"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Apparently, the Mayor is now in favour of bike user/vehicle registration,
and wants a private bill put through Parliament to achieve this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5225346.stm

I definitely have mixed feelings about this. I disagree with the guy from
British Cycling who says a "tiny minority of cyclists" are flouting road
regulations - in my reasonably frequent cycling experience, I reckon about
half of cyclists go past me through red lights, and as a pedestrian I come
across people cycling on non-shared-use pavements nearly every day.


Yes, it isn't a tiny minority. I'd even say it's a majority.

But I don't understand why everyone agrees that jumping lights is such a
terrible thing for cyclists. Is there not an argument to be made that
different rules do apply and *ought* to apply to cyclists, simply because
cyclists are making life or death decisions every second they are on the
road.

If you follow the Highway Code to the last letter while driving a car, the
consequences of another road user making a mistake are sometimes but very
rarely fatal. When I'm driving, I don't always slow down to check whether
someone is jumping their red light as I approach my green light. I don't
always glance to the right behind me when turning left, to check if someone
might cut me off as they try to make a left turn.

When I'm cycling, I do these checks 100% of the time, because if I didn't I
would have been killed several times by now. Following the Highway Code to
the letter does not protect me in the same way as it protects a car driver.

So what I'm saying is that cyclists are checking if the coast is clear all
the time, regardless of whether a green light or the rules tell them it's
safe or not. Their reasoning is that the green light is useless to them -
they need to double-check regardless - so why should they be bound by a red
light, when they can see that it's perfectly safe for them to cross.

And if you force cyclists to follow the letter of the law in all situations
(thereby telling them that their own safety is no longer in their own
hands), I think the actual accident statistics would increase.

j

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 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.

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 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.

B2003

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.

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.


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 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.

B2003

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.

Jim wrote in message
:

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Apparently, the Mayor is now in favour of bike user/vehicle
registration, and wants a private bill put through Parliament to
achieve this. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5225346.stm

I definitely have mixed feelings about this. I disagree with the guy
from British Cycling who says a "tiny minority of cyclists" are
flouting road regulations - in my reasonably frequent cycling
experience, I reckon about half of cyclists go past me through red
lights, and as a pedestrian I come across people cycling on
non-shared-use pavements nearly every day.

Yes, it isn't a tiny minority. I'd even say it's a majority.

But I don't understand why everyone agrees that jumping lights is
such a terrible thing for cyclists. Is there not an argument to be
made that different rules do apply and *ought* to apply to cyclists,
simply because cyclists are making life or death decisions every
second they are on the road.

No, no and thrice no! I disagree in the strongest terms that different rules
should apply to cyclists. You seem to be saying that because cyclists are
more vulnerable if they make a mistake (and *maybe* are more vigilant
because of this) they should be exempt from obeying traffic lights. I'm an
advanced driver and therefore maybe am more vigilant - should I also be
exempt from obeying parts of the Highway Code?

A cyclist who jumps the lights and hits or is hit by a car who has a green
light doesn't even carry third-party insurance to cover the damage that he
causes to the car.

Martin Underwood wrote:

It pains me to see cyclists get away with committing offences for
which car drivers would be punished, and the comparatively small
number of bad cyclists blackening the name of all other cyclists
(like me) who abide by the same rules and "drive" to the same
standard when cycling as when driving - including stopping at every
red traffic light and occupied zebra crossing, and not overtaking
cars on the left in a queue of traffic especially approaching a left
turn.

I agree with you 150% - but then, even in my 40s, I must be regarded as "old
school". I try and follow the same rules cycling as I would if I were
driving, I respect crossings and traffic lights, don't overtake on the
inside, when there is other traffic around I indicate (to avoid any
confusion), I carry lights and a fluorescent vest, take heed of one-way
regulations etc etc ad infinitum.

There are a couple of areas where I'm possibly not "to the letter". On
pathways (as distinct from a footpath adjoining a road) I will sometimes
cycle but, if approaching a pedestrian, I slow down until I am certain that
they are aware of my presence (especially when approaching from behind -
I'll wait for them however long it takes). This, despite what it says in the
Highway Code, is a grey area now, with many police forces even (in my
opinion, wrongly) encouraging cyclists to use the footpath for *their* own
safety, even when it's alongside a road. As a pedestrian I know what it's
like when a cycle suddenly hurtles past you from behind, at speed. My other
transgression is that, if I'm approaching a roundabout or corner intending
to turn right, I will normally centre myself in the marked approach lane,
rather than keep strictly left, purely for my own safety - from past
experience too many motorists force their way past and it can be
intimidating and dangerous.

We are actually promoting cycling here in a major way in the next few years
and I am very seriously considering becoming a registered cycle trainer.
Most cyclists behave in a stupid manner simply because nobody has explained
to them (and they have not thought about) the dangers of being on the road,
to both themselves and pedestrians. It's a shame that there is no longer an
effective (preferably compulsory) basic proficiency test for cyclists. In my
day it was carried out on a painted route on a school playground and the
principles of it have always been firmly embedded in my mind when I'm out on
the open road. It's time that it was taken more seriously again. Even if a
licence is not made nationally compulsory there should be a requirement to
hold some form of certificate of competence (perhaps a three level one -
bronze, silver or gold, to represent basic, intermediate or advanced levels,
with the basic level being compulsory and the others optional).

Jim wrote:

So what I'm saying is that cyclists are checking if the coast is
clear all the time,

Are you serious? You might, I might and Martin might - but I would venture
that we are very much in the minority these days. It's quite terrifying
watching the behaviour of some of our fellow cyclists (mind you, it's
equally terrifying watching some of the suicidal antics of our motorised
brethren in their upholstered roller skates!).

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

" wrote:

Colin, I understand what you say about impracticality of "local"
legally-enforced bike registration; i.e. it would have to be national
or nothing.

Why? The congestion charge applies to any vehicle entering central
London no matter where in the UK they're from. I don't see legally
why it couldn't be possible to legislate that anyone operating a
bicycle in Greater London must register so long as it were reasonable
easy for people from outside London to register, perhaps have an
office at each mainline terminus where you could register and obtain a
plate or be able to order a plate to be sent through the post.

I know there's not a hope of Ken getting this through, but as a
pedestrian who walks from Cannon Street to Clerkenwell and back every
working day and sees cyclists riding on pavements and through red
lights every such day, I'd love to see it happen.
--
Roy

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