flutteringwow
She called me baby, like an old romantic
Clearly woodface your opinion is the only valid one. I assume you are one of the aggressive lycra wearing cyclists from your response? .
He is.
Clearly woodface your opinion is the only valid one. I assume you are one of the aggressive lycra wearing cyclists from your response? .
Driving at 30mph downhill with double white lines, which he crossed. Didn't want to slow down, so blamed us. Well behaved pupil on driving lesson. I'm afraid your bigotry is showing.Why was he angry? I would not be surprised to find a badly or dangerously driven car in the mix somewhere.
I have been hit three times by a cyclist in my life.
Oh dear. Law is made by need. Many years ago compulsory insurance wasn’t law, there were no speed limits & driving tests were basic or not required.Apparently you don't understand "relatively". And your post is simply deflection from the point that death by dangerous behaviour should be treated equally, no matter by whom or by how many. And as for highway code whingeing, how many cyclists even know what it is?
I would go further, all bikes must have third party insurance and parents have to cover children. Bikes should have a number plate so that thus can be checked. All bikes must have an equivalent to a MOT. Adult Cyclists should have a licence and pass the equivalent to the highway code. It costs a lot if money to provide cycle lanes but after consideration a road tax is perhaps unfair as we don’t charge electric cars.
No, it is just that you are ill informed or just a troll.Clearly woodface your opinion is the only valid one. I assume you are one of the aggressive lycra wearing cyclists from your response? We get a lot around here. I do ride a bike from time and I would be happy to have some form of regulation where there is currently very little.
I pretty much agree with all of that. I don’t think it’s illegal to ride on the pavement though?I doubt there are accurate stats but it would seem likely that drivers are responsible for the majority of RTAs in the uk and that its pedestrians crossing roads at the greatest risk.
The laws should apply equally to all party's in terms of accident outcomes, if you kill someone through dangerous driving or furious cycling the outcome should be the same. However given the much greater risk of outcome severity through none-incident resultant dangerous road use while in charge of a vehicle vs a bicycle the punishment should reflect the outcome likelihood. Ie a bigger fine for dangerous hgv vs car, vs motorbike, vs bicycle.
I both drive and cycle and I have no issue with the greater responsibility being put on me as a driver than cyclist for breaking the rules where there to be no accident outcome.
I'd be quite happy for cyclists bikes to be taken off them and crushed for running red lights and riding on pavement for example, same should go for cars, the cost incurred in loss would be a suitably scaled deterrent.
Gangs of hoodies on cycles pulling wheelies down busy streets has nothing to do with 'cyclists' in the broader sense, just like joy riders has nothing to do with 'drivers' in the broader sense and attempting to conflate either as such is pointless scapegoating and othering.
The simple fact is there are only two groups here- responsible and irresponsible road users, their chosen method of transport has naff all to do with it. And if you disagree with that statement then you're a f-cking idiot.
I have 3rd party insurance & think regular cyclists should have it & many do, it can often be part of house insurance also.I do think cyclists and scooterists, should have 3rd party liability insurance. I have been hit three times by a cyclist in my life. Twice as a pedestrian - both times by a cyclist jumping a red light. One in London outside KingsX Station- and a cop helped me out, and took details from the cyclist. Second time was this year in Cambridge which resulted in my sprained ankle and badly grazed knee....
The very first time was about 15 years ago, whilst I was driving, and was stationary, hand brake on, waiting at a red light. Cyclist hit me square in the back, cracked my bumper......left me £900 out of pocket.
So I do think some form of registration and insurance scheme would be good. I concede there are uninsured drivers, but to expect any system to be 100% effective, when there are criminal elements about who will evade is naive, and a non-argument. You could put ANPR and facial recognition at every crossing and traffic lights! There is much improved, more accurate ANPR technology available - but it is significantly more expensive than the existing.
I think any road user (driver, cyclist, scooterist etc) who kills a pedestrian or other road user, needs to be subjected to the same legal processes and custodial sentences - I'd say minimum of 20 years in clink
Exactly this, again. Will get little or no nation coverage as it is such a common occurrence. Not newsworthy, everyone drives so no one cares.Just had a look at the BBC News front page for Scotland, 2 pedestrian deaths caused by motor vehicles yesterday and one serious injury, but....but....but........ something-something cyclists
I thought that was the case. I just wanted to check as a driver was pontificating up thread & they know everything etc@Woodface bicycles aren't included in speed limits. In extreme cases cyclists can be charged with careless cycling, dangerous cycling, or even furious cycling (when a cyclist pontificates on MMT before going for a ride?). Local bye-laws can impose speed limits.
This is a joke, right? Or course it is. A pavement is a footway.I pretty much agree with all of that. I don’t think it’s illegal to ride on the pavement though?
Cofrect, because the Road Traffic Act only applies to motor vehicles. Bikes are exempt and I think horses too.As a cyclist I obviously know nothing about the Highway Code but I think speed limits only apply to motor powered vehicles?