2 Things I would change...

[Rickshaw Phil]

Why has this thread degenerated into an insurance/registration debate?

 

[srw]

About time cyclists HAVE Insurance rather than mouth off how other road users are always to blame. The "It's my right" for cyclists attitude is starting to wear a bit thin. About time laws surrounding cyclists are modernised. Cyclists jump red lights, ride on the pavement, etc, etc. They are not above the law.

Question - What's the point of third-party liability insurance?
Answer - To ensure that innocent members of the public who are injured or who have property damaged by the policy-holder have some way of getting compensation.

Question - Why is third-party liability insurance compulsory for drivers of motor vehicles?
Answer - Because hundreds of thousands of drivers every year cause damage to property or injury to third parties and because many of those injuries are life-threatening or result in death.

Question - Why is third-party liability insurance not compulsory for riders of bicycles?
Answer - Because the number of riders of bicycles who cause damage to property or injury to third parties each year is vanishingly small - measured in the tens, not even the hundreds.

Question - Why do most people on here have third-party liability insurance?
Answer - Because they recognise that there is a risk, albeit a very small risk, of them causing injury to third parties or damage to property.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

About time cyclists HAVE Insurance rather than mouth off how other road users are always to blame. The "It's my right" for cyclists attitude is starting to wear a bit thin. About time laws surrounding cyclists are modernised. Cyclists jump red lights, ride on the pavement, etc, etc. They are not above the law.

A splendidly driver-centric view of the world.

No one has said, in this thread, sfaik, that cyclists are above the law. Their lawbreaking represents a lower order of risk to other road users than that of motorists and therefore the legal framework reflects that. Going for some lowest common denominator "let's treat everyone like motorists" approach simply ignores the KSI outcomes of each class of road user. After all, motorists kill pedestrians, when the pedestrians are on the pavement minding their own business, at a rate at least a couple of orders of magnitude greater than cyclists do.

If someone operates a ton-and-a-half piece of equipment in a public place in such a way that injures another person how are they not to blame?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You are indeed probably correct. However I can imagine that the cyclists that do 'mouth off' are more probable the ones with insurance.

Pavement cyclists, rlj'rs, they don't give a stuff at how they ride so why would they give a stuff about insurance?

Ian you fool, don't you see? Stick a reg plate on the back of their bike and they'll all become good law abiding citizens just like motorists and motorcyclists and never brake a law again. It's obvious.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Of course car drivers break the law. We all do.

No we don't. (except on motorways)

I think we can sometimes weaken our argument by appearing to point at drivers, expecting them to obey the law at all times.

They (and I, - shock horror I drive a car and sometimes a motorcycle too) drive heavy machinery at speed in public places that contain people I care about. I really do expect them to obey the law at all times. I have a right to expect that, or to expect that if they don't their license will be endorsed and ultimately taken away surely?

 

[Paul J]

This is another thread of lets slag of the car or anyone who disagrees about cyclists. Looks like I will bow out of this one and leave you lot to it to play with your two wheels and ban the motor car with the line Cause it's my right.

 

[srw]

This is another thread of lets slag of the car or anyone who disagrees about cyclists. Looks like I will bow out of this one and leave you lot to it to play with your two wheels and ban the motor car with the line Cause it's my right.

Alternatively you could read what's been written with an open mind.

I'm particularly interested in the "bikes must have third-party liability insurance" discussion. Which bit of my argument to you disagree with?

 

[defy-one]

I am a pedestrian, cyclist and motorists. I enjoy all 3 equally. I am wary of other road users and have been driving for 28 years, so I'm well aware of the dangers I pose as a motorist and as a cyclist.
My earlier post was to highlight the motorist should not automatically be seen as the bad guy when he comes in contact with a pedestrian or cyclist. Of course those road users are going to come off worse and the driver has a large amount of metal to protect him.
Some folks here appear to have the view that a cyclist/pedestrian couldn't possibly be the cause of a road traffic incident and that was the point I was trying to highlight.

To those anti car cyclist I would say wake up!

 

[lukesdad]

Anyway, to get back on track. What I want to know is, when are these bleeding Roman CTC members Centurions comming to fix my road

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I am a pedestrian, cyclist and motorists. I enjoy all 3 equally. I am wary of other road users and have been driving for 28 years, so I'm well aware of the dangers I pose as a motorist and as a cyclist.
My earlier post was to highlight the motorist should not automatically be seen as the bad guy when he comes in contact with a pedestrian or cyclist. Of course those road users are going to come off worse and the driver has a large amount of metal to protect him.
Some folks here appear to have the view that a cyclist/pedestrian couldn't possibly be the cause of a road traffic incident and that was the point I was trying to highlight.

To those anti car cyclist I would say wake up!

I'm a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist and motorist. my enjoyment of all four, especially the first three is spoiled by the antics of, speed and frequency of encounter with the last two. No one here has the view that cyclists/pedestrians can do no wrong so not sure why you're arguing against a point no one has made.

To those who are pro-car cyclists I would say wake up!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Anyway, to get back on track. What I want to know is, when are these bleeding Roman CTC members Centurions comming to fix my road

I ask you brothers, what have the Romans EVER done for us?

 

[Boris Bajic]

This is another thread of lets slag of the car or anyone who disagrees about cyclists. Looks like I will bow out of this one and leave you lot to it to play with your two wheels and ban the motor car with the line Cause it's my right.

Paul, many of us are car owners. I am a keen driver and have been accused on this forum of being a pro-car troll.

As a non-wearer of helmets I've been accused of having an obviously pro-helmet agenda. It matters not.

You will get some quite stridently pro-bicycle views on this sort of forum, but most members are quite reasonable.

Many of the posts in this thread disagreeing with mandatory registration and insurance have been reasonable and well argued.

I imagine the great majority of this forum's members are also drivers, motorcyclists or both. There are also some HGV and PSV drivers on here.

Relax and enjoy the debate. Everyone else is always wrong, anyway.

 

[Boris Bajic]

No we don't. (except on motorways)



They (and I, - shock horror I drive a car and sometimes a motorcycle too) drive heavy machinery at speed in public places that contain people I care about. I really do expect them to obey the law at all times. I have a right to expect that, or to expect that if they don't their license will be endorsed and ultimately taken away surely?

You have the right to expect the Moon to be made of cheese if you want.

I agree with you that mandatory registration and insurance are not the answer, but I'm amazed that you expect drivers and motorcyclists to obey the law at all times. Have you ever cycled along the A40 between Brecon and Llandeilo on a dry, summer Sunday? The slower bikes ride along some sections at 100 mph. That's where I taught all my children to ride on the open road.

We can expect whatever we want, but that's not the same as requiring it or getting it.

 

[Boris Bajic]

I drop a large rock on your head after stamping on it first.

What is the advantage of stamping on the rock before dropping it?

 

[Boris Bajic]

So what level of compliance do you want?

I'm not sure I have any views on that.

As a recently reformed speeder and user of a hand-held mobile, I do not have a lofty moral high horse to speak from.

I once rode from Brighton to London in the early hours on a track bike (but with lights, plates and tax disc) that I'd just built. I'd forgotten to wire up the instrument lights, so I had no idea how fast I was going. I just rode it home on the stop. I found out later what speed I must have been doing. I am very naughty and have no right to expect or want any given level of compliance with any law.

Can I guess? 47%? Or maybe "more than some but not as much as quite a lot".