when she stepped out in front of him without looking only 2m ahead of him. At that small distance he’d have hit her doing 10mph. Maybe she wouldn’t have died at 10mph but she probably still would have done at 20mph. 🤷‍♀️. The witnesses said it was her fault. Coroner agreed. Police and CPS obviously did as well.

It’s not any more ridiculous than an entire thread, started by you, op, saying that every single man woman and child has to be wearing a high vis emblazoned with their id credentials, just because someone scratched your wing mirror and you’d like to speed about unimpeded in your two and a half ton monstrosity a bit more, that’s pretty much the nub of it.

Are you going to bless us all with a pt2 of this dire nonsense once this thread thank god expires?

@Lovelysausagedogscrumpy

The reason we only have 2-3 cyclists jailed every year is because they are not subject to the same laws as motorists. Doesn’t make it right.

I'm sorry, are you seriously suggesting that cyclists kill or seriously injure as many people as drivers and the only reason there are not as many cyclists jailed is because the same laws don't apply? Not because cyclists simply very rarely cause anything like the sort of injuries and fatalities that drivers are causing every day?

FWIW, while I have no time for the type of fool who wants to divert road safety resources away from the carnage caused by drivers and into schemes to address the single figure deaths attributed to cyclists, I don't think it's ok for cyclists to use public roads and paths for any sort of racing or speed training, any more than it's ok for drivers to do so.

FYI, I've yet to meet any "pedestrians"

FYI I’ve met several in the 20 plus years I spent commuting in London, who stepped out onto the road whilst glued to their phone, and I managed not to cause either of us a serious injury because I was paying attention, and was lucky enough to have very good disc brakes on my bike.

That number is dwarfed by the amount of bad drivers I had to take defensive or evasive actions from otherwise I’d end up underneath a car/skip lorry/RANGE ROVER

Honestly OP you haven’t got the slightest clue or understanding about actual road safety.

If you were truly concerned about road safety, you’d sack off your huge sports (lol) utility vehicle and stop posting pointless threads.

Have you actually used them? Many look fine, but are actually really dangerous.

If you have to keep stopping to give way to cars when a car wouldn't have to, they aren't fit for purpose. If they suddenly disappear without warning, they aren't fit for purpose. If they are full of pedestrians wandering around, they aren't fit for purpose.

If you are commuting to work by bike, and using the bike lane takes you twice the time as riding on the road does, wouldn't you use the road?

"my stance is clear re rules and the law - no one should be above it."

Plenty of crimes can be committed at jogging pace or slower.

Why are you condemning the rest of us to a lawless free for all by hooligans on foot?

Hi vis for joggers with ID at all times is the way to solve this. And those that are slower than joggers too. Cyclists, walkers, normal people going about their everyday business. Fuck it, high vis the prime minister and government too while we’re at it. High vis ID for all is the way to a happier healthier country all round.

To prosecute under section 4 of the RTA, the police just need to prove that a motorist was impaired but drink or drugs, there's no prescribed limit, and you don't have to even attempt to drive the vehicle, being "in charge" of it can be enough.

Having alcohol in your over a prescribed limit comes under section 5 of the RTA. No prescribed limit applies to cyclists, instead you get prosecuted under section 30 if you are incapable of having proper control of the cycle. No need for a breath test.

Given that an intoxicated cyclist is mostly a danger to themselves rather than others, this is proportionate.

Near me there is one of those LED signs that tells vehicles what speed they're doing (accompanied by "thanks" or "slow down" as appropriate. It's pretty normal for cars to be doing 27 in what is a 20mph zone (outside a school, no less) but for some reason such misdemeanours barely raise an eyebrow when committed in a car. As said before, the easiest way to get away with murder is to run someone down with a car.

Ride a bicycle on the other hand and people will judge you for putting the smallest toe out of line.

Good cycle lanes get used. If a cycle lane isn't being used then there is something wrong with it. If anyone wants to post Google Maps links to cycle lanes that "no one uses" I'll gladly look through and point out what's wrong with them.

Also on the speed thing - car speed limits are largely based on the probability of you killing or seriously injuring someone if you hit them. Things like stopping distance and speed at impact are very important here.

A bike has far less momentum, so you aren't going to hurt a person in a car if you run into a car with it. The same applies to pedestrians - even at the same speed, momentum is much lower, so risk of injury to a pedestrian is lower.

Exactly.

Also, even good or OK bike lanes can't be used if they are full of gravel and debris. Riding on that is just asking to get thrown off under a car.

He didn’t escape prosecution on a technicality, he was deemed to have done nothing wrong. And i don’t just mean from the pov of speed limits don’t apply to cyclists but the fact the accident was not his fault and was unavoidable.

if he had been cycling at 19mph and there had been a person stood in the road for 2 minutes and he had plenty of time to see them and avoid them but instead decided to plough into them and kill them he might have been prosecuted (even though under the car speed limit).

the speed is not the defining factor here. It’s what actually happened (the person stepping out without looking right infront of him).

Given that all speed limit enforcement in the uk have a margin for error, usually 2 or 3mph over plus 10%, if he was doing 25mph, he was on that margin, so at worst would have got a speed awareness course.

Would you like to go to jail for killing a pedestrian who, without warning, stepped out in front of you? no you wouldn't but you want a cyclist to go to prison..... double standards.

So few cyclists are jailed because they are rarely the cause of road deaths.

but cars etc kill around 1800 people per year inc approx 300 children.

This new law wouldn't have led to any prosecution because the accident wasn't his fault.

What is an almost 100% risk-free getting away with riding offence when you ride on the pavement, jump red light, ride through pedestrians crossing on official crossings??

Who even cares? I really don't care if people get away with those things. I hope they get away with those things.

Honestly, people don't want bikes on the road because "they hold up traffic". You can't ride on pavements because "you're riding through pedestrians". You can't win.

Not suggesting that at all - that would be a ridiculous thing to say wouldn’t it ? What I’m saying is that there are many people here using the fact that drivers kill far more people, as a reason not to tighten the laws governing cyclists. I appreciate it’s difficult because there are all ages involved but it’s not a reason to ignore or fail to legislate to stop some of the dangerous behaviour, that if we’re honest here, we’ve all seen cyclists engage in.

They need to start by prosecuting motorists for the dangerous behaviour they engage in, speeding, using phones, jumping red lights, road rage……I see it all and the majority are “getting away with it”.

I genuinely believe the laws which are needed for cyclists are there already, it’s illegal for a cyclist to cycle dangerously and they can and are prosecuted if they injure or kill somebody while cycling dangerously, they are prosecuted if caught jumping red lights. I agree plenty aren’t but that’s due to lack of police catching them not lack of legislation. The only discrepancy is speeding but it’s pretty impossible to attach an accurate calibrated speedometer to a bike. You wouldn’t like it if cars didn’t have speedos but you could still be prosecuted for doing 32mph in a 30mph limit.

Within the last 4 years I have known 3 people personally who have all been seriously affected while cycling by motorists.

A friend was out cycling on a straight A road and hit by a van and killed. As far as I know that van driver has not been prosecuted. 🤷‍♀️

A friend’s husband recently cycling along in broad daylight with a fluorescent jacket and lights and was hit from behind at 60mph, wasn’t expected to live but has done but with serious injuries. Motorist said she never saw him. Police aren’t prosecuting because there’s no witnesses (she admits hitting him) and apparently it’s not in the public interest.

another friend was cycling in a group and a 4x4 did a close pass and someone in the group gave him the finger. 4x4 driver turned round, chased them down a side road and purposefully hit them. Only prosecuted after a lot of pushing and complaints from the cyclists involved. The police were very happy to do nothing even though it was on a helmet cam! He eventually was found guilty of dangerous driving and given 11 points and a big fine. He could have killed somebody on purpose and the police didn’t give a shit.

So I don’t think it’s fair to think cyclists should be held to some sort of higher accountability than drivers seem to be.

many people here using the fact that drivers kill far more people, as a reason not to tighten the laws governing cyclists

Well, yes. Because faffing around with expensive to implement and enforce (and in the OP's case, impossibly so) new laws to crack down on cyclists while drivers are killing and maiming so many more is like worrying about fixing the washer on the leaking bathroom tap while you have a burst water main in the kitchen.

As I've said up thread, get the deaths, injuries and general degradation of our shared public spaces caused by drivers down to the same level as cyclists first, then it would make sense to focus on additional laws and enforcement for cyclists. Until then I'd rather keep the big guns for the big problem and work on influencing cyclists through social pressure.

And on a personal level I get an illegal close pass when I’m cycling most bike rides, often quite a few. People shouting abuse out their window at you…..even people driving the other direction who haven’t been held up by you! Passengers throwing water bottles at you as they overtake seems to be the latest craze! Drivers honking their horns like mad and pulling out to overtake but then swerving towards you to scare you. That sort of behaviour.

which probably explains why Richmond park is popular for cyclists, less cars at slower speeds.