Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35757966)

When I was at primary school, we got basic clycling saftey lessons from the local council.

I think I still have the wee badge. It was called cycling proficiency. Think I was about 10 at the time.

You can train people all you want but if they hoose not to wear a helmet then that is their decision.

Not all cyclists are idiots though and there are just as many bad drivers out there. Parking on double yellows, parking in disabled bays. Going through red lights, not using indicators. The list could go on.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35758056)

My own view is that there's room for us all on the road if people show a little consideration for each other. That said there should be some responsibility placed on the cyclist, they're the ones not encased in a protective metal shell all vulnerable, they should have insurance and most cycling bodies offer insurance as part of their membership fee.

Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35758058)

I agree a little mutual consideration is needed. However, because cyclists are vulnerable I think this places greater responsibility upon the motorist i.e. the person in charge of a half a ton of moving metal.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35758065)

No, the most vulnerable look out for themselves.

As you have a motorbike licence, you will know that when you are trained to ride one you are taught to look out for other vehicles that could injure you. You are trained in all your lifesaver observations, you trained to take a commanding position in the road, the skills required to ride a back are totally different than riding a bike.

With a bicycle, you are the hazard, you can't take a commanding position in the road and you can't keep up with other traffic, it is up to you not to be danger to yourself and others


No but it may protect you from being sued.

wear a more substantial one then


Might save your life too, in fact especially if you are new to cycling learning some skills before hand would be better than on the road training where at present there is no requirement to have even read the Highway Code.

. I wonder about whether you have bike one as you would know how totally different the training and the tests are for both and how different a cycling one would/should be.



Then learning to cycle defensively would be a good thing.

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35758151)

no there is no law against stupidity

Originally Posted by Ken W (Post 35758163)

I see many cyclist crossing when the traffic lights are red and there is regally a cyclist injured. My local train station I often see cyclists crossing the rail when the barriers are down.
Ken

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35758198)

so you cyclists avoid a purpose built cycle path designed for your safety and you think that your not stupid -i would say stupid and stubborn would about sum it up .

Originally Posted by techguyone (Post 35758208)

If they used cycle lanes they wouldn't be able to strap on all their surveillance gear and play 'traffic cop' like this guy & so many others.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ily-again.html