A very interesting couple of links. A few thoughts:
- "heated debate" - really? I thought it was quite disappointingly calm.
- The fat comments - these aren't helpful. The guy's fat. He probably doesn't get a lot of exercise. He may benefit from going on a bike. But, with respect, the comments are unhelpful and we can do much better.
- Accountability. I do see his argument here. As cyclists, we are not required to have insurance, and so (and I don't understand the technicalities) if I'm on the road and I scratch someone's car or someone on a bike collides with me, then there should be some mechanism for dealing with this (small claims?). Many of you on here have insurance, and that's probably a good idea, but I would be concerned if some cyclist without insurance collided with me and refused to pay - I wouldn't really know how this is dealt with?
- Cost/Complexity. The lady on the video made a good point, relating to the above. I have to admit that some sort of proficiency test, license, insurance, and thorough policing makes sense to me. I would feel that this way, cyclists on the road have had proper training and that those who RLJ and break the law would be caught up with sooner or later. Recently, I felt that I didn't know what I was doing on the road on a bike (even though I drive), and so I read CycleCraft and took part in adult cycle training - and would highly recommend it. Sometimes I wonder if some of these people who are seen doing the wrong things just don't understand that they are wrong. However, the lady made an excellent point that all of the above costs money and would deter people from taking up an activity that we really need to be encouraging. What a dilemma!
- Changing of Training. The chap's arguments about cycling proficiency suggest to me that what is being taught has changed - I'll suggest without facts that it's gone from 30-40 years ago where cyclists should be keeping out of cars' ways, to todays 'defensive cycling' where you should be in the middle of the lane, owning your lane whilst you perform your maneuver. A lot of the videos on here with confrontations with drivers show me that drivers don't really understand this modern training, and most of their arguments seem to come from a basis of them not understanding what is safe for the cyclist. I wonder how we could better educate them? I've heard ad campaigns mentioned, but they're expensive. Perhaps if the drivers knew why a cyclist was cycling in a proper way, they'd be more understanding - not "what's this guy in the centre of the road for" but "oh, he's in the centre of the road because he's turning, fair play".
- Duty of care depending on risk. I'd not heard this argument before, but it's a good one.
- Car drivers not wanting to death of a cyclist on their hands. I felt this was a good point and not one that I'd considered. Regardless of who is at fault, I've always a tendency to think about the cyclist (who often comes off much worse), but I guess it's very traumatic for the car driver too.
- Infrastructure. The guy said he wanted more money spend on infrastructure. I suspect he means segregated cycle paths to free up the roads for cars, but it'd be interesting to clarify this with him.
- Tarring all cyclists with the same brush - I think this was a cheap shot by the guy, as well as him accusing the guy of laughing about cyclists not following the highway code. He could be being deliberately misleading, or he could have a genuine misunderstanding of current cycling techniques. I think the lady defended this pretty well, but could perhaps have been stronger in saying how cyclists (like us) who try to follow all the rules are appauled and irritated by those that don't probably as much as drivers are.
Phew. Enough rambling. Just my thoughts.
