Ban cyclists and e-scooter riders using phones, Tory peer urges.

[newfhouse]

if it's going to be a deterrent.

It isn’t. They don’t enforce existing rules that already prohibit far more dangerous behaviour by road users.

 

[PK99]

Your medical vulnerability doesn’t alter the fact that cars drivers are more dangerous to you than bikes cyclists. It should go without saying that nobody should ride in such a way that they knock you or anyone else flying, but if they are already speeding past you on the pavement I’m not convinced that a new law about phones will modify their behaviour one iota.

If hit by a car/bike you are correct.

But my experience as a pedestrian is that I am put at risk and have to take avoiding action FAR more times by cyclists than motor vehicle drivers

That avoiding action is most often necessary on pavements and on crossings where I have priority - often by cyclists riding one-handed with a mobile.

As I said above, and you chose to ignore:

So to those cyclists bleating the usual cyclist bleat "Cars are more dangerous than bikes".

Please don't !

 

[newfhouse]

That avoiding action is most often necessary on pavements and on crossings where I have priority - often by cyclists riding one-handed with a mobile

So the problem is dangerous and discourteous cycling, which I think we all agree should be discouraged. Sometimes mobile use will be a factor, sometimes it won’t.

I nearly fell off while peeling a banana once. Should fruit consumption have its own prohibition? Or cycling with fewer than a prescribed number of hands on the steering mechanism? (Won’t somebody think of the unidexters?)

you chose to ignore:

I did. This is a discussion forum.

End of.

 

[Andy in Germany]

Imagine having enough power that you can call for laws being changed due to one concerning incident.

The amount of shoot that goes on in this country every day and were going after a non issue again. Almost like another distraction, getting people frothing at those bloody cyclists again.

I supose they figure scapegoating and "othering" has worked pretty well as distraction so far, why stop now?

 

[Solocle]

Disagree, I would not expect to be subject to the same jurisdictions when walking along a road as when I’m driving or cycling etc. jurisdiction needs to be proportionate.

Just as I would not expect the same jurisdiction when swimming in the sea as a captain managing a ferry.

The legislation quite rightly recognises this.

I mean, it's sure going to be interesting to find somewhere to fit my all new bike tachograph...

And as for pedestrians?

 

[matticus]

Road users as a collective should, imo, be subject to the same juristiction.

Nonsense.
Would you make speed limits for all vehicle classes the same?
Would you support licencing for pedestrians?

 

[Oldhippy]

There are t*ats everywhere you cannot possibly legislate for everything. It is just another politician making a noise to justify their existence by looking like they give a crap and distraction from issues that affect society in much more serious ways.

 

[Dogtrousers]

There are t*ats everywhere you cannot possibly legislate for everything. It is just another politician making a noise to justify their existence by lookinglike they give a crap and distraction from issues that affect society in much more serious ways.

Well, you don't really need to. You don't need to rush through legislation to stop this, that and the other. Here's a thought, you could make "careless or dangerous" cycling an offence and it would cover the various eventualities. Provided the police have the resources and inclination to enforce it.

Where something is a genuine specific problem - like lorry drivers playing pacman* on their phones while driving down the motorway, or parents frantically checking the whatsapp school run group while on the school run - then you need to address that specific problem.

* Sorry I'm a bit out of date. Maybe this should be FIFA 22 or some other game.

 

[matticus]

There are t*ats everywhere you cannot possibly legislate for everything. It is just another politician making a noise to justify their existence by lookinglike they give a crap and distraction from issues that affect society in much more serious ways.

Yes.
And it's a form of populism: back some measure that will constrain "those sort" whilst looking after the common man.

 

[mjr]

Yes.
And it's a form of populism: back some measure that will constrain "those sort" whilst looking after the common man.

And the best solution is to get a majority, or at least a blocking minority, cycling. So helping and encouraging others onto bikes should be our response.

(With another cycling PM, we may actually have a blocking minority but it's rather fragile.)

 

[cougie uk]

Banning motorists from using phones doesn't seem to stop the use. I actually think I see more than ever using the phone at the wheel.

You can sit in a car with the engine off using a phone, what way would the bike one work? Could you sit on a bike and use a phone or have to dismount to stop strava?

I think you will see a drop off in this soon. Report any you have any proof of and it's 6 points on their licence.

 

[Jody]

I think you will see a drop off in this soon. Report any you have any proof of and it's 6 points on their licence.

I don't tend to see as many making calls but there seems to be a suspiciously large amount of people driving round constantly glancing at the thighs or the pocket of the door card.

No idea what's in their right hand but it seems to capture their attention.

 

[Milkfloat]

If hit by a car/bike you are correct.

But my experience as a pedestrian is that I am put at risk and have to take avoiding action FAR more times by cyclists than motor vehicle drivers

That avoiding action is most often necessary on pavements and on crossings where I have priority - often by cyclists riding one-handed with a mobile.

As I said above, and you chose to ignore:

So to those cyclists bleating the usual cyclist bleat "Cars are more dangerous than bikes".

Just STFU!

The stats really don't support your argument at all. Whilst I am not discounting your personal experiences the real danger is the motor vehicles. I would love to be in a situation where mobile use by cyclists is a real problem that requires separate legislation over and above what we have now, as it means we have probably experienced a cycling revolution where cycling is so normalised and safe that a large percentage of cyclists feel that they can ride and call without being hit by a tipper. It means we have approached Netherland's levels of cycling a safety where mobile phone use has actually been banned.

 

[Sixmile]

I think you will see a drop off in this soon. Report any you have any proof of and it's 6 points on their licence.

I ride with a fly6 on the rear and occasionally a fly12 on the front and they wouldn't pick up most phone use. Reporting anything to police without footage is a waste of time from experience.

 

[All uphill]

If hit by a car/bike you are correct.

But my experience as a pedestrian is that I am put at risk and have to take avoiding action FAR more times by cyclists than motor vehicle drivers

That avoiding action is most often necessary on pavements and on crossings where I have priority - often by cyclists riding one-handed with a mobile.

As I said above, and you chose to ignore:

So to those cyclists bleating the usual cyclist bleat "Cars are more dangerous than bikes".

Just STFU!

STFU = Stupendous Thanks For Upknowledging?