and when they hear a car do they go in single file? Like hell!
I'm a motorist and a cyclist and there are good and bad on both sides. Idiots who don't use lights and hi-viz clothing deserve to die so good riddance to them, lets just hope they don't damage the car too much. But I have to say there are a lot of idiot drivers as well though, I have constructed a list to highlight everyday occurrences.
1) drivers who do not give a full width when overtaking.
2) drivers who cut in front of you at roundabouts and junction and think the cyclist will magically disappear if they just get in front.
3) drivers who shout at you to get on the path (cretins best describes these)
4) drivers who are completely blind to cyclist or even acknowledge their existence on the road.
Drivers who open doors without looking after parking so the innocent cyclist slams into them.
I think cyclist who damage your car door by cycling into it should have insurance.
formerly known as slewis ---
My personal favourite, is drivers who think cyclists don't belong on the road because they don't pay 'road tax'. Road tax does not exist, drivers pay vehicle excise duty which is not ring fenced for road maintainance. The majority of road funding comes from council tax, which I do pay thankyou very much.
To be fair, drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, bus drivers, everyone's an idiot (present company excluded of course). Except horses, they seem well behaved. Nearly got kicked by one once, but that was my fault as I was young and got too close.
Paul's system thread
(where the photos live) Paul's Flickr page
They don't have to. Your supposed to give a full car width when overtaking bicycles as you would when overtaking a car, so it makes no difference if they ride single file or side by side.
Er, since when? your logic would mean that you can only overtake on a three-lane carriageway, leaving the centre lane clear?
Pioneer tv + LX85, Sony HW15 Proj, Cyrus DAC XP+/Mono X300/CDXTSE2/PSXRx2, Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Baby Grands and Maestro centre, B&W CM1 surrounds /PV1D (9.1), CA BD751, Virgin TiVo, Inspire Rega t/t, Benz Glider MC, EAR 834P phono amp; Slee Novo Headphone Amp.TQ Black.
Read your Highway Code, Mr Toast.
Switzerland used to have a number plate requirement for cycles. It cost sFR.8.00 per year. Not just is this a good idea because of ownership registration but they should have a compulary inspection for road worthyness at the same time!
used to, and they dropped it because it didn't work and was useless.
Why would wearing a helmet increase accident rates?
down to percieved safety. There's been rafts of studies done on it and if people see cyclists wearing helmets they give them less room when passing etc as they percieve the cyclist to be safer if they are hit. Just have a quick google if you don't believe me.... Also in Australia when they introduced the compulsory law for cycle helmets, the amount of people cycling dropped, which in turn is less safe for those left on the roads. Leave it up to the individual to make the decision, unless they are children, then it's up to the parent. We don't need a law for this.
Both should, in my opinion, be made law.
why? If it's safety, like I've already said, you'd be much better bringing in a law for car drivers to wear helmets as well, that would reduce deaths and injuries a lot more than on a bike.
If my friend would have run this guy over, regardless of whether he had no lights etc, do you really think he would have gotten off lightly?
not necessaily. People are becoming more wise to this and I've seen instances of the drivers not bing blamed if the cyclist doesn't have lights on etc. You're making a very large assumption on something that didn't happen.
I haven't lived in Switzerland for the best part of twenty years. A quick google and I found this;
Pro-cycling campaigners are continuing their calls in support of the national policy which requires bikes to be registered using ’vignettes’ or stickers, which allow bikes to be traced, and provide their owners with insurance if they get into an accident. Last week, the Senate voted to bring an end to the practice, with supporters of the move saying most cyclists are already covered by their personal liability insurance. Those in favour of retaining the stickers say that, at an average price of CHF 5 countrywide, they guarantee affordable insurance for everyone
I think that was from 2010.
Personally, I think it is riciculous to suggest that not wearing a helmet is safer. - As to leaving road safety, whether that is for yourself or others to individuals rather than making laws ... I think there are plenty of examples to suggest that doesn't work. Using mobile phones whilst driving, the compulsary use of seat belts etc etc.
Not everyone is a responsible individual ... . When using public highways you potentially pose not just a risk to yourself but others too. Nothing wrong with limiting this by law, actually, its essential.
Pretty ... and pretty proud of it
I beg to differ, every Sunday one always EDITED in the street by my driveway
Personally, I think it is riciculous to suggest that not wearing a helmet is safer.
so you'd agree that car drivers should wear them as well if you want to make it compulsory on safety grounds?
anyhoo, here's one study that says that car drivers are more likely to leave more room if they see a cyclist is not wearing a helmet http://www.helmets.org/walkerstudy.htm
how many people do you still see using mobiles whilst driving or not wearing seatbelts? Just because you make a law doesn't mean that people will follow it. I'm all for things being safe, but at some point you can't keep regulating for people's stupididty.
Don't get me wrong, I agree about the risks of using public highways. However, making people wear helmets on their bikes will only serve to reduce the number of people cycling, and with the amount of congestion on the roads today, that's not what is needed. It's not essential for people to wear helmets when they cycle. Research will give you a 50/50 split on the fact that helmets save, but also take lives. Take a look at both the netherlands and Denmark - two of the countries with the biggest uptake in cycling, and the safest places to cycle. Neither of these countries have felt the need to introduce a law to make it compulsory to wear helmets yet they seem to do fine.
A lot of the time I do wonder when people suggest having things like this as law if it's not more of a case to make those not cycling feel safer about those who do cycle, rather than the other way round.
Just to pick up on some of the points made in this thread -
It is against the law (Road Traffic Act) to drive, cycle (or ride a horse) without lights during lighting up times.
It is against the law (Road Traffic Act) to carelessly open a vehicle door (in the path of a cyclist for example) causing an accident.
It is also against the law (Road Traffic Act) to drive without due care and attention (to other road users). Road users is a broad term and includes EVERYONE who uses the highway (pedestrians, cyclists, horses, drivers etc).
It is against the law (Road Traffic Act) to cycle furiously.
A system of registration plates for cyclists is interesting, however, as cycles are bought, sold and stolen more frequently than cars, who would maintain the database and where would the funding come from ?
Finally, our countrys police force is stretched enough and their numbers decreasing due to the current governments policies. With huge emphasis being placed on the prevention and detection of Burglaries, Vehicle Crime and Offences Against The Person (assaults and robberies) when does the poor beat bobby get time to pursue an offender through to court (and be able to justify the use of his time to put the file together) for a cyclist without lights ?
The "car width rule" which you quote is a GUIDELINE, it is not law. It cannot be prosecuted unless another offence has been committed at the same time eg Driving without Due Care and Attention.
The Highway Code (and the Gov.UK website) is made up of Guidelines, Best Practices AND The Law. Just because its in the Highway Code (Gov.UK) doesn't mean its in the Road Traffic Act and therefore punishable in the courts
Rule 66 of the Highway Code states:never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.
i can't see "car's width" in that link? Plenty of room perhaps. Otherwise, you'd be in the ditch trying to overtake two bikes or a car .
© 2014 Haymarket Publishing