Boltar wrote in message
:

Martin Underwood wrote:
Why. If there was a political will, it would happen. I don't know
why it wasn't enacted several decades ago: any vehicle on the road
needs to obey the Highway Code and needs to be identifiable if it
fails to do so.

Bicycles arn't road vehicles. They just happened to be used on the
road by
most owners. YOu can ride them in parks, in fields , up hills ,
wherever its allowed.
In fact its debatable whether they are vehicles at all given they
don't have engines.
If you say they are then perhaps we should call push scooters and
skateboards
vehicles too? No? Why not?

As soon as a vehicle uses the road, it becomes a road vehicle for the time
that it is on the road.

As a cyclist (as well as a car driver) I'd wholeheartedly support a
national bicycle registration scheme with a requirement to display
clearly-identifiable number plates front and back that could be read
by police or traffic-light cameras. It's rare to see cars go through
red

I think you might find yourself in the minority there. You can just
imagine
some bored plod or traffic warden giving some poor cyclist a ticket
for some minor infraction just as happens with cars today. Can't see
cycling lasting long if that happens.

Oh I'm used to being in the minority - happens all the time. Doesn't make my
views any less valid!

And why should a cyclist escape punishment for "a minor infraction" when a
motorist gets penalised for that same "minor infraction"?


they can :-( Likewise for cyclists who drive full-tilt at zebra
crossings with loads of people on, scattering them in their wake - I
saw this in

And you think license plates would stop this? You think these people
would
even bother to register? Whats to stop people who don't? How will the
police
catch them if they head off down an alleyway, call in the helicopter?
Be realistic. Theres a simple way of dealing with idiots like that
because I've
done it. I was crossing a pedestrian crossing about 6 months back on a
green man
and saw a courier cyclist heading across my path but I just carried on
walking whereas
she presumably expected me to stop. I made sure she clipped me and
she

was sent flying badly grazing her arms. Tough.

I witnessed a cyclist ride at a woman pushing a pram across a zebra crossing
when I was at university in Bristol (Bristolians may know Blackboy Hill, a
long road on a downward gradient, crossed by zebra crossings every so
often). Without lessening his speed, he swerved to avoid the pram and
clipped the central refuge bollard, and went flying. As he got up, he was
swearing at the woman for "daring" to cross on a zebra crossing. At one
point I thought I'd have to intervene because he looked as if he was going
to hit her, but my mate, a great big burly guy, "had a word with him" and he
lost interest in this!


I believe that road traffic offences committed while cycling don't
count towards penalty points on a car licence: I'd like to see this
change too.

Don't be an ass. A lot of people cycle because they don't drive.

And they shouldn't have points on their non-existent licence, although such
points should be held in reserve in case the person gets a licence later
(within the validity period of the points). But if they *do* have a licence,
cycling offences (on the road) should constitue endorsable points on it.

Theres a simple way of dealing with idiots like that
because I've
done it. I was crossing a pedestrian crossing about 6 months back on a
green man
and saw a courier cyclist heading across my path but I just carried on
walking whereas
she presumably expected me to stop. I made sure she clipped me and
she

was sent flying badly grazing her arms. Tough.

I witnessed a cyclist ride at a woman pushing a pram across a zebra
crossing when I was at university in Bristol (Bristolians may know
Blackboy Hill, a long road on a downward gradient, crossed by zebra
crossings every so often). Without lessening his speed, he swerved to
avoid the pram and clipped the central refuge bollard, and went flying. As
he got up, he was swearing at the woman for "daring" to cross on a zebra
crossing. At one point I thought I'd have to intervene because he looked
as if he was going to hit her, but my mate, a great big burly guy, "had a
word with him" and he lost interest in this!


These are the worst incidents you can both conjure up after a lifetime on
the roads spent, I suspect, in eager observation.

I wonder if there is really a serious problem to be fixed here, apart from a
sense of jealousy that people are getting away with breaking the rules.

j

Jim wrote:
Theres a simple way of dealing with idiots like that
because I've
done it. I was crossing a pedestrian crossing about 6 months back on a
green man
and saw a courier cyclist heading across my path but I just carried on
walking whereas
she presumably expected me to stop. I made sure she clipped me and
she

was sent flying badly grazing her arms. Tough.
I witnessed a cyclist ride at a woman pushing a pram across a zebra
crossing when I was at university in Bristol (Bristolians may know
Blackboy Hill, a long road on a downward gradient, crossed by zebra
crossings every so often). Without lessening his speed, he swerved to
avoid the pram and clipped the central refuge bollard, and went flying. As
he got up, he was swearing at the woman for "daring" to cross on a zebra
crossing. At one point I thought I'd have to intervene because he looked
as if he was going to hit her, but my mate, a great big burly guy, "had a
word with him" and he lost interest in this!


These are the worst incidents you can both conjure up after a lifetime on
the roads spent, I suspect, in eager observation.

I wonder if there is really a serious problem to be fixed here, apart from a
sense of jealousy that people are getting away with breaking the rules.

This is the impression I get. The expense and hassle of a bike
registration scheme are very unlikely to bring significant benefits,
even in terms of casualty reduction. Although traffic offences by
cyclists are commonplace, the magnitude of the consequences is almost
always far lower - generally annoying rather than life-threatening.

I'm sure someone will pop up to say that a cyclist almost killed them,
but the statistics just don't support this as a common thing - of the
210 pedestrians hit by cycles in the whole of 2004 in the whole of Great
Britain, 1 was killed and 42 were seriously injured [1].

[1] Road Casualties Great Britain 2004 (DfT), table 23.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Arquati wrote:
I'm sure someone will pop up to say that a cyclist almost killed them,
but the statistics just don't support this as a common thing - of the
210 pedestrians hit by cycles in the whole of 2004 in the whole of Great
Britain, 1 was killed and 42 were seriously injured [1].

With the increase in fuel costs, parking charges, the higher congestion
charge, people not wanting to use public transport (cost, safety post
7/7, heat, multiple changes etc) and higher costs of parking your car
at a rail station (so you cycle to the station, or get a folder so you
can use it at the other end too) and many other reasons, the use of
bikes has rocketed and in London it now looks like Amsterdam or
Cambridge. However, these recent bikers have no road sense at all, even
if they've come out of their car to take to two wheels. The cycle
network is a joke too, meaning you quickly come to realise it's better
(and often safer) to take to the road than use lanes that can put you
in serious danger.

It's rather worrying that many cyclists believe they are legally
allowed to go through red lights, which explains why I'd put it at
about 70-80% jumping lights in London, from crossings (where the
pedestrians would come off worse) to junctions (where cyclists will
come off worse). Going on the pavement at speed is another problem. Go
along Embankment in the morning or after 5pm to see how close some of
them come to having an accident. People can take sudden turns (e.g. a
tourist stepping back to take a photo) and no cyclist can predict that
or react in time.

I'd be interested to see what the figures are in 2005 and 2006. I doubt
many pedestrians will be killed by a cyclist, but I bet injuries will
rocket and they don't have to be life threatening (and therefore
recorded) to give some innocent victim a seriously bad day, from cuts
and bruises to other relatively minor injuries or damage to property
being carried.

More cyclists will be injured too. In areas where the vast majority
flout the law, pedestrians are quite literally hitting back. I've
witnessed three cyclists being thrown off their bikes on a pelican
crossing, and the verbal abuse towards them is increasing too. It's
only a matter of time until someone is killed (cyclist or pedestrian)
not because of a collision but because of 'bike rage'. You can also see
that the cyclists that do abide by the law seem to annoy those that
don't, if being stopped hinders their progress.

To keep on topic, a registration system isn't workable. You just need
to have more cops issuing expensive on-the-spot penalties to those that
don't care, combined with proper education to tell those who really
don't know, what the rules actually are. Maybe Ken should push for more
REAL police rather than the plastic ones that stand around without any
power to do jack s**t!

Jonathan

In article .com,
(Jonathan Morris) wrote:

The cycle network is a joke too, meaning you quickly come to realise
it's better (and often safer) to take to the road than use lanes that
can put you in serious danger.

As someone who bikes in Cambridge and London, London is well provided
with bike facilities and in some areas much better provided with
alternatives away from main roads which Cambridge just doesn't have.

What is noticeable is that London hasn't caught on to various devices
which are common in Cambridge. For example we have few one-way streets,
just streets with No Entry restrictions at one end which allow cycling
in both directions.

The biggest problem with that is where there isn't room for a cycle slip
lane bypassing a No Entry sign and No Motor Vehicles (low flying
motorcycles) signs have to be used instead. Almost every motorist seems
to believe that all such signs have "Except for Access" plates attached
even when they don't and they also believe that the exception always
includes them.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Martin Underwood wrote:
Boltar wrote in message
If you say they are then perhaps we should call push scooters and
skateboards
vehicles too? No? Why not?

As soon as a vehicle uses the road, it becomes a road vehicle for the time
that it is on the road.

Well I don't consider a bicycle a vehicle. IMO a vehicle is something
that is
self propelled. A bicycle does not fall into this category any more
than
roller skates do. If you wish to take the line that *anything* on the
road
should be licensed then I await the fun and games when pedestrians have

to hang a license plate around their necks when they cross the road and

horses have to have one tied to their tails.

Don't be an ass. A lot of people cycle because they don't drive.

And they shouldn't have points on their non-existent licence, although such
points should be held in reserve in case the person gets a licence later
(within the validity period of the points). But if they *do* have a licence,
cycling offences (on the road) should constitue endorsable points on it.

Aside from the fact that this is not going to be the slightest
deterrent to
a cyclist who has no intention of ever getting a car license all they'd
have to do would be to get a license based on a different address if
they did want to get an unendorsed license. Unless you want to link it
to NI or similar in which case its hello George Orwell.

B2003

On 30 Jul 2006 09:56:58 -0700, "Boltar"
wrote:

should be licensed then I await the fun and games when pedestrians have
to hang a license plate around their necks when they cross the road and

Can you really imagine any politician suggesting that Britons should
have to carry government registration documents with them at all times
when out in public? Oh, hang on...

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK