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

[Stat Brother]

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.

[tweet]1028646088260169729[/tweet]

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What a strange priority? Haven’t they got more relevant things to deal with like fox hunting?

 

[TheJasperCo]

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.

Those convicted of death by dangerous driving can get a maximum of 14 years imprisonment.

There's no equivalent penalty for causing death by dangerous cycling - the law doesn't exist.

This proposal looks to raise the maximum penalty for causing death by dangerous cycling, rather than relying on antiquated legislation taken - quite literally - from the Victorian era.

Don't get your knickers in a twist. Embrace this proposal and avoid coming on here with an agenda...especially when people do die through reckless cyclists.

*This post was written by an avid cyclist and a motorist. *

 

[The Large One]

Those convicted of death by dangerous driving can get a maximum of 14 years imprisonment.

There's no equivalent penalty for causing death by dangerous cycling - the law doesn't exist.

This proposal looks to raise the maximum penalty for causing death by dangerous cycling, rather than relying on antiquated legislation taken - quite literally - from the Victorian era.

Don't get your knickers in a twist. Embrace this proposal and avoid coming on here with an agenda...especially when people do die through reckless cyclists.

*This post was written by an avid cyclist and a motorist. *

You're probably better off reading the first reply on that Twitter thread, and THEN realising why it's such a daft priority.

 

[Murray 17]

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.

 

[Stat Brother]

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.

What have BMW drivers got to do with it?

 

[TheJasperCo]

You're probably better off reading the first reply on that Twitter thread, and THEN realising why it's such a daft priority.

Yes, but that's not the government's responsibility. The government sets the laws, and it's up to the police and local authorities to enforce it.

But I agree that more needs to be done to tackle dangerous driving, absolutely. I'm just arguing that people are debating this issue as if there shouldn't be harsher penalties for cyclists.

 

[drew]

Wouldn't it be easier just to change the law so that if someone dies as a result of your actions, whether accidently, negligently etc, there is a maximum tarriff (say 14 years) irrespective of whether you are driving a car, riding a bike, walking or doing anything.

 

[BensGrandad]

Simple answer ban all cyclists and bikes on A class road make them use B Roads. That way cyclists can still ride a bike with priority on B roads and cars can use in the main the A roads.

 

[The Large One]

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.

Those first two sentences don't actually bear any relationship to each other. The issue is about safe cycling (or 'dangerous cycling' as they've called it). Sadly, the occasional car driver does do exactly what you've said, with fatal consequences. Meanwhile - fatalities from cyclists jumping red lights between 2007-16 = nil.

Why prioritise an issue where the far bigger problem isn't dealt with to the same extent? If nothing else, lack of resources will not make any new laws or guidelines enforceable.

Meanwhile, with this government being so much ideologically in hock to the road lobby (i.e. motor lobby), there is often a cry of 'victimhood' or 'bullying' from those quarters whenever someone tries to make driving safer. It happened with drink-driving; with mobile phone use while driving; with seatbelts; with reducing speed (NSC went into meltdown of 20mph speed limits in Brighton & Hove - now they're everywhere). No, can't crack down on the motorist - cyclists are to blame for cars driving into them on cycle paths.

And that's speaking as someone who drives.

 

[The Large One]

Yes, but that's not the government's responsibility. The government sets the laws, and it's up to the police and local authorities to enforce it.

But I agree that more needs to be done to tackle dangerous driving, absolutely. I'm just arguing that people are debating this issue as if there shouldn't be harsher penalties for cyclists.

I'm not above giving a cyclist (as a pedestrian) a bit of verbal who goes through a red light.

But good luck with that. One thing that won't happen is enforcement of any driving laws, especially given the reduced resources of the authorities.

Simple answer ban all cyclists and bikes on A class road make them use B Roads. That way cyclists can still ride a bike with priority on B roads and cars can use in the main the A roads.

Is it simple? Or is it daft? What you appear to be saying is 'let cars have priority on 'A' roads, and cyclists have priority on 'B' roads.

'A' road are often, by their very nature, bigger, wider and more 'important' access roads, and would therefore be better as hosting a cycle lane.

'B' road are generally smaller, usually single lane, with no facilities to host cycle lanes. And any car on a 'B' road would not be able to use the road to its fullest purpose.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

I'm a motorist and a cyclist, I think the biggest cause of accidents is lack of care and attention. From all sides. We all lose concentration at times, it's easily done. Some people are thick as a lamppost, which doesn't help - but it's not just that, accidents can happen. There will never not be accidents and ultimately, I agree that the law should be clear when it comes to the consequences for dangerous cycling.

 

[The Rivet]

Awww...cyclists about to be held to account go on social media rampage of indignation. Bless.

 

[vegster]

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.

[tweet]1028646088260169729[/tweet]

If it actually happens and a law is passed to give some guidance to cyclists not to ride recklessly then that will be a good thing.

However, you need not worry, this is the Tory government of Mrs May so any chance of it happening is remote.


Also, in Worthing, I find that cyclists are always incredibly polite and understanding when they nearly cycle in to me down the " No Cycling " signposted twittens in my area.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Wouldn't it be easier just to change the law so that if someone dies as a result of your actions, whether accidently, negligently etc, there is a maximum tarriff (say 14 years) irrespective of whether you are driving a car, riding a bike, walking or doing anything.

Way too easy

 

[Stat Brother]

If it actually happens and a law is passed to give some guidance to cyclists not to ride recklessly then that will be a good thing.

However, you need not worry, this is the Tory government of Mrs May so any chance of it happening is remote.


Also, in Worthing, I find that cyclists are always incredibly polite and understanding when they nearly cycle in to me down the " No Cycling " signposted twittens in my area.

There is a law - ''not paying due care and attention', would cover most of the whinging that's already on this thread.

Whereas the big stuff such as drunk cycling can be found here:-

It is illegal to ride a bicycle on a road or other public place while unfit through alcohol or drugs, ie so wasted that you don’t have proper control of the bike. It is also an offence to be drunk in charge of a bicycle, so your friend shouldn’t even be pushing his bike while drunk.

The punishment for these offences would be a fine – your driving licence cannot be affected by any matter related to cycling because riding a bicycle doesn’t require a licence. A police officer would most likely conduct a roadside sobriety test and if he felt the cyclist was a danger to himself or others he might arrest him and let him sleep it off in a police cell. Otherwise, the cyclist would be cautioned or face a fine.

However, if alcohol causes a cyclist to ride in a dangerous fashion, he could be charged with ‘furious cycling’ for which you can face imprisonment. Cycling after drinking is not a good idea because alcohol impairs balance, reaction times and judgment. For the sake of a taxi fare, your friend is putting himself and other road users in danger. You should talk to him about this.


Hmmmm charged with 'furious cycling' ought to be a badge of honour.

 

[The Rivet]

There is a law - ''not paying due care and attention', would cover most of the whinging that's already on this thread.

Whereas the big stuff such as drunk cycling can be found here:-

It is illegal to ride a bicycle on a road or other public place while unfit through alcohol or drugs, ie so wasted that you don’t have proper control of the bike. It is also an offence to be drunk in charge of a bicycle, so your friend shouldn’t even be pushing his bike while drunk.

The punishment for these offences would be a fine – your driving licence cannot be affected by any matter related to cycling because riding a bicycle doesn’t require a licence. A police officer would most likely conduct a roadside sobriety test and if he felt the cyclist was a danger to himself or others he might arrest him and let him sleep it off in a police cell. Otherwise, the cyclist would be cautioned or face a fine.

However, if alcohol causes a cyclist to ride in a dangerous fashion, he could be charged with ‘furious cycling’ for which you can face imprisonment. Cycling after drinking is not a good idea because alcohol impairs balance, reaction times and judgment. For the sake of a taxi fare, your friend is putting himself and other road users in danger. You should talk to him about this.


Hmmmm charged with 'furious cycling' ought to be a badge of honour.

The ONLY people whinging are cyclists.

 

[Stat Brother]

Minister for roads

[tweet]1028699892003352576[/tweet]

 

[Pavilionaire]

According to Sky News you can currently kill someone by dangerous cycling and only get a maximum of 2 years under the laws dating from Victorian times designed for horse drawn carriages.

 

[Stat Brother]

According to Sky News you can currently kill someone by dangerous cycling and only get a maximum of 2 years under the laws dating from Victorian times designed for horse drawn carriages.

2 years more than many a car driver that's killed.