Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace


thirdcrank
Posts: 30879
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby thirdcrank » 30 Oct 2009, 11:06am

I presume David Thomas was going to speak on the original subject (something about compulsory helmets ?) and they decided to keep him on the list. A quick waste of £28-75 IMO.

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby meic » 30 Oct 2009, 1:36pm

Funny that his head was about to be crushed by a BUS. However the excellent BUS driver managed to stop his BUS before crushing David's head with a BUS and he says CYCLES are dangerous things!!!!!!

How many times each day does a bus pull out in front of a cycle and the untrained, untested cyclist manage to stop avoiding injury and still they say CYCLES are dangerous things!!!!!!

Cycles are VULNERABLE, buses are DANGEROUS (but not most of the time) :)
Yma o Hyd

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby reohn2 » 30 Oct 2009, 6:02pm

Groan
-----------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
orbiter
Posts: 274
Joined: 17 Jan 2007, 9:33pm
Location: St Albans, UK

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby orbiter » 30 Oct 2009, 10:20pm

meic said it all. Stupid. And from the same Spectator as (used to be?) edited by a well known dumb blonde cycling advocate?

User avatar
anothereye
Posts: 750
Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
Location: Haringey, North London

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby anothereye » 2 Nov 2009, 12:11pm

All road users that come within half a kilometer of me are a menace. I want the roads to myself so I feel safe and never have to adjust my speed or position in relation to anyone else. But alas; at times I need to be pragmatic so I will co-operate and respect others who do the same (so the road is a mirror for other aspects of life).
So the menaces are the road users who do not respect other users rights and safety: they come in all shapes and sizes: lorries, pedestrians, cars and cyclists.

Gerry

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby reohn2 » 3 Nov 2009, 9:41am

anothereye wrote:All road users that come within half a kilometer of me are a menace. I want the roads to myself so I feel safe and never have to adjust my speed or position in relation to anyone else. But alas; at times I need to be pragmatic so I will co-operate and respect others who do the same (so the road is a mirror for other aspects of life).
So the menaces are the road users who do not respect other users rights and safety: they come in all shapes and sizes: lorries, pedestrians, cars and cyclists.

Gerry


So our problem is a lack of law enforcement? would you agree?
-----------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
anothereye
Posts: 750
Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
Location: Haringey, North London

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby anothereye » 3 Nov 2009, 5:58pm

reohn2 wrote:So our problem is a lack of law enforcement? would you agree?
Oh, yes: 100%:
1. Feedback from police to 'bad' drivers (not necessarily prosecution at first).
2. Better crash investigations leading to more prosecutions.
3. The worse, say 5%, to be banned from driving for life.
4. I don't have a problem with cyclists jumping red lights except when they disrespect pedestrians; in such cases they should be fined.

G

downfader
Posts: 1074
Joined: 8 Feb 2009, 10:09pm
Contact:

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby downfader » 3 Nov 2009, 7:50pm

anothereye wrote:
reohn2 wrote:So our problem is a lack of law enforcement? would you agree?
Oh, yes: 100%:
1. Feedback from police to 'bad' drivers (not necessarily prosecution at first).
2. Better crash investigations leading to more prosecutions.
3. The worse, say 5%, to be banned from driving for life.
4. I don't have a problem with cyclists jumping red lights except when they disrespect pedestrians; in such cases they should be fined.

G


On point 4 you might argue that a RLJ could cause another vehicle to swerve and crash into other cars, pedestrians or cyclists.. etc. I do agree on point 3.... perhaps it should be something like 3 strikes and you're out..? :?

When cars crash the Police seem to do a fair amount - you often hear motorists moan and swear about being held up by it. However some counties forces dont seem to show equality towards pedestrians and cyclists being hit, or take near misses as seriously as they should.

But in answer to this "debate"... I think we're all to blame in equal measure as road groups go.

User avatar
anothereye
Posts: 750
Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
Location: Haringey, North London

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby anothereye » 3 Nov 2009, 8:14pm

downfader wrote:On point 4 you might argue that a RLJ could cause another vehicle to swerve and crash into other cars, pedestrians or cyclists.. etc.
Personally; I don't RLJ but most times I see other cyclists doing it it is when they know the lights: invariably all traffic stopped & pedestrian light = 4 way crossing. In fact it is in the interest of motorists that cyclists get ahead in these circumstances and often there is only one pedestrian so I think it should be legal (so long as pedestrians are respected).
_______________________________________________________________
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users

pq
Posts: 1067
Joined: 12 Nov 2007, 11:41pm
Location: St Antonin Noble Val, France
Contact:

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby pq » 4 Nov 2009, 10:06am

But in answer to this "debate"... I think we're all to blame in equal measure as road groups go.


That's just so wrong. When cyclists act foolishly, they create almost no danger to anyone but themselves. When car drivers do it they're a menace to all.

As for this "debate", the idea of paying so that some moron can tell me I should be paying road tax isn't that appealing.
One link to your website is enough. G

downfader
Posts: 1074
Joined: 8 Feb 2009, 10:09pm
Contact:

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby downfader » 4 Nov 2009, 6:56pm

pq wrote:
But in answer to this "debate"... I think we're all to blame in equal measure as road groups go.


That's just so wrong. When cyclists act foolishly, they create almost no danger to anyone but themselves. When car drivers do it they're a menace to all.

As for this "debate", the idea of paying so that some moron can tell me I should be paying road tax isn't that appealing.


Sorry I meant in terms of breaking laws there, not causing danger. Sorry, I kind of rushed my post there. :oops:

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby reohn2 » 4 Nov 2009, 8:06pm

anothereye wrote:
reohn2 wrote:So our problem is a lack of law enforcement? would you agree?
Oh, yes: 100%:
1. Feedback from police to 'bad' drivers (not necessarily prosecution at first).
2. Better crash investigations leading to more prosecutions.
3. The worse, say 5%, to be banned from driving for life.
4. I don't have a problem with cyclists jumping red lights except when they disrespect pedestrians; in such cases they should be fined.

G


I seems quite obvious to me that so long as no one is seriously injured in a collision the police just don't want to know.
As for near misses,threatening behaviour,and general nuisance making,unless its easily sorted or long an protracted by an individual(s) the police just don't want to know.
I'm getting tired of hearing about people being abused in some form or other and the police's reaction being far less than satisfactory.
Only yesterday I was speaking to another cyclist who had been knocked off his bike on a traffic island by a driver who admited it was her fault,the cyclist suffered two broken ribs,cuts and bruises,and a damaged bike and clothing,helmet etc.The driver was taken to the police station given telling off and the cyclist was informed that she had not been charged as her actions were "a momentary lapse of concentration".In my book that amounts to driving without due care and attention :? ,nevertheless no charge was brought,and the driver gets off scot free whilst the cyclist is feeling that the police aren't doing their job,feelings with which I share as similar incidents have happened to me.
Whether the police don't have the manpower to follow up such incidents(too much paperwork etc) or whether they simply aren't interested in doing the their job correctly, or some other reason,which I can only hazzard a guess, anyway whatever the reason it is lowering the public's opionon of the effectiveness of the police and any belief in the keeping of law and order in our green and pleasant land,and adds weight to the belief that criminals are free to do as they wish with impunity.
I have mentioned on here before now zero tolerence policing, which I make no appologies for mentioning again,if the law is being broken and it can be proved then the culprit should be brought to book,that is surely the police's job and they should do all in their power to see to it that,that is what happens,as it is now they are a laughing stock to the criminal fratnerity and seen as useless by the most others who have any dealing with them, ie the law abiding public.
If cyclists jumping red lights were blitzed,such much so that they were afraid to do it for fear of a £40 fine not only would the "respectful to pedestrians" ones stop RLJing but the disrespectful ones too,result, abiding by the law would become the norm,not the reverse is seems to be at the moment.
Scale that up to cars RLJing and we would have the same result,something which I for one would welcome as of now I see more cars RLJing than at anytime in my time using the roads.I'm 56 and have been riding and driving for 45 of those years.
Due IMHO to bad policing(for whatever reason)and to lesser extent to lenient sentencing,I live in a society that regards the law something to get around/disregard or "I don't see a need for it so I do as I please" these people do what they do because they can,if they couldn't or to be more precise if there was a good chance of being caught, they wouldn't.
Last edited by reohn2 on 4 Nov 2009, 8:52pm, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------

thirdcrank
Posts: 30879
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby thirdcrank » 4 Nov 2009, 8:37pm

The decision on whether to prosecute motoring cases has been with the CPS rather than the police for a quarter of a century. The police only do the investigation. Few people are going to bust a gut if they know the case is going nowhere. Here's the CPS policy and guidance to Crown Prosecutors

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road ... x.html#a15

On top of all the learned friend stuff, it has to be appreciated that when the CPS was set up, nobody really considered how they were going to cope with the volume of traffic prosecutions. This went overnight from most of the relatively minor stuff being completely on police hands, including standing up in court and doing the prosecuting, to it being done by solicitors, often with little experience (because the police had been doing it.) Around here at least they were swamped. The only realistic answer was to prosecute a lot less stuff and police officers quickly learned they were wasting time submitting files except in really clear cut and relatively serious cases. In the meantime, an entire generation of police officers has been and gone without any incentive to deal with what was once bread-and-butter stuff. To begin with, this all suited quite a lot of people. Then, too late, it dawned on people that quite a lot of baddies were also drivers. The CPS launched a consultation paper, partly because of growing concern that their policy towards traffic enforcement was supine.

Here's what they've most recently had to say about that consultation:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/consultations/pbd ... index.html

User avatar
richardyorkshire
Posts: 161
Joined: 23 Sep 2008, 10:42pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Debate scheduled:Cyclists are a menace

Postby richardyorkshire » 4 Nov 2009, 9:11pm

thirdcrank wrote:The decision on whether to prosecute motoring cases has been with the CPS rather than the police for a quarter of a century.


I was recently hit by a car when cycling to work. The car came out of a side road and turned onto the main road as if I wasn't there. The driver offered the classic "I didn't see you" excuse. This despite me being over six foot, wearing a fluorescent yellow jacket and having three lights on my bike which I'd conscientiously lit up as it was a bit drizzly that morning.

I rang the police officer who attended the scene a few days later, to see if the driver was going to be prosecuted. The police officer informed me that she was using her discretion not to charge. She said it was a matter for her discretion. Was she misleading me? Should she have referred it to the CPS?
Wisest is he who knows that he knows nothing.