cyclist deaths & the law

mumf

Remember also that EVERYONE has rhe right to use the Queen's Highways( except motorways) under Magna Carta. MOTORISTS have to be licenced for that privelige.

Strider590

mumf wrote: »

Remember also that EVERYONE has rhe right to use the Queen's Highways( except motorways) under Magna Carta. MOTORISTS have to be licenced for that privelige.

Exactly.....

And Winston Churchill abolished road tax because he saw a time fast approaching where motorists would falsely claim ownership over the roads, causing conflict with vulnerable road users.

skivenov

I think we've hit the stage now where some basic training is needed for cyclists on the road, and some means of making sure a bike's owner can be traced (like a reg plate on a car). I've nearly hit two cyclists in the last fortnight. The first went through a red light and the second was riding down an unlit road at night with no lights, no reflective clothing, not even a reflector.

Add onto that the amount of times I've seen cyclists ploughing through pedestrian crossings against a red light, it's hit the stage where, like motorists, they need to legislate with the bad ones in mind.

fannyadams

another one bites the dust

Please can anyone help find the driver of the grey 'transit like' van that killed my mate's son Timothy on Friday afternoon in Spalding?

Dave_C_2

skivenov wrote: »

Modified by me I think we've hit the stage now where some basic training is needed for pedestrians on the road, and some means of making sure the pedestrian can be traced (like a reg plate on a car). I've nearly hit two pedestrians in the last fortnight. The first stepped off the kerb into my path without looking and the second was walking down an unlit road at night with no lights, no reflective clothing, not even a reflector.

Add onto that the amount of times I've seen pedestrians crossing roads on the zig zag lines near a pedestrian crossing against their red light, it's hit the stage where, like motorists, they need to legislate with the bad ones in mind.

Fixed it for you

Dave

Johnmcl7

skivenov wrote: »

I think we've hit the stage now where some basic training is needed for cyclists on the road, and some means of making sure a bike's owner can be traced (like a reg plate on a car). I've nearly hit two cyclists in the last fortnight. The first went through a red light and the second was riding down an unlit road at night with no lights, no reflective clothing, not even a reflector.

Add onto that the amount of times I've seen cyclists ploughing through pedestrian crossings against a red light, it's hit the stage where, like motorists, they need to legislate with the bad ones in mind.

People keep referencing the need for cyclist training but I still not believe that would make any difference. Some of the worst cyclists in my area are the school children who I know from discussions with the school have been through several cycling courses and know fine what they should be doing but they completely choose to ignore it and ride like idiots.

I don't believe the cyclists are ignoring red lights and pedestrian crossings because they don't know any better, I think the more simple reason is they don't care. I very much agree with you on the cycling at night with no lights or reflective gear particularly as I've just been staying a few days in a city centre and watched countless cyclists (I would assume most to be students) with no lights in busy traffic. However there are laws against this I believe but I've never seen or heard of them being enforced.

John

custardy

skivenov wrote: »

I think we've hit the stage now where some basic training is needed for cyclists on the road, and some means of making sure a bike's owner can be traced (like a reg plate on a car). I've nearly hit two cyclists in the last fortnight. The first went through a red light and the second was riding down an unlit road at night with no lights, no reflective clothing, not even a reflector.

Add onto that the amount of times I've seen cyclists ploughing through pedestrian crossings against a red light, it's hit the stage where, like motorists, they need to legislate with the bad ones in mind.

and yet it was the 'trained' driver that pulled out and hit the cyclist?

olly300

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

People keep referencing the need for cyclist training but I still not believe that would make any difference. Some of the worst cyclists in my area are the school children who I know from discussions with the school have been through several cycling courses and know fine what they should be doing but they completely choose to ignore it and ride like idiots.

In my area the best cyclists seem to be children under 12 and workmen.

The worst cyclists are teenage boys followed by men in their 20s who aren't workmen, and believe it or not the parents who accompany the kids aged 10-12 on their bikes.

The parents of the these pre-teens seem to think they know enough to accompany their child on the road but if it wasn't for their child being visible and in a good road position many of them would be injured at junctions.

The uni students in my area are more nervous of cycling as there are some large roundabouts and a few scary junctions, which if you don't know the area short cuts you don't know how to avoid.

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

I don't believe the cyclists are ignoring red lights and pedestrian crossings because they don't know any better, I think the more simple reason is they don't care.

They don't like stopping as having to start up again slows you down and takes more effort, and in some cities there are a lot of crossings.

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

I very much agree with you on the cycling at night with no lights or reflective gear particularly as I've just been staying a few days in a city centre and watched countless cyclists (I would assume most to be students) with no lights in busy traffic.

It's because they don't think they will be cycling back when it's dark so don't take lights with them. Since there are more cyclists who now leave panniers on their chained up bikes and lights are cheap they don't actually have an excuse.

Unfortunately they also decide it's not cool to wear reflective clothing at all regardless of whether it's night or not.

Another thing that annoys me is people - and it's usually men in their 20s - who decide that if they wear a reflective band around each of their ankles that's enough for a driver to see them by when the rest of their clothing is dark and they don't have any lights.

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

However there are laws against this I believe but I've never seen or heard of them being enforced.

In London the police regularly fine cyclists every year at certain pedestrian crossings for going through them.

Johnmcl7

olly300 wrote: »

In my area the best cyclists seem to be children under 12 and workmen.

The worst cyclists are teenage boys followed by men in their 20s who aren't workmen, and believe it or not the parents who accompany the kids aged 10-12 on their bikes.

Yet the teenage boys should be the ones who have had the most training and most recently by that point.

It's because they don't think they will be cycling back when it's dark so don't take lights with them. Since there are more cyclists who now leave panniers on their chained up bikes and lights are cheap they don't actually have an excuse.

I don't believe this for a second, I think the simpler and far more likely reason is they don't bother given it's been dark for a while and none of them look like they've been out cycling long distance.

John

skivenov

custardy wrote: »

and yet it was the 'trained' driver that pulled out and hit the cyclist?

Advanced trained at that. Lucky I was or he'd have been dead.

DSA standard of training: Green light = All forward and trust in the lord.
Advanced standard or training: Green light = proceed but expect the stupidest twit you've ever met to appear doing something unimaginably stupid.

And he did.