To be fair, I have no problem with the law being improved to deal with errant or irresponsible cyclists, if current law isn't effective. I think there is some merit in the argument for third party insurance, although how you enforce it, is another matter. I have insurance via membership of Cycling UK, but I don't fancy wearing a sandwich board with number plates either side (how else would they be displayed?) and the cyclist road tax argument is easily knocked back.
However, the Daily Heil's grossly unbalanced, sensationalist line gets on my wick.
A stereotypical anti-cycling bullet often fired our way is that "they all ignore red lights" but as I said to a non-cyclist mate who recently complained to me about this, my belief is that it's the minority getting the majority a bad name, I don't RLJ, but in any event if you have ever jumped a red light whilst driving a car, or exceeded the speed limit, failed to conform to a traffic sign, parked on the pavement, or driven after consuming alcohol even within the legal limit, you are taking a far greater risk with the safety of others than a cyclist doing the same, so wind your neck in and get a bit of proportion please. He took a sip of his pint, looked at me, and said, "fair point".
