Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Cyclists / electric scooter users

135

Comments

  • People see the worst in what they're not and the best in what they are.
    So motorists see cyclists as bad and vice verse.
    For what it's worth I think there are appalling road users of all types.
    I also think it's a classic 80/20 thing. 20% cause 80% of the problems whether in a motor vehicle, cycling or walking.
    I just know to cycle defensively as one of the driving 20% could easily kill me.
  • There's always going to be accident, even the best road in the world are gonna have accidents, human error.
    Doesn't mean you can't make roads safer - a better road network would cut down on accidents. A lot of the roads in London weren't designed to be shared by motorists/cyclists and they're getting worse as the number of cyclists increases.

    Some of the accidents could be avoided.
    No one is suggesting we don't try to improve things, I just think you've got totally the wrong target, whilst some cyclists may be a problem, clearly people who drive cars are doing far, far more damage.
    Agreed. You only have to look at the stats.
    As a cyclist I don’t go through red lights (unless it’s a quiet road with no one around at all), but as a motorist I probably break the speed limit most days, regrettably. 
  • edited July 2019
    Of the 448 killed by a vehicle in 2016, 3 were caused by cyclists, compared to 289 by cars. These levels have been broadly consistent over the past five years.

    102 cyclists were killed on British roads in 2016. Around 3,400 were seriously injured, and there were around 15,000 other casualties. This data won’t cover any incidents that weren’t reported.

    Maybe that's why the police see it as less of a priority?
    The police should protect all road users and pedestrians - they are failing at present. It's abundantly clear they don't target those on two wheels whatever they do but for some reason this group are above the law?

    If a cyclist or electric scooter crashed into you on the pavement or pedestrian crossing I'm assuming you'd be unhappy.


    Depends if it killed me or not.

    How about broken arm, leg or head injury?
    Yeh. I'd be annoyed. Doesn't prove your point though. Young men with bad manners annoy me but I don't think that the police should dedicate much needed resources to sorting them out, rather than, say, doing their best to manage a higher percentage risk.
  • Electric scooters are illegal? That seems like a ridiculous decision.
    Illegal to use on footpaths & pavements... Perfectly legal OTR.
  • Dazzler21 said:
    Electric scooters are illegal? That seems like a ridiculous decision.
    Illegal to use on footpaths & pavements... Perfectly legal OTR.

    I think you're wrongish.

    They are illegal on the footpath but could be legal on the road if they satisfy the regs for powered vehicles.
  • Dazzler21 said:
    Electric scooters are illegal? That seems like a ridiculous decision.
    Illegal to use on footpaths & pavements... Perfectly legal OTR.
    Ah thats good then, hopefully they don't allow them to be too powerful, I have a 72v 20a bike that can easily hit 70 km/ph, seems ridiculous when you don't need any sort of license.
  • Sponsored links:


  • kigelia said:
    I work in central London on an ambulance and as a cycle responder. The law is broken all day every day by cyclists and car/van/any motorised vehicle. It is rarely enforced by police simply because there are too many offences and not enough police.

    i have seen road users or all sorts (powered or otherwise) stopped by police for their actions but not as often as it should.

    the big issue is that everyone thinks they are a better, more skilled, road user than others. They all cite example of others breaking the law of just being a bit of a dick. They neglect to mention the times they pulled out without looking or passed another road user a little too closely. Hit the curb when cornering. Jumped a light to save a few seconds or went a little too fast.

    if we all reflect on what we are doing and try to do it better the roads will be much safer. As opposed to sitting in ivory towers bemoaning everyone else on the road.
    This is probably the most sensible thing that's been posted on this thread - and there's a lot of stuff that has been suggested that isn't sensible.

    No one group of people has any more right to the road than any other, and cyclists and motorists alike could do with being better educated in terms of what constitutes good behaviour on sharing the roads.

    On a slightly separate note, the argument that often gets touted, and has been mentioned already on this thread, is that cyclists should "be insured, licensed and pay tax". But in this country we have an obesity problem and an environmental crisis. Putting up barriers to cycling will only mean less people on bikes and more people in cars, or cramming onto our already creaking public transport network. The benefits of having more people commuting or getting about on a bike far outweigh the negatives.
    I'd suggest that me, in my car (with paid for Road Tax), has more right to be on the road than a cyclist (but that's just my opinion)
  • Dazzler21 said:
    Electric scooters are illegal? That seems like a ridiculous decision.
    Illegal to use on footpaths & pavements... Perfectly legal OTR.
    They are not legal to use on the road. According to the BBC, they only place they can be ridden is on private land.

    ''They are classified as Personal Light Electric Vehicles (PLEVs), so they are treated as motor vehicles. That means they are subject to all the requirements a motor vehicle is subject to - MOT, tax, licensing and construction requirements - such as having visible rear red lights, number plates and signalling ability. Electric scooters do not have these, so they are not legal for roads".

    Source - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48106617


  • kigelia said:
    I work in centralLondon on an ambulance and as a cycle responder. The law is broken all day every day by cyclists and car/van/any motorised vehicle. It is rarely enforced by police simply because there are too many offences and not enough police.

    i have seen road users or all sorts (powered or otherwise) stopped by police for their actions but not as often as it should.

    the big issue is that everyone thinks they are a better, more skilled, road user than others. They all cite example of others breaking the law of just being a bit of a dick. They neglect to mention the times they pulled out without looking or passed another road user a little too closely. Hit the curb when cornering. Jumped a light to save a few seconds or went a little too fast.

    if we all reflect on what we are doing and try to do it better the roads will be much safer. As opposed to sitting in ivory towers bemoaning everyone else on the road.
    This is probably the most sensible thing that's been posted on this thread - and there's a lot of stuff that has been suggested that isn't sensible.

    No one group of people has any more right to the road than any other, and cyclists and motorists alike could do with being better educated in terms of what constitutes good behaviour on sharing the roads.

    On a slightly separate note, the argument that often gets touted, and has been mentioned already on this thread, is that cyclists should "be insured, licensed and pay tax". But in this country we have an obesity problem and an environmental crisis. Putting up barriers to cycling will only mean less people on bikes and more people in cars, or cramming onto our already creaking public transport network. The benefits of having more people commuting or getting about on a bike far outweigh the negatives.
    I'd suggest that me, in my car (with paid for Road Tax), has more right to be on the road than a cyclist (but that's just my opinion)
    But you pay an emissions charge for your car.
    If vehicles did pay the whole cost of roads hardly anyone could afford to motor.
    The vast bulk of paying for roads comes from general taxation.
  • edited July 2019
    kigelia said:
    I work in central London on an ambulance and as a cycle responder. The law is broken all day every day by cyclists and car/van/any motorised vehicle. It is rarely enforced by police simply because there are too many offences and not enough police.

    i have seen road users or all sorts (powered or otherwise) stopped by police for their actions but not as often as it should.

    the big issue is that everyone thinks they are a better, more skilled, road user than others. They all cite example of others breaking the law of just being a bit of a dick. They neglect to mention the times they pulled out without looking or passed another road user a little too closely. Hit the curb when cornering. Jumped a light to save a few seconds or went a little too fast.

    if we all reflect on what we are doing and try to do it better the roads will be much safer. As opposed to sitting in ivory towers bemoaning everyone else on the road.
    This is probably the most sensible thing that's been posted on this thread - and there's a lot of stuff that has been suggested that isn't sensible.

    No one group of people has any more right to the road than any other, and cyclists and motorists alike could do with being better educated in terms of what constitutes good behaviour on sharing the roads.

    On a slightly separate note, the argument that often gets touted, and has been mentioned already on this thread, is that cyclists should "be insured, licensed and pay tax". But in this country we have an obesity problem and an environmental crisis. Putting up barriers to cycling will only mean less people on bikes and more people in cars, or cramming onto our already creaking public transport network. The benefits of having more people commuting or getting about on a bike far outweigh the negatives.
    I'd suggest that me, in my car (with paid for Road Tax), has more right to be on the road than a cyclist (but that's just my opinion)
    Road Tax isn't a thing (not existed since the 1930s). You pay Car Tax ( vehicle excise duty). Also, all tax-payers pay for the upkeep of roads via general and local taxation no matter whether they use the road or not.




  • Its not unusual down here to see a queue of slow moving traffic proceeded by a mobility scooter, one old boy (80+) gives motorists unrepeatable abuse if they question his behaviour. :)
  • How many cyclists/e-scooterists have killed or injured pedestrians or motorists?
  • I think the argument is Police could and should be doing more in regards careless driving by motorists and cyclists. Fact is resources in the police are too low to make a discernable difference. My view is I can't change that so as a driver of several hundred if not thousand miles a month I drive properly and look out for my fellow road user. Like driving on the left and only moving out to overtake then return. Like keeping an eye out for motorcycles and cyclists before making a manoeuvre. And keeping to the speed limit. That way I limit my risk to me and others 

    If some idiot chooses to cut through traffic on a totally unprotected push bike they take their life into the hands of another idiot sadly and the statistics are pretty badly weighted in favour of the idiot in the car, of which there are many. 

    Speeding fines piss people off, before anyone predictably counters me with "duur you should obey the speed limit" I agree, however I'd much rather more resource was put back into firmly bollocking, scaring and prosecuting dangerous drivers. Those looking at mobile phones, whilst those talking on them have lessened their concentration it is not in the same league of dangerous as a maggot texting, looking at some bollocks or dicking about with it and flicking their eyes up and down to the road. 

    The road safety adverts are scary enough about this and I've seen the accidents where people have been playing about with phones to give me a genuine hatred of people pissing about with phones while driving, it's a spcially unacceptable as drink driving in my opinion 
  • I am a keen cyclist and have been for years, the whole argument about cyclists should stay of the pavement/ pathways is utter nonsense. What about when idiot pedestrians dordle along cycle paths with their head phones on paying no attention to anything around them. I know it sounds far fetched but in my mind pedestrians are the cause of loads of cycling accidents.  The worst offenders being dog walkers, who seem to think they and their dogs have free reign over any pathway. Ended up in the canal on my bike twice in the last 3 years both due to idoits walking dogs.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited July 2019
    CH4RLTON said:
    I am a keen cyclist and have been for years, the whole argument about cyclists should stay of the pavement/ pathways is utter nonsense. What about when idiot pedestrians dordle along cycle paths with their head phones on paying no attention to anything around them. I know it sounds far fetched but in my mind pedestrians are the cause of loads of cycling accidents.  The worst offenders being dog walkers, who seem to think they and their dogs have free reign over any pathway. Ended up in the canal on my bike twice in the last 3 years both due to idoits walking dogs.
    Pathways where there are pedestrians and dogs are not suitable for speeding along on a bicycle, which ending up in a canal tends to suggest is what you may have been doing at the time. 


  • edited July 2019
    CH4RLTON said:
    I am a keen cyclist and have been for years, the whole argument about cyclists should stay of the pavement/ pathways is utter nonsense. What about when idiot pedestrians dordle along cycle paths with their head phones on paying no attention to anything around them. I know it sounds far fetched but in my mind pedestrians are the cause of loads of cycling accidents.  The worst offenders being dog walkers, who seem to think they and their dogs have free reign over any pathway. Ended up in the canal on my bike twice in the last 3 years both due to idoits walking dogs.
    Pathways where there are pedestrians and dogs are not suitable for speeding along on a bicycle, which ending up in a canal tends to suggest is what you may have been doing at the time. 


    I used to enjoy cycling on canal towpaths but stopped some time ago. This was because the cyclists changed. They were more aggressive and treated walkers badly.
    After a few arguments with other cyclists about their behaviour I just stopped using canals.
    What wasn't realised was that cyclists needed a permit from the waterways board to cycle there and the rules were very clear. Pedestrians had priority over cyclists and should be cycling at a speed that reflected that.
    If you went in the canal you must have been cycling irresponsibly whatever the dog walkers were doing.
    I speak as a year round cycle commuter.
  • edited July 2019
    I think there should be better enforcement particularly at certain junctions, but police can't come out to actual crimes nowadays let alone do that. Something does need to be done though to root out the poor behavior on all sides before resentment and further bad behavior escalates

    I cycle commute and see it all the time from cyclists who jump lights etc but rarely create serious 'danger' as such, cars and vans just don't look - its getting a lot worse recently far more deadly and destructive, and pedestrians particularly tourists who wander into cycle lanes not realising a silent cyclist at high speed could easily take them out, the cyclist infrequently ending up worst off.

    It's getting worse i.e. more dangerous to cycle. There are some improvements to cycle highways, but not enough, and sometimes poorly executed or impossible to adapt London's antique road networks for new kinds of use.

    This morning a van nearly drove into me, he simply wasn't looking, and a Boris biker (think they are some of the worst cyclists) swung on to a crossing as the lights went off the road and was clipped by a speeding moped who jumped the light.

    Last week a bus nearly drove into me again he wasn't looking when he pulled out; I nearly took out a tourist by Buck House, who didn't look, and still didn't look when I yelled look out at her. Must use my bell more I guess, but this was literally on a road not a park.

    etc
  • edited July 2019
    Another issue is that people walk with their ears (not literally) and cannot pick up the noise of a cyclist/e-scooter approaching from behind or when crossing the street as an initial warning unlike motor vehicles. Hence the reason for e-car to include an artificial noise on speeds below 20mph. 
  • A deaf person can't hear a vehicle or bell or a warning they can't see.
    A deaf person can't follow the shouted warnings of the police either.
    Neither can headphone wearers.
    Whatever kind of road used you are, proceed in the assumption you are invisible, nobody will obey rules, every other road user hates you and wants to kill you.
    Everybody should get up half an hour earlier and not be in such a rush.
  • not quite true - you can actually hear a lot through headphones
  • Fair enough.
    Still, a deaf person can't hear a shouted warning.
    Or the toot from a vehicle.
  • I do think Cyclists WORKING on bikes should have to take some form of Cycling proficiency that they need to work and can be revoked if they’re caught acting dangerously 


  • Tip: Never trust a Zebra crossing. Always continue to look left and right. 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!