Just two points I want to make.
1) Everyday when I am driving I am beginning to see more cyclists on the road which is a good thing but a lot of them don't have safety helmets on or lights on at night. I think we should have a policy where each cyclists must have helmets and lights on for their own saftey. If we should have our seat belt on in the car and have lights on for other drivers to see then surely a law should be introduced. Even Britains current greatest Cyclist Bradley Wiggins has called for a law on this.
2) I live on a small Country lane where cars pass by and some of them drive like lunatics so some people are too scared to go out for that reason. I know Cyclists can be a nightmare when they go too far out and don't make room for cars to drive by but these cycling lanes are not really helping and I would love the Goverment to help make it more safer for Cyclists to cycle on the road.
For example, in Amsterdam and Copenhagen they have cycling roads where cars are not allowed to drive on and passengers are not allowed to walk on. I know it would be very cost effective and un-feasible to make the whole of London like this picture below but it would certainly help commuters get around and they don't have to pay for transport fees..
Comments
I've just bought a bike and want to get into my cycling and wouldn't dream of not wearing a helmet or riding in the dark with no lights.
One of my ex primary school teacher's husband got killed on the road without a helmet on.
The first Boris Bike fatality happened a couple of weeks back, I'm not aware of the details other than the cyclist was hit by a lorry, maybe in that instance wearing a helmet might have made no difference.
As to the legality of wearing a helmet - although it's not mandatory some insurance companies might argue that failing to wear one could be deemed to be contributory negligence, leading to a reduction in any insurance claim you make.
Logically if cyclists have to wear a helmet then shouldn't pedestrians also have to?
Not using lights is just plain stupid, I would have my lights on well before dusk and also wear some sort of hi vis/reflective clothing whenever I'm on the road.
For instance, I came off last week ago after pinch flatting right at the bottom of a hill at a tad over 60k/h. Straight over the bars, over a hedge and landed in a field. If that had been a road, the helmet I was wearing might just have saved my life.
There surely can't be even a hint of a debate about lights. Anyone riding in the dark without them deserves - no positively demands - to be removed from the gene pool.
Talks a lot of sense.
A lot of the problem in 'proving' helmets save lives comes in trying to find a good representative sample. This is nearly impossible due to not all cycling accidents being similar. There is, for instance,a big difference between me banging out a 40 km commute in 1hr 15 mins, including central London in rush hour, and a bloke poodling back and forth to the shops down country lanes at 10 k/h
The other day on Denmark Hill I saw a mum with a two year on a rear seat , and a five year old on the handle bars ... Not one of them wearing a helmet....
As for compulsory issue, the effect in Australia has been for less casual cycling, and the benefit of helmets hasn't been completely proven. For example I wouldn't make them available with Boris bikes, cause you could never trust anyone not to have dropped it.
Lights, legally required at night, the police love nicking people for it, buy some nice LED USB ones.
Some prick turned right out of stationary traffic without looking, indicating and if it hadn't been for quick thinking of another driver he wouldn't of stopped either.
He smashed into my back wheel. I landed on my helmet. A top of the range Arai. I was doing 25 - 30 mph. The damage to the lid properly scared the shit out of me. No doubt in my mind without it I'd be dead or brain damaged.
Have been cycling again for 5-6 years and I wouldn't even cycle half a mile up the road to the shops without a helmet.
2) Australian studies have shown helmets only effective for small children just falling off. Most crashes no other vehicle tend to be facial. Hit a car, helmet is no help.
3) cars need to only overtake when safe to do so. Don't hug kerb so they try to squeeze by.
4) I live in country so don't ignore traffic lights (there aren't any) but still get regularly cut up.
I am not sure about the stats but we all wear them now without even thinking about it and its surely better to play it safe.
The bloke who fixes up my bike is an ex-Pro cyclist and he says that his helmet (the one on his head) has probably saved his life at least twice in road crashes SINCE he retired and has been cycling as a weekend fun rider!
Also it is infuriating when a cyclist refuses to use a path designated as a cycle lane and drives in the road, slowing up motorised vehicles.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2008/08/07/calgary-cyclists-speeding-pathways.html
Ill be the first to agree that im prob a pain in the ass on my scooter but when you have red lights and I see little old grannies/school kids crossing the roads and lance armstrong is smashing through the red light with wiggins closesly behind, it sort of gets right on my tits.
Then you get the ones that wait at the red light and take about ten minutes to get out of my way, they get on my tits too. So I wish they could travel at a safe speed, stop at reds and zebra crossings and get out of my farking way when the lights go green
For me, the biggest problem with cyclists is without a doubt the high numbers of them that ride around at night with no lights. I'm sure there's a whole level of them who are too young to drive and don't therefore have the first clue that the main purpose of bike lights is so that they can be seen rather than for them to see with.
It seems that I'm not breaking the law: http://www.astounding.org.uk/ian/cyclelaw/speed_limits.html
Even though I can get done for 'cycling furiously' which sounds pretty cool.
Wouldnt dream of riding 5 yards without a helmet. I had a fairly serious crash as a teenager after going over the handlebars of a road bike which left me having to have a skin graft just under my nose.
My view is that all cyclists should be tested for a road cycling licence. If you dont pass, you arent able to ride on the road. Simple as that. Unfortunately, lycra, a helmet and a decent bike doesnt make you a decent cyclist. So many riders in my old club had sweet FA in the way of road savvy and are just an accident waiting to happen. This would stop all of that. With the cycling licence comes the requirement for insurance too.
On the other side of this argument, anyone taking a driving test should be forced to take a cycling awareness test as part of the test too. The number of drivers on the roads that are completely oblivious to cyclists is beyond a joke. I've taken to wearing a helmet cam for peace of mind. Whenever I'm riding my bike, its recording. I've had far too many near misses to count now.
It also requires a complete change in attitude from drivers. For example: Infuriating it may be but there is no legal requirement for a cyclist to ride in a provided cycle lane. At the end of the day, its about harmony on the roads, both drivers and cyclists need to get on together and accept that both are present on the road and have a bit of bloody patience. Does it really matter that a driver has been held up for something like 20-30 seconds stuck behind a cyclist before finding a safe place to overtake? Interestingly, the last time I went out on my bike last Monday evening on a 2.5hr 50 miler, my mate and I had an articulated lorry behind us on Darenth Hill (going towards Longfield). We was pedalling up at 17-18mph so pretty decent pace yet this lorry decided to overtake us on the brow of the hill, forcing a car to take evasive action coming the other way! If I know someone has waited behind me for a safe place to pass, I'll always acknowledge thanks by raising a hand and for the most part I'll get acknowlegment back. But then they can properly tell I'm a serious cyclist as I ride properly and safely including stopping at red lights (shock horror!)
However its not just about drivers changing attitudes, its the cyclists too. They have to be accountable for their actions. Adults riding on pavements when they should be on the road, Adults taking non-foldable bikes on trains, riding through red lights, riding the wrong way up one-way streets (common place in Whitechapel and Mile End)...all of which make my blood boil.
As for hi-vis clothing, scientific research suggests that mainly black lycra with white trim is far more eye catching to the majority of drivers than fluro-yellow/orange.
Oh and as for lights, all three of my bikes are lit up like a xmas tree.
At the end of the day, anyone thinking Boris is really going to spend billions on turning London into Amsterdam (which was an amazing cycling experience btw!) need to take a reality check. If drivers and cyclists were more lenient and more appreciative towards each other, we'd all get along much better in some sort of harmony.
I get your point about cyclists weaving in and out of traffic, but, like most drivers, you fall int the trap of failing to differentiate between cyclists who know how to ride, and those who don't. Granted, there are plenty of cyclists who haven't got a Danny - but more accidents are caused by impatient drivers changing lanes at lights without looking in their mirrors than cyclists deliberately weaving in and out of traffic.
I don't get your point about drivers not expecting to be undertaken on the inside on roads with no cycle lane - would you prefer we rode on the outside?