Prime Minister urged to extend dangerous driving law to cyclists

We live in a society where some people are so enraged at hindrance to their progress that they drive at and abuse school crossing patrol operatives or whatever lollipop ladies are called these days.

Pressing the button at a pedestrian crossing is the sort of thing that Kim Jong Un would do.

Been shopping in Cambridge today with some mates, the city centre was full of pedestrians and cyclists and for the most part they just seem to rub along in a fairly relaxed manner. Pedestrians wander about in the road, cyclists ding their bells and weave through them. Nobody seems to worry too much and the expectation of having to stop keeps the relative speeds pretty low.

Or so I thought..

As we were walking along the pavement a somewhat butch looking girl, in her 20s, at a guess rode her bike diagonally from the road and onto the pavement, heading for a narrow walkway between some buildings. In doing so she ran into a gentleman walking the other way. As if that was not bad enough she then proceeded to yell at the poor guy she had just run into shouting "are you f***ing blind, do you you want to get run over?" The gentlemen in question started to look like he was going to do something rather ungentlemanly and before it turned ugly we sort of stepped in. The cyclist was absolutely out of order but instead of simply apologising she really seemed to want to make something of it. It was all rather ugly and uneccesary.

"That's why people don't like cyclists" said one of my friends. 

I pointed out that the agressive person was simply an agressive person who happened to be riding a bike and that she represented only herself and not cyclists in general.

But you can see why being on a bicycle is tagged as the identifying feature of that person. I hate that we all get lumped together as some homogenous group rather than seen as individuals responsible for our own actions and not those of morons who happen to share a transport choice.

Some of those BBC comments were painful  to read, it makes me so sad the majority of people think this way. I also get a similar spout of junk when I speak to people about cycling. 

A real shame

The government has zero appetite to deliberately make life more difficult for cyclists. Here's what really happened;

Opposition MP planned to get herself in the news to virtue signal without making an effort.

Prime Minister kicks it into the long grass with no intention of going looking for it later.

On the BBC site comments 555 and 556 juxtaposed are two of my faves.  I wonder what all the removed ones were like?

God, I'm so winded by the Alliston case; I'm sorry that the lady died.

Isn't it pretty unusual to get questions in the House when someone is killed on the roads?  Although not as a knee-jerk to Alliston, I'm not averse to a reasonable update in the furious riding law.

 I guess it's not made the priority list til now because actual incidents are pretty rare. We seem to accept the hundreds of motor related deaths each year  - many aren't even news.

I did a bit of law many years ago.  For criminal charges, you have the actus reus, the criminal act, and the mens reus, the intent, or motive.  The mens can, in descending order, be malice afore-thought, the red  mist/ angry in the moment, negligent or careless,  unintentional, or plain unfortunate despite taking due care.  The way motoring law seems to be operating is that an assumption is made that everything that happens is always at the unintentional end of things.  Music blaring/SMIDSY.

Back to the BBC news story comments, it's useful-ish to get a sense of the anti-cycle comments, however grossly, grossly mis-informed or lazy we consider them to be.  Not using  those high quality cycle lanes, where allegedly available (my first teenage smash was with another bike on a cycle path) and the vey presence of cycles lanes, sacrificing space clearly needed for cars, etc are two such gripes.

And there are SO MANY of these springing-up everywhere, aren't there, and so thumpingly expensive per kilometre to build - I could give you 10 miles of greenfield dual carriageway for that, and I'll throw in a graded interchange.

The VED argument keeps on being trotted out (extract from the .gov website below just to lay that old one to rest -again) and of course there are no untaxed, uninsured vehicles and no drivers out there with either penalty points, a ban, or no license at all - do tell me if I'm being unfair here.  

One correspondent wants us to have and display a certificate of bike roadworthiness - just like motor vehicles always have done.  (Verging on New Forest cycling code now  - keep those wee stops discreet next weekend, guys and gals!) These things are totally necessary, given what a menace, with our freebie cycle lanes we all are.

There are some people popping on the BBC comments trying to be sensible and reasonable, so well done you for trying.

The rates explained

The first vehicle tax rate is based on CO2 emissions.

When the first vehicle tax period has ended (this is either after 12 months or if the vehicle is sold or transferred within the first 12 months), the amount of tax that needs to be paid depends on the type of vehicle. The rates are:

£140 a year for petrol or diesel vehicles
£130 a year for alternative fuel vehicles (hybrids, bioethanol and LPG)
£0 a year for vehicles with zero CO2 emissions

Stats in perspective from interweb.

Table 1: Number of deaths where a pedestrian was injured in collision with
(a) a pedal cycle, or (b) a car, pick-up truck or van, England and Wales,
2006-2010

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Deaths (persons) |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Year | (a) Pedestrian hit by | (b) Pedestrian hit by |
| | pedal cycle | car, pick-up or truck |
|------+------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2006 | 3 | 233 |
|------+------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2007 | 6 | 267 |
|------+------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2008 | 3 | 247 |
|------+------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2009 | 0 | 141 |
|------+------------------------------+----------------------------------|
| 2010 | 2 | 123 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

(ONS)

There are some right beauts on the beeb comment.. could keep me amused for hours!

I've noted these little gems for our amusment,  before having to get back to earning a living.. 

"Cyclists are a major traffic hazard."

"I saw a track bike only last week weaving in and out of the traffic and then jumping a red light. I also walked on a shared path only last evening. Not one cyclist passed me at the recommended width of 1.5 meters. Some must have going 30 mph and some actually brushed past me."

"A cure for this would be to insist cyclists have insurance and some form of number plate.
If they could be tracked down after ploughing through a red light or shouting a load of obscenities at anyone who gets in their way, they might think twice about doing it?" (I'm lovign the use of the word 'cure' here)

"A reckless Cyclist can be as lethal to a Pedestrian as a Reckless Vehicle Driver is to a Cyclist. There should be no exceptions."

"They should use the opportunity to include some legislation to protect pedestrians and other road users (and countryside users) from dangerous horse riders too. Too many hunt riders use their horses as weapons with no legal comeback for the people the injure." (Where does this person live?!)

"These manic, arrogant cyclists are a danger and nuisance to pedestrians and road users.
They need to be brought under control by tougher legislation.
Having Green goals and aspirations is not a licence to cycle anywhere or anyhow you like."

"I dream of a world without any cyclists....."

"Living in the country I'm sick of being at the mercy of stupid, fat, middle aged men, wearing Lycra, riding three abreast down narrow country lanes. Creating massive tailbacks and 20 minutes delays, whilst clearly taking a perverse pleasure out of pissing off the local car owning fascists. 
What is the fascination of looking like a badly stuffed sausage, ED and varicose veins?"

"why we pander to grown men who chose to ride children's toys to work is beyond me."

"@43 you don't see them wearing the ridiculous lycra that the cyclists do here, us car drivers should not have to see the awful sights that are out there. Sir Chris Hoy was right no one over 8st should be allowed to wear lycra."

The cyclist was clearly in the wrong and the outcome was tragic, however the media and public response does seem out of proportion. From the last data I could find, for 2013,  33 pedestrians *every month* are killed in road traffic accidents  (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/annual-road-fatalities). Maybe one or two of those drivers were just as irresponsible as the cyclist in question?

Also, as an aside, whilst the number of pedestrian, motorcyle and car passenger deaths have pretty much halved since 2000, the number of cyclist deaths has not reduced by a much lesser amount, about 15%.  That needs some work IMO.

Unfortunately, it really does make me despair that there is such a massive public reaction to a single cyclist being an idiot on a fixie - yet there is so little reaction to the regular deaths of vulnerable road users due to the inattention or incompetence.

I say just let them do it. Let's be honest, it's like any other law. It's only a problem if you break it, and let's be honest again, the only "cyclists" that ride dangerously, are the knob ends that aren't really cyclists but give us all a bad name.

God, the comments on that BBC article are depressing.

I look forward to dangerous and careless jogging, then the many reactionaries who only seem to be tolerant of obesity and diesel fumes will have won.

After us, pedestrians.

We need to all wear cameras and report every incident. I must have Rode with my eyes closed before or just accepted it but every single day I am noticing a pedestrian on their phone or dancing away, stepping out ahead of me. I'm doing very well not to call them what they are...

On the BBC site comments 555 and 556 juxtaposed are two of my faves.  I wonder what all the removed ones were like?

God, I'm so winded by the Alliston case; I'm sorry that the lady died.

Isn't it pretty unusual to get questions in the House when someone is killed on the roads?  Although not as a knee-jerk to Alliston, I'm not averse to a reasonable update in the furious riding law.

 I guess it's not made the priority list til now because actual incidents are pretty rare. We seem to accept the hundreds of motor related deaths each year  - many aren't even news.

I did a bit of law many years ago.  For criminal charges, you have the actus reus, the criminal act, and the mens reus, the intent, or motive.  The mens can, in descending order, be malice afore-thought, the red  mist/ angry in the moment, negligent or careless,  unintentional, or plain unfortunate despite taking due care.  The way motoring law seems to be operating is that an assumption is made that everything that happens is always at the unintentional end of things.  Music blaring/SMIDSY.

Back to the BBC news story comments, it's useful-ish to get a sense of the anti-cycle comments, however grossly, grossly mis-informed or lazy we consider them to be.  Not using  those high quality cycle lanes, where allegedly available (my first teenage smash was with another bike on a cycle path) and the vey presence of cycles lanes, sacrificing space clearly needed for cars, etc are two such gripes.

And there are SO MANY of these springing-up everywhere, aren't there, and so thumpingly expensive per kilometre to build - I could give you 10 miles of greenfield dual carriageway for that, and I'll throw in a graded interchange.

The VED argument keeps on being trotted out (extract from the .gov website below just to lay that old one to rest -again) and of course there are no untaxed, uninsured vehicles and no drivers out there with either penalty points, a ban, or no license at all - do tell me if I'm being unfair here.  

One correspondent wants us to have and display a certificate of bike roadworthiness - just like motor vehicles always have done.  (Verging on New Forest cycling code now  - keep those wee stops discreet next weekend, guys and gals!) These things are totally necessary, given what a menace, with our freebie cycle lanes we all are.

There are some people popping on the BBC comments trying to be sensible and reasonable, so well done you for trying.

The rates explained

The first vehicle tax rate is based on CO2 emissions.

When the first vehicle tax period has ended (this is either after 12 months or if the vehicle is sold or transferred within the first 12 months), the amount of tax that needs to be paid depends on the type of vehicle. The rates are:

£140 a year for petrol or diesel vehicles
£130 a year for alternative fuel vehicles (hybrids, bioethanol and LPG)
£0 a year for vehicles with zero CO2 emissions

What a fucking joke. Government stuffing up negotiations that are crucial for the future of the country, but Labour MPs pick on bloody cyclists. You couldn't make it up.