Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lord Nikon
I think there should be a law brought into place regarding cyclists.
|
I think there *are* laws in place regarding cyclists.
Quote:
|
Currently they are the ONLY road user not required to pass a test before using the road,
|
I would not argue against a sensible programme of cycling instruction.
Quote:
|
not required to have their vehicle inspected annually and therefore not responsible for problems they cause.
|
The law already requires that cycles be kept in IIRC "good mechanical order" and that they have lights to use at night. There is nothing which says that "cyclists are not responsible for the problems they cause".
(NB Cyclists can receive "on the spot" fines of £30 for each light they don't have.)
However as regards a cycle "MOT", there is a massive difference between a cycle and any other common road vehicle. Consider the individual parts of a cycle and you realise there aren't exactly many of them:
Tyres, brakes, "drive train" (chain, gears, pedals), headset/ handlebars, frame, reflectors, lights and, well that's really about it!
Now if any one of those fails (except for lights and reflectors), the bike probably isn't going anywhere until it's fixed anyway, so a requirement to *prove* they work is rather pointless.
Quote:
|
they should carry license plates.
|
A perennial suggestion with several major drawbacks:
1) Where would you put the licence plate without making it either too small to read, redesigning the bike, having it obscured by the rider or making it a physical hazard?
2) Licencing schemes are *expensive*. They require administration, notification, enforcement etc etc. The fact is that the only way to make such a system work would cost so much that it would price a lot of cyclists off the road entirely.
3) Cycle licencing schemes have been tried in various parts of the world including several areas of the United States and have been found to be unworkable and a waste of taxpayers' money and Police time.
Quote:
|
Why should every other road user be bound by the laws of the road and them be free to do as they please?
|
Sorry? Just because some cyclists break the law or act in irresponsible ways does *NOT* mean that they are "free to do as they please"!
Quote:
|
They are THE most vulnerable road user, and yet they are in some (not all) cases the ones responsible for the accidents they are involved in.
|
Yes, they are responsible for *SOME* of the accidents, especially if riding irresponsibly, but the *dangerous* accidents tend to be the ones that tend to involve motorists and the "sorry mate, I didn't see you" syndrome.
Quote:
|
or just generally unstable on a bike.
|
Quoting from paragraph 136 of the highway code: "be aware of other vehicles especially cycles and motorcycles. These are more difficult to see than larger vehicles and their riders are particularly vulnerable. Give them plenty of room, especially if you are driving a long vehicle or towing a trailer"
Quote:
Example - a cyclist rides out of a sidestreet without warning, you hit your brakes, a car runs up the back of you...
The car that hit you is at fault, The cyclist gets away from the scene and you have no way of establishing who it was, no number plate, generic cycle and no eyewitnesses can identify them.
The cyclist caused the accident, yet cannot be found.
This needs to be redressed.
|
This is utter nonsense.
You say it yourself "The car that hit you is at fault", not the cyclist/ small child/ mother with pram, but the driver who was *too close* behind you. Full stop. End of story.