Changing cycling rules of the road

[GrumpyGregry]

I think the KSI rate for Paris is comparable when you look at per mile traveled. The boast that Paris had no cyclist fatalities was based on a very small area.

roughly equivalent to London Zones 1 + 2 no? population of around 2 million?

 

[mjr]

roughly equivalent to London Zones 1 + 2 no? population of around 2 million?

Even if so, London zones 1+2 can't claim no fatalities

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Even if so, London zones 1+2 can't claim no fatalities

I don't ride there regularly anymore and when I did (mid- late-90's, & a short spell in 00's, cycling was an eccentric way to travel)

But I wonder if left turn on red were to be introduced in 'central' how long it would be

a) before a cyclist turning left got wiped out by a speeding motor vehicle on green
-&-
b) before a pedestrian gets badly hurt by a cyclist who turns left without taking appropriate care (given the % that scatter pedestrians on light-controlled crossings today)

 

[jonny jeez]

Why, as in "on what justification", should people who ride bikes be singled out, or held to higher standards of behaviour, and, in particular, enforcement and sanction than other people who use the roads? Especially those other road users who represent significantly greater risks?

Well, the OP wasn't singling anyone out...just suggesting some rules to aid or provide greater convenience for cyclists...but this isn't really the point.

The question you asked was do car drivers stick to 30MPH, well no, we know they don't. But that doesn't mean we should not live by the rules. Whether a car is more dangerous, or a cyclist is more at risk isn't relevant to the OP, or to the following of rules...sure its relevant to general safety and road use...but the OP wasn't commenting on this.

hence my question which I appreciate may appear like I'm being arsey, trust me I'm not...I'm just making a distinction that I don't consider it relevant.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Well, the OP wasn't singling anyone out...just suggesting some rules to aid or provide greater convenience for cyclists...but this isn't really the point.

The question you asked was do car drivers stick to 30MPH, well no, we know they don't. But that doesn't mean we should not live by the rules. Whether a car is more dangerous, or a cyclist is more at risk isn't relevant to the OP, or to the following of rules...sure its relevant to general safety and road use...but the OP wasn't commenting on this.

hence my question which I appreciate may appear like I'm being arsey, trust me I'm not...I'm just making a distinction that I don't consider it relevant.

Not taking it as you being arsey else I'd not bother replying.

I wasn't replying to the OP's post. I was replying to post #2. Hence I quoted post #2 in my reply. The same post #2 that you've given a 'like' to. The same post #2 that I think is tosh. The same post #2 that favours some sort of enforcement clampdown on people who ride bikes. And would appear to prioritise this over some sort of enforcement clampdown on those who represent an greater risk. And suggests that because some people on bikes behave badly nothing should be done for the other people on bikes who behave well because, as is well known in motoring circles "all you cyclists are the ruddy same".

Which is an interesting position to take, for someone in a cycling forum!

 

[benb]

suggests, to me, and I may be wrong, that Paris was already a safer environment in which to cycle that, say, London was/is.

Possibly, although as others have said, cycling rates in Paris aren't spectacular. But at least they are trying really hard to put in proper cycle lanes everywhere. When I cycled there, I found most drivers were OK, but they are very intolerant of taking primary - I got beeped at several times.

In any case, whether Paris was already a safe environment to cycle or not in has no relevance to whether allowing cyclists to go through reds would work in the UK.

 

[Dan B]

In any case, whether Paris was already a safe environment to cycle or not in has no relevance to whether allowing cyclists to go through reds would work in the UK.

Is this a variant of the "it wouldn't work here because we're not Amsterdam" argument, or something else?

 

[martint235]

Possibly, although as others have said, cycling rates in Paris aren't spectacular. But at least they are trying really hard to put in proper cycle lanes everywhere. When I cycled there, I found most drivers were OK, but they are very intolerant of taking primary - I got beeped at several times.

In any case, whether Paris was already a safe environment to cycle or not in has no relevance to whether allowing cyclists to go through reds would work in the UK.

Was this because you were in primary though or because your average French driver thinks the horn button is what makes the engine go?

 

[benb]

Was this because you were in primary though or because your average French driver thinks the horn button is what makes the engine go?

I couldn't say, I don't speak forrin.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Is this a variant of the "it wouldn't work here because we're not Amsterdam" argument, or something else?

I was looking for a reason why it has worked in Paris....

It hasn't been adopted nationally in France though has it? No idea what to make of that.

 

[benb]

I was looking for a reason why it has worked in Paris....

It hasn't been adopted nationally in France though has it? No idea what to make of that.

No, but it's only been in Paris for less than a year I think, so maybe they'll expand it.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Because in Paris people who ride bikes are respected and the city had stunningly low KSI figures before the change?

I find this a bit hard to believe.

I've never cycled in Paris, but I have worked there, and "respect" just isn't something that Parisians tend to do to anyone.

Of course you can refrain from killing someone without respecting them.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I find this a bit hard to believe.

I've never cycled in Paris, but I have worked there, and "respect" just isn't something that Parisians tend to do to anyone.

Of course you can refrain from killing someone without respecting them.

Having cycled and worked there I know where you are coming from.

 

[jonny jeez]

You continue to miss the point. No one is saying that, because car drivers speed we should jump red lights. The objection is to drago's assertion that, because less than 100% of cyclists behave perfectly less than 100% of the time, cyclists shouldn't be given any new laws that might make life easier. The drivers speeding was to illustrate that singling out cyclists was not especially reasonable.

I'm not missing the point Adrian...i am disagreeing with it.

 

[Markymark]

So, in the planners office....

Cyclists sometimes break laws so they should not get anything new to help them along.

Cars break lots of laws and kill lots of people but lets build them all sorts of things to make their journeys quicker and easier.