Yet again - Cyclist Killed in London

[Derek]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Never heard of a cyclist being done for it though, or wrong way down one way streets or on pavements.

Plenty do. From a very quick google.

http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/di...4120001619.pdf

Highlight figure is 53255 fixed penalties issued to cyclists by the Met alone over a four year period between 2010 and 2014.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Derek

Paris is making the entirely sensible decision to allow cyclists to treat red lights as give ways.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33773868

Cyclists in Paris no longer have to stop at every red traffic light - new rules mean that in certain circumstances they can ignore the signals and keep going. The aim is to make the city's roads much safer.

People end up thinking that just because a light is green it is safe to go - when it might not be... Far better to use all our senses all the time.
"Also allowing cyclists to proceed is safer, because it means they avoid getting caught beside trucks and buses as they wait for lights to change. That is the origin of a lot of accidents."

Goodness me some sense at last! Why did we have to wait for the French to show the way when we've been saying this for years...

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Goodness me some sense at last! Why did we have to wait for the French to show the way when we've been saying this for years...

I hope that's a tongue in cheek comment.

I can see cyclists using this as an excuse to completely ignore red lights and then blame the driver when they get mullered.

As for the poor driver: Legal speed, you got a green light to keep going and then out of the blue a cyclist dives across the junction right in front of you... Bang! He's dead. Your fault.

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

I hope that's a tongue in cheek comment.

I can see cyclists using this as an excuse to completely ignore red lights and then blame the driver when they get mullered.

As for the poor driver: Legal speed, you got a green light to keep going and then out of the blue a cyclist dives across the junction right in front of you... Bang! He's dead. Your fault.

Read the article.

It shows that in Paris, on either side of the Champs-Élysées there are 2 very different ways of traffic regulation. At one end there are traffic lights, at the Arc, there aren't.

Guess which one has more accidents involving cyclists.

No, not that one. From personal experience as a non cycling tourist there, that road is scary, yet the traffic lights certainly didn't help!

The point is, if you know there can be cyclists coming on a red, you drive accordingly, if they take you by surprise, then the bag happens. This is a good idea frankly even if on first read it seems a bit crazy.

[Taf]

If you enter the Arc de Triomphe roundabout on a bicycle you had better have eyes front and back, and to both sides. And be able to rapidly deploy hand gestures, shrugs and streams of abuse.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

I hope that's a tongue in cheek comment.

Nope. There are dozens of opportunities for cyclists to proceed safely through red lights; all it takes is observation and common sense and if this is seen to be exercised the police turn a blind eye.

[Taf]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Nope. There are dozens of opportunities for cyclists to proceed safely through red lights; all it takes is observation and common sense and if this is seen to be exercised the police turn a blind eye.

But how many actually look and also possess common sense?

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Taf

But how many actually look and also possess common sense?

We simply don't know how many road users possess these skills.

I know cyclists are being crushed frequently despite obeying the rules.

[Osem]

They're also being crushed sadly for being stupid and given their obvious and well publicised vulnerability on our roads I find it quite bizarre that so many behave in that manner. My wife cycles a lot and is always very careful at junctions, traffic lights etc. especially around large vehicles which she keeps well out of the way of. It's really not rocket science and ought to be standard behaviour for any cyclist along with appropriate lighting and clothing.

Quite why anyone would dare to cycle in London without some training, knowledge of/respect for the highway code and suitable insurance is beyond me.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Kursk

I know cyclists are being crushed frequently despite obeying the rules.

It's obeying the rules to pelt up the cycle lane on the blind side of trucks turning left but it's not a good idea. You vs truck: You lose.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Osem

They're also being crushed sadly for being stupid and given their obvious and well publicised vulnerability on our roads I find it quite bizarre that so many behave in that manner. My wife cycles a lot and is always very careful at junctions, traffic lights etc. especially around large vehicles which she keeps well out of the way of. It's really not rocket science and ought to be standard behaviour for any cyclist along with appropriate lighting and clothing.

Quite why anyone would dare to cycle in London without some training, knowledge of/respect for the highway code and suitable insurance is beyond me.

Some of the people who cycle around London are from other (more forward-thinking) Countries in which cycling is given greater precedence in road strategies and practices. This, together with the fact that Britons tend to be inexplicably aggressive when they get behind the wheel, contributes to the potential for disaster.

It is not only 'stupid' cyclists that get killed by stupid motorists. Many motorists fail the rocket science test daily; it's just that for cyclists, and I accept that there are varying rider skill levels as there is driving ability, the result can be catastrophic.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

It's obeying the rules to pelt up the cycle lane on the blind side of trucks turning left but it's not a good idea. You vs truck: You lose.

No, it would be poor judgement. But then, town planners are guilty of poor judgement for not properly accommodating all road users within their designs. The result is bolt-on arrangements for cyclists that are just not good enough.

[dave6x]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Some of the people who cycle around London are from other (more forward-thinking) Countries in which cycling is given greater precedence in road strategies and practices. This, together with the fact that Britons tend to be inexplicably aggressive when they get behind the wheel, contributes to the potential for disaster.

It is not only 'stupid' cyclists that get killed by stupid motorists. Many motorists fail the rocket science test daily; it's just that for cyclists, and I accept that there are varying rider skill levels as there is driving ability, the result can be catastrophic.

No, it would be poor judgement. But then, town planners are guilty of poor judgement for not properly accommodating all road users within their designs. The result is bolt-on arrangements for cyclists that are just not good enough.

Have to agree with much of what you say.

When my father started teaching me to drive, well over 40 years ago, he said:

"Just remember that everyone on the road is an idiot, including you, and you won't go far wrong!"

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by dave6x

Have to agree with much of what you say.

When my father started teaching me to drive, well over 40 years ago, he said:

"Just remember that everyone on the road is an idiot, including you, and you won't go far wrong!"

I think your sig sums it up rather well dave

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Some of the people who cycle around London are from other (more forward-thinking) Countries in which cycling is given greater precedence in road strategies and practices. This, together with the fact that Britons tend to be inexplicably aggressive when they get behind the wheel, contributes to the potential for disaster.

It is not only 'stupid' cyclists that get killed by stupid motorists. Many motorists fail the rocket science test daily; it's just that for cyclists, and I accept that there are varying rider skill levels as there is driving ability, the result can be catastrophic.



No, it would be poor judgement. But then, town planners are guilty of poor judgement for not properly accommodating all road users within their designs. The result is bolt-on arrangements for cyclists that are just not good enough.

Of course not - it'd be ridiculous to assume that idiots only come on 2 wheels which I why I don't. The point is that, whoever's right or wrong, cyclists are far more vulnerable than any other road users so if their instinct for self preservation is serving them well you'd expect them to be far more careful on the roads than many of them actually are. The idiocy isn't limited to novice cyclists either - some of of the lycra clad 'tour de asphalt' brigade are the worst offenders and you'd really think they'd know better. Frankly I'd swap life for self righteousness any time and I just don't understand why you see so many cyclists make the most alarming decisions on busy roads. A car/bus/van/lorry driver may be just as stupid and/or inconsiderate but is far less likely to be injured in any contact with a cyclist and that might be why some of them act the way they do.

Town planning is of course a long term business and if they've got it so badly wrong in respect of motor vehicles, it's no great surprise that they haven't got to grips with the needs of a small group of road users which has only relatively recently started to grow. It'll take decades to sort out reasonable provision for cyclists so in the meantime they're going to need to do their utmost to protect their own interests by at least applying some common sense. It may not be fair but it it would be the prudent thing to do whilst awaiting more/better cycle routes.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Osem

Of course not - it'd be ridiculous to assume that idiots only come on 2 wheels which I why I don't. The point is that, whoever's right or wrong, cyclists are far more vulnerable than any other road users so if their instinct for self preservation is serving them well you'd expect them to be far more careful on the roads than many of them actually are. The idiocy isn't limited to novice cyclists either - some of of the lycra clad 'tour de asphalt' brigade are the worst offenders and you'd really think they'd know better. Frankly I'd swap life for self righteousness any time and I just don't understand why you see so many cyclists make the most alarming decisions on busy roads. A car/bus/van/lorry driver may be just as stupid and/or inconsiderate but is far less likely to be injured in any contact with a cyclist and that might be why some of them act the way they do.

Town planning is of course a long term business and if they've got it so badly wrong in respect of motor vehicles, it's no great surprise that they haven't got to grips with the needs of a small group of road users which has only relatively recently started to grow. It'll take decades to sort out reasonable provision for cyclists so in the meantime they're going to need to do their utmost to protect their own interests by at least applying some common sense. It may not be fair but it it would be the prudent thing to do whilst awaiting more/better cycle routes.

I know that many motorists find assertive riding irritating. I know too that many motorists just do not want cyclists on the roads at all. Accidents will happen.

In the meantime cyclists should do their utmost to protect their own interests by applying the common sense rule of cycling on the pavement. Accidents will happen.

Cycling is a growing industry. Interest in it as a means of transport, improving health and well-being, interest in it as a sport, interest in returning to the less complicated days of yore are all on the up. We can't wait for Cities to be gradually redesigned; a radical approach is needed to pedestrianise/cyclise City Centres and designate specific arterial cycle only road routes asap.

I know you'll love it when it happens. And it will