All these fatalities

[Crankarm]

I don't think they are on the edge of their nerves - most have no idea that what they are doing could have serious consequences.

The problem is that 999 times out of 1000, we do something risky on the road and we get away with it (whatever it is - tailgating, failing to observe something, a dodgy overtake, jumping a red light, you name it). We get away with it by good luck, because another driver is concentrating and has allowed for our error, because the ABS kicks in, etc.

So our bad behaviour goes unpunished. So we do it again. And again.

Years ago I worked with a woman who routinely tailgated. As we did a lot of driving together, it wound me up and became a routine topic of conversation. This went on for a couple of years.

Then one day she bought her first brand new car. Two days later, she rear-ended someone she'd been tailgating. Her precious new car was off the road for weeks being repaired, she had to pay a hefty excess, and paying the next year's insurance premium really hurt her.

She stopped tailgating after that.

Paul's right - some advanced training (driving or cycling) makes you much more aware of what might go wrong. Usually it doesn't, but concentration makes the difference between crashing or not crashing when something does go wrong.

Nooooo.......... the reason she stopped tailgating was not because of any training course, but as you clearly state because her previous bad driving cost her a lot of money. Simples.

 

[Crankarm]

You are being an arse today, aren't you?

Nice to see you haven't lost any of your nasty hostility with an enforced days rest yesterday .

 

[Amanda P]

I was trying to make two points (badly) and mixed them up.

She stopped tailgating because it cost her a lot of money.

Many people get through a liftetime of (bad) driving, because they never suffer any consequences from it. If we all received better/advanced training, we might not suffer any consequences, but we'd be made much more aware of what they might be.

 

[J4CKO]

I am all for a do's and dont's section, I thought I was ok on the road when I started having driven for years and cycled occasionally but doing it every day, the advice on here, cyclecraft and watchign other cyclists has helped massively, there is loads of excellent advice in these pages but it needs to be searched for and pages of chaff to be sorted through, perhaps pointers could be distilled and listed bullet point style.

Heres the first one,

1/ Dont go anywhere near HGV's or other very large vehicles you will get squashed, they cant see you, or at least assume they cant, if in doubt stop (where safe to do so) and think of another way around, if it slows you down its better than being dead.

 

[peanut]

I believe it would be an excellent safety improvement for all cyclists to have to attend and pass a safe cycling course and possibly hold public indeminity insurance.

I realise that insurance would hit those on a tight budget hard but I see no reason why the rest of us drivers should subsidise cyclists who contribute nothing to their use of the highways.

I really like the idea of a Cycling safety Course. Its crazy to expect new cyclists to share busy roads with vehicles and yet have no cycling experience and often have no appreciation of the highway code, or legal and safe use of the roads.

 

[rh100]

I realise that insurance would hit those on a tight budget hard but I see no reason why the rest of us drivers should subsidise cyclists who contribute nothing to their use of the highways.

Did you mean to put a

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying insurance, but I may already be insured on my household one - will have to check. But it's probably unenforceable if people are getting away with no car insurance already.

 

[J4CKO]

Peanut, yes, like the CBT for motor cycles.

The insurance thing is also a good idea but Drivers arent the cyclsits sugar daddy paying for our every silly whim, I pay VED on two cars I also pay vast ammounts of personal tax, it all goes into a big pot called central government and spent where they see fit, the VED probably doesnt go on roads anyway and pales ito insignificance compared to most peoples actual tax liability so it pisses me off when some tit in a scratty old car lords it over me like he is personally paying for my every need yet probably contributes much less to the economy than I do.

VED needs scrapping, stick it all on petrol

 

[MartinC]

I believe it would be an excellent safety improvement for all cyclists to have to attend and pass a safe cycling course and possibly hold public indeminity insurance.

I realise that insurance would hit those on a tight budget hard but I see no reason why the rest of us drivers should subsidise cyclists who contribute nothing to their use of the highways.

I really like the idea of a Cycling safety Course. Its crazy to expect new cyclists to share busy roads with vehicles and yet have no cycling experience and often have no appreciation of the highway code, or legal and safe use of the roads.

Peanut. I don't think you're right with this but one of the sentiments I agree with. Any training for cyclists has to be a good idea.

Obligatory training and insurance are disproportionate to the risk that cyclist face and create. Cycling is far more akin to walking than driving (for example children do it as well as adults). To me it's a big part of the problem that people think all road space should be mediated by the rules that are convenient for cars.

The point about subsidies is wrong. Road costs p.a. are far more than is collected in VED and the total costs of motoring to the country far exceed the total tax take. Last time I saw the official figures (Government Department figures for the tax take and the cost) for this each car is being subsidised to the tune of about £2000 p.a. Many cyclists pay tax. The question is why does everyone have to subsidise drivers not the other way round.

For all the licencing and testing that happens my experience is that many drivers often have no appreciation of the highway code, or legal and safe use of the roads. Recommending the same system for cyclists, pedestrians, people pushing prams or whatever doesn't seem to have much merit.

 

[peanut]

Obligatory training and insurance are disproportionate to the risk that cyclist face and create.

try telling that to the families of those cyclists that have been killed on the roads this year.

Any measure that will significantly reduce the risk of injury or fatality to cyclists is worthwhile.

 

[ttcycle]

I have to agree with Jonny and Paul - whether you're on a bike or in the car it's about riding/driving assertively as well as defensively. I've used that technique for advanced driving where you state in the car (maybe people can have a go at it on the next ride in) all the hazards you see ahead that will cause you to slow or change course potentially - really opens your eyes up to looking ahead and having good road awareness. Sometimes it's easy to get pissed off with someone when they pull out suddenly but the assumption is to be aware of potential hazards early on and only you as a cyclist, driver, ped etc can take responsibility for your actions in that part of the equation. It's a fine balance between maintaining a good speed so you don't annoy other road users but also being aware ahead of time when to slow down for upcoming hazards. I no longer feel the need to go super fast all the time on the bike or in the car as ultimately it achieves very little.

 

[andyfromotley]

My wife moans at me for regularly pointing out bad driving and it's because she also talks too much/looks at her passenger/waives her hands about whilst driving. She thinks that's normal. Me? I concentrate. I don't speak much, my hands are on the wheel, I mirror check every few seconds. Driving (and riding) can be a dangerous time so we must all concentrate more. And expect the unexpected.

Pretty much since i passed my advance course 7 years ago i just cant bear to let my other half drive. It terrifies me.

Having benefitted from a 4 week standard 4 week advanced and 2 week advanced refresher in the last 15 years i have an extremely poor opinion of the standard of drivers (and driver training) in this country.

To be fair tho, as i have said in this forum before as a regular cycle commuter i personally find Leeds to be a very safe place to cycle. Considerate drivers and very few incidents of not in the 2 years since i took it up.

 

[MartinC]

try telling that to the families of those cyclists that have been killed on the roads this year.

Any measure that will significantly reduce the risk of injury or fatality to cyclists is worthwhile.

Hyperbole, you can substitute the participant in any activity for "cycling" in your statement and make the same emotional argument e.g. pedestrian. You need to show that there are significant extra risks in cycling compared to the other ones you ignore for your argument to carry weight. Bear in mind that cycling covers a vast range of activity, a 3 year old toddler on the pavement and a messenger in London are both cycling.

Remember, too, that I agreed with you that training was a good idea. I thought it was the idea of making it mandatory that was disproportionate so this post seems to be an overreaction anyway.

Also bear in mind that some of the unfortunate cyclists killed this (or any) year were highly trained anyway so conscripting all their families to your cause seems a bit presumptious.

 

[BentMikey]

Crikey Peanut, you can really sprout some utter boll0cks.

 

[peanut]

BM you are a thoroughly rude and obnoxious person but I understand that you have a need to be obnoxious and post rubbish in order to elicit a response and propagate an argument so I just ignore your type.

However I make an exception in this instance as your rude and ignorant response shows a complete insensitivity and utter disregard for those people viewing whether guests or members who have lost a friend or relative due to a road fatility.

 

[Origamist]

Also bear in mind that some of the unfortunate cyclists killed this (or any) year were highly trained anyway so conscripting all their families to your cause seems a bit presumptious.

And offensive.