[Politics] "We're cracking down on dangerous cycling".

[The Spanish]

I think the needless and laughably entitled aggression of middle aged middle class male cyclists in central London has created a backlash. Screaming get out the way at pedestrians that are no danger to them all over the shop, picking rows with cabbies the lot. Can’t stand them now, have become bullies and display a really shitty attitude in general.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

When fully MAMiL'ed I don't use cycle lanes, as I do not believe I ride at a speed that makes it safe to do so.

People like you are the problem, not the solution.

 

[pasty]

Like most things in life, I think good cyclists in general suffer from the cockwomble cyclists that do exist.

Like the complete and utter ****wit deliveroo cyclist who very nearly took out both myself and my mate walking across a pedestrian crossing on green by the level walking home from the station last night. Straight through a red light, very fast and only one hand on the handlebars as he was using a mobile at the time. Oh, and he had the cheek to shout at us.

 

[Bob!]

People like you are the problem, not the solution.

By ensuring he keeps pedestrians safe?

 

[Nobby's Whiskers]

As a driver, cyclist and pedestrian I welcome any move to make the roads and cycle-paths safer. However if we're going down the legislation route, how about we ALL take responsibility for our actions, including pedestrians?

Many countries have jaywalking laws; here pedestrians have priority on all roads other than motorways (again dating back to ancient laws). Frequently they step out in into the road or across designated cyclepaths without looking, merely listening. If you do that in front of a car, you're going to come of worst - with a bike an innocent rider could just as easily be injured or killed too. Electric cars are being forced to make artificial noise pollution for this very reason.

 

[Jesus Gul]

As a cycle commuter through the mean streets of central Brighton for the past year and a bit...few observations

Most of my commute is cycle route from Preston park through town so no real problems with car drivers. Nice to cycle against the traffic down one way roads as one is allowed to in north Laine

Cyclists who go through lights on the commute I have no time for. Zip past me and wipe out a few old ladies why don’t you. On my Sunday morning ride I may slide through the odd red but only if roads are clear.

Pedestrians are the biggest threat and im constantly aware of those staring a t their phones crossing roads on the diagonal...stepping out in front of busses they’ve just got off as I pass...and the drunk/drugged up. I consider myself a safe and conscientious cyclists and I’ve had three near misses in the past year. You do need to concentrate.

Saying that a great way to commute. £0 and 15 mins door to door.

 

[Nobby's Whiskers]

It's worth remembering that the kid who was jailed for "furious cycling" was on the road and the poor lady stepped out in front of him. Absolute idiot for riding a bike without adequate (or legal) brakes, but he was convicted not for causing the accident but for failing to prevent it. The judge argued he was going too fast to stop. If we extend that logic to cars, EVERY road would become a 20mph zone, including the A23 and A27!

 

[Triggaaar]

Definitely gets my vote.

After all the 2 people a year killed by dangerous cycling need a voice.
The 5 people killed daily by dangerous cars, can go f**k themselves.

Cars are killing so many more people than cyclists are, is there some way we can enable cyclists to kill more, so that's it's more balanced?

 

[Stat Brother]

Cars are killing so many more people than cyclists are, is there some way we can enable cyclists to kill more, so that's it's more balanced?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I've got to be honest, as someone that lives in the countryside, cyclists are the bane of my life at weekends. Just yesterday I had 3 incidents of dangerous cycling that I encountered. All were entirely unavoidable and all were reckless with potentially awful consequences if the drivers/walkers hadn't reacted quickly to avoid the stupidity and recklessness of the cyclists.

The overwhelming arrogance of the cycling community, who seem to now believe they own the roads/footpaths/everywhere, needs to stop and harsher penalties for dangerous cycling absolutely do need to be in place.

 

[Triggaaar]

View attachment 99678

If we could make those compulsory, maybe you could die happy.

 

[Stat Brother]

Saying that a great way to commute. £0 and 15 mins door to door.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I'm just so pleased we have an event like VeloSouth, next month.

On the morning of Sunday September 23, 2018, the world famous Goodwood Motor Circuit will welcome 15,000 cyclists onto its hallowed tarmac for the start of the first ever Vélo South – a major new 100 mile closed road sportive for the UK.

https://www.velosouth.com/the-ride/


Oh the luxury of being able to ride 100 miles around Sussex on roads that have been completely closed off to cars.

You are. But the thousands aren't. There are loads of businesses that are negatively effected, people trying to get to and from work that are negatively affected, people that won't be able to get the care they need, people who can't enjoy their limited time off work because people want to go from a cycle, people that are stuck in their villages for the day so people can go for a cycle...

And all so a cycling company can be selfish as f**k by taking over the roads. And let's not pretend this is for anything other than a jolly. This isn't saving the planet or anything - it's having the opposite effect with thousands commuting down to the area to compete. No other sport would get away with taking over such a vast amount of space and negatively affecting so many peoples' lives. It really does speak of the resounding arrogance of the cycling community that they're getting away with this. And all with absolutely no consultation of the people who are most affected until after the event is confirmed.

And to think, they could easily have done this event by closing off individual lanes on dual carriageways and motorways without disrupting so many people. Just utterly, utterly ludicrous, arrogant and selfish.

 

[Stat Brother]

Blimey I thought that was never going to get a bite.

 

[rippleman]

Whatever penalties are introduced, it is pretty much pointless if the police choose not to enfore the law.

There are an ever increasing number of idiots who believe that the pavements are there to cycle on; they aren't. The law states that bicycles can only be ridden on the public highway or designated cycle path. Despite that the police have indicated to me, in writing, that they have no intention of enforcing the law.

So we wait until somebody else is killed or seriously injured and then apply the new penalties to the cyclist, rather than addressing the cause and penalising those who are cycling illegally in order to prevent deaths / serious injuries.

 

[perseus]

Cycling on footways may be deemed bad PR for cycling but it’s got to be said that the greater nuisance of driving on footways is generally ignored by society.

http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/

 

[brightn'ove]

If car drivers went through red lights, drove on the pavement, weaved in and out of traffic, rarely indicated or used lights, I'm sure they would kill more than 5 people a day.

You may well not do any of these things, but a lot of cyclists do.

And that's speaking as someone who cycles.

Cars go through red lights all the time.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

I say this crackdown is long overdue. It is about time these non road-tax road users had a measure of control.
Of course it must not be limited to causing death. Dangerous cycling without care and attention should be penalised.

 

[Stat Brother]

I say this crackdown is long overdue. It is about time these non road-tax road users had a measure of control.
Of course it must not be limited to causing death. Dangerous cycling without care and attention should be penalised.

What you mean one like the cycling without due care and attention law that currently exists?

 

[TimWatt]

It may seen pointless, but maybe I could try applying some rationality to this discussion.

Perhaps it might be sensible to aportion resources to preventing harm based on the degree of risk and exposure to the cause of that harm.

Imagine an urban scenario where the cause of an injury to a pedestrian could be either a. a Range Rover (of unladen weight 2249kg) travelling somewhat out of control at 35mph, or b. a cyclist of wight 70kg plus 30kg bike going at a more than skittish 25mph. The physics of the propensity of injury (assuming no braking before impact) would relate to the kinetic energy of each vehicle - the formula for which is 1/2 * mass * v squared (ie velocity counts for a lot but a car is a lot more massive than a bike).

So in this scenario (mass in kg and v in metres per second) - the RR would be 0.5* 2349 (car plus man) * 15.65 * 15.65 = 287661.5 J, whereas for the bike it would be 0.5*100*11.18*11.18 = 6249.62 J - ie roughly a factor of 50 in terms of kinetic energy. And that's ignoring the potential for the proportion to become vastly more at higher speeds.

But then that does not take account of actual risk since according to DfT car travel is about 61% of trips and bikes about 2% so you're about 30 times more exposed to the risk of a car hitting you in the scenario above (assuming drivers and cyclists are equally likely to collide with you as a pedestrian).

So 50 * 30 = 1500.

Meaning by very rough measure for exposure to risk you're around 1500 times more exposed to danger from cars than bikes which might be fair allocation of resources to mitigating those risks.

I agree that cyclists not following traffic rules are somewhat annoying but a fair judgement of how annoying compared to car drivers would I suggest be around 1/1500 as annoying.