Force all cyclists to use cycle lanes says Mr Loophole

Seriously is there a more powerful or vocal lobby than motorists??

Pollute the planet. Fine.
Kill hundreds each year. Fine.
Feel free to speed - just don't take the piss.
If you do kill someone - you get off very lightly.
Clog up the roads - fine.

He's a despicable loathsome cock womble. Please don't give him any more publicity.

Let him try using cycle lanes that are not maintained, not swept from glass, overhanging trees not removed, quite often badly designed. He is not in the real world 

Sure, sure we'll use them as long as they work, aren't full of potholes and drains and, crucially, that any motorist blocking a cycle lane - at any time - is blown up so as to as efficiently as possibly remove the obstacle.

Fair's fair after all.  And the roads will be a lot emptier in a week.

This guy is obviously a dick.

Unfortunately, his suggestion isn't as far fetched as it sounds: Germany has had mandatory cycle paths for many years. Whenever I read an article calling for segregated cycle lanes I do worry that it is the start of a slippery slope leading towards a system more like the one we have here in Germany, especially since the UK is looking to mainland Europe for ideas on cycling infrastructure.

Let's just hope that government dicks, riding around in fat Audis and sitting in traffic don't hear what this idiot has to say and think "Oooh, that's a good idea....".

There is a certain irony in someone requesting for greater regulation of cyclists who makes his living by exploiting 'loopholes' (tm) to help people who speed / otherwise break the law avoid the consequences of their actions.

On a separate note, his comments - and the concerns expressed by posters above - are a follow-on from the way that every time a new piece of cycling infrastructure gets opened then the amount of abuse received by cyclists who choose not to use it, increases.

A new off-road cycle path opened near me. I use it going one way (to work, uphill) as it does get me off the road and away from the idiots who have to speed to get to work in the morning cos they left it to the last f-ing second to get out the door and they've got a pile of paperwork to do, etc, etc.

I choose not to use it going back home and stay on the main road.  The route is quite steeply downhill and the cycle path has 'give ways' across each of the handful of side streets. But those side streets all have walls or tall hedges so you cannot see into them, so you have to come to a complete stop before crossing, whilst looking right back over your shoulder to check that nobody is going to swoop into them off the main road (since the side streets pre-date the cycle path and nobody thought to change the layout so much, they all have those exciting curves out onto the main road to help cars not have to slow down...).

I've always used to the road to come home - I can get up to a decent speed, I have priority over the side streets so I don't have to keep stopping, etc.

But since that path opened, the number of close passes, shouts from cars, and stuff like that that I've experienced has gone through the roof.

Mr F-ing Loophole is (unfortunately) just expressing an opinion shared by far too many people who don't cycle (or, who drive to a mountain or woods so they can cycle away from traffic).

Surprised no one has commented on the choice of picture up top, which of course doesn't show a bike lane.

This guy should be struck off.

The case I always remember is getting Graeme Swann off for being well over the limit on the story that he had to get a screwdriver to get his cat from under the floorboards.

That and all the time he has got other idiots off from appalling speeding.

Hmm, where to begin.

Firstly, "at a cost to the tax payer". Yes, all public infrastructure is built at cost to the tax payer. However, if you do any form of BCR (Benefit Cost Ratio, essentially the ratio between cost & maintence and benefits recieved) you see that most cycle infrasturcture has massive (relative to traditional road  schemes) BCRs are so are one of the best inrastrucutres to build.

Secondly, given loads of train and 'bus services are subsidised by the government. Do we conclude that Mr Loophole would also advocate that people should use those and not private vehicles as these public transport networks are provided "at a cost to the tax payer".

Thirdly, and possibly the most important point, is that if cycling infrastructure has been built and it is not being used then there are very good reasons for it. Either it is of insufficient quality to be used (http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month/), or is dangerous (http://road.cc/content/news/172152-video-driver-left-hooks-cyclist-upgra...), or doesn't go where you need it to go.

I cannot ever see the government doing this at either a local or national level, it is effectively telling people how to get from A to B, which even with the numbers of cyclists is an impossible task. Imagine it, every trip you want to make you have to apply to a central agency to look at the start and end points (along with any stop-offs) then decide the official route so that you can maximise the cycling infrastructure use. It would take days, costs £millions and ultimately be non-enforceable.

"Instead, they are dancing to the tune of a very vocal cycling lobby"

Yeah cyclists really do get it all their own way /s
 

I'm happy to be forced to use a cycle lane on roads where there is one, however many around here are shared paths and I wouldn't be happy being forced to use those.

They are fine when they are quiet but when they are busy with pedestrians combined with an  increased number of cyclists its just asking for trouble.

The number of times I am shouted at to get off the pavement when its actually a sharded path, I wonder if pedestrians need some education as well.

If we all slow down and be patient with eachother, there is room for cyclists and cars on the roads. Just remember to treat each other with respect and stick to the law.

one day he will die and no one will remember his ravings.

I wonder, what will they carve into his headstone?

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads

This lawyer obviously feels he needs to present a bigger image... "vigorous exercise" , owning an aggressive dog breed, bullying vulnerable road users, defending dangerous people....

He has a point, the roads are to dangerous and thats the problem. Make the roads safer to use never mind painting a strip of road and pretending its got a force field around it so its safe to use.

Stop Press:

Lawyer in 'fucking arsehole' shock

patrick.mcloughlin.mp [at] parliament.uk

Dear Mr McLoughlin

Please make it mandatory for local authorities to provide cycle facilities that are better than using the roads !

(Yes, I was inspired to write this as a response to Nick Freeman.
http://www.nickfreemansolicitors.co.uk/force-cyclists-to-use-designated-...
)

Naturally cyclists will choose which facilities to use, based on preference - speed, convenience, effort, safety etc.

Choosing not to use cycle facilities should be taken as a severe criticism of the very poor standard of provision for cyclists (who contribute equally to the 'public purse'!)

The onus is on the authorities to provide facilities that are better than using the roads - then of course we will use them !

At the moment pathetic facilities seem to be used instead as an excuse to harrass, intimidate, endanger and even kill cyclists that use the road. Drivers like Nick Freeman actually think it is their righteous duty to physically run cyclists off the road, especially if we are allowed to ride on a bit of pavement nearby. 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22punishment+pass%22+london

I draw your attention to one instance near me:
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/crime/cyclist-dies-after-collisio...
Note the comments from readers.
'mylocat' : I understand that there is a cycle path alongside this road, so what was he doing on the road?
'Annoyed from Northampton (ex-Traffic Warden !)' : A gentleman of 70, probably didn't realise that there was a cycle lanes, as the older generation are usually more law abiding than the younger generation. SAD, R.I.P.
They actually think cycles are already banned from the road !
The 'cycle path' there is about a foot wide, and shared with pedestrians - pretty sure the surface is lumpy and gritty.
https://goo.gl/maps/dTE3ooADyQE2

Until we have decent roads and separate cycle-paths designed along Dutch lines (see links at end), 
we urgently need to educate drivers that cyclists may use the roads - not just the gutter.
When Bikeability took over from Cycling Proficiency (~2007), DfT should have taken steps to educate drivers to expect and understand cyclists taking the assertive 'primary position' mid-lane, and riding two-abreast where it is safer to do so.
Sadly many police officers also lack an appreciation of Bikeability cycle training.

Unless drivers learn this then I expect 2016 will continue to see cyclists being deliberately killed and injured by drivers while simply trying to cycle around on the roads.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17063165
https://youtu.be/NRcLGDCiz0I
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6164053/Stud-farm-owners-so...
http://www.ctc.org.uk/news/20141024-driver-facing-jail-seriously-injurin...
Now "pleaded guilty to causing his death by dangerous driving" - awaiting sentence

Is the Highway Code being updated ? Much has changed since 2007.
Can driver training and testing be used to check new drivers understand ?

I note 
http://think.direct.gov.uk/cycling.html
but few drivers will have seen that.

Maybe police could send 'close pass' offenders on a cycle-specific training course (NDORS) ?

I welcome West Yorkshire Police joining the 'helmet-camera' movement - that could be really effective nation-wide.
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/14139266.STOP_THE_DANGER_DRIV...

I look forward to your acting in this matter.
Yours sincerely
Eric D

Dutch facilities
http://www.crow.nl/publicaties/design-manual-for-bicycle-traffic
http://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/wiki/dutch-cycle-infrastructure
http://www.makingspaceforcycling.org/
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/
http://www.hembrow.eu/studytour/

Just because things are there it doesn't mean its the most appropriate way to make your journey. I am sure that for 90% of commuting motorists there are bus and train routes available but they choose not to use them as they are not efficient or convenient. Same for me with cycle lanes. The cycle lanes on my commute are incomplete, poorly designed, dangerous and inneficient. I therefore choose not to use them.

Just because something is funded out of government funds I have no obligation to use it. Mr Poophole should be targeting the fools in local and central goverment who sqaunder my significant tax contributions on ill conceived, poorly executed schemes.

Build some fucking cycle lanes then I'll use them. I'd quite happily get out of the way of the knobheads on the road if the infrastructure was there and it was useable. Twat.

I'm interested in his views on cyclists having "an extremely aggressive stance" and the all-powerful "very vocal cycling lobby". If only he produced some kind of newsletter that I could subscribe to. (Or, does he write for the Daily Mail?)

However, given a choice between a group of people having an aggressive stance (cyclists) and a group of people actually being aggressive and killing thousands of people (some motorists), I know which one I'd rather count myself in.

Maybe he could work on reducing the number of people killed and injured on our roads, rather than spouting divisive rhetoric which only serves to polarise people.

What a cloff-prunker!

In the 'whereabouts 2' documentary the group of cyclist were allowed on the road by a police officer, when the could ride the speed limit. If they couldn't they had to use the shoulder of the road (sort of the cycling path) (USA)

So this makes it a speed capability thing.

In Holland there's 2 kinds of cycling path's mandatory and voluntary. When mandetory, you are not allowed on the main road with a bicycle, if voluntary you are allowed. So it can depend on the roadclass and facility next to it if you can apply such a rule. as such it's not bad suggestion, not really new though.

As for the camera vigelanties: as a car driver if you don't do wrong it should all be fine, afterall it's on camera. And get a dashcam.

As for safety clothing/lights: there is something to say for mandatory bike lights in the day time: cars are also a lot more visible when they lights are on, especially in low lights or gray faul weather. but it's not practical to enforce that on weightweenies bikes...

No problem at all...

...as long as you put in petrol/diesel extra taxes that would really compensate for all the problems that unnecessary car use can cause such as traffic accidents, reduced life expectancy due to exhaust fumes, land use, noise, green house effect etc and send this money directly to cycling infrastructure. With all these money we would built at least a small bicycle motorway for every house.

I suggest we all flood his firm's website with constructive criticism of his views. It has a comments facility.

As I mainly ride in Birmingham where there are no cycling lanes to speak of, I can safely ignore his ****wit comments which are clearly designed to help sell his book. Perma-tanned k***head.

"Force all cyclists to use cycle lanes" says Mr Loophole

"Force Mr C*nthole into the sea" say Cyclists.

He is good at finding 'loopholes' in the law, including for rape suspects by looks of the front page of his site. Lovely chap.

Yawn.. Another time-wasting, attention seeking troll.

The idea is a complete non-starter untill they can standardise the design and provision of cycle lanes.

Quote:

So do leave at least this particular low life under his stone.

amen
 

Dear road.cc. As Peter Walker at the Grauniad says, we do love you and promise to read you every day. And we might need to be reminded of the grotesqueness of anti-cycling culture and its representatives from time to time.

But not so much. And not if it means giving this creep more publicity.

He probably likes upsetting cyclists, and this is helping him along.

So do leave at least this particular low life under his stone.