improving roads for cyclists?

[Mrklaw]

I was wondering over recent dates whether it would make sense to adjust some of the ways road traffic rules work to help cyclists. It was partly spurred on by seeing a cycle level traffic light that turned green a few seconds before the main traffic lights, allowing cyclists to clear the junction which is good for them and also good for the traffic.

So here are a few things I though might help:

1) more traffic lights with cyclist priority. Especially on roads with quiet ways etc. Cycle level lights that release cyclists a few seconds early
2) where there are ‘all stop’ crossroads where all traffic is stopped to allow pedestrians to cross - allow cyclist to proceed with caution if it is clear. Effectively like a flashing amber for cyclists only
3) turn left on red. If it is safe to do so, allow cyclists to turn left on a red signal. This will help them clear junctions, also helping to keep the traffic behind moving without delay and potentially reducing risk of being swiped by left turning vehicles.

What do you think? Any other suggestions that would help cyclists keep safe?

 

[sheddy]

Presumed Liability ?

 

[Sharky]

I would like to make hedge rows/trees that grow out over the road illegal. On some roads round here, the trees/hedges hang more than a metre over the road, particularly at a cyclists head height, forcing cyclist still further out into the line that cars take.

 

[Debade]

Idaho Stop - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

 

[Drago]

Banning motor vehicles.

 

[snorri]

What do you think? Any other suggestions that would help cyclists keep safe?

Sign up to your local cycle campaign group and play an active role in having conditions improved for cyclists in your locality.

 

[slowmotion]

Ride on the roads like other vehicles.

Don't wish for cyclist ghettos.

 

[Profpointy]

As sheddy above mentioned, presumed liability could / would make a huge improvement to cyclist and especially pedestrian safety.

The other huge improvmen t would be to get rid of 90% or more cycling lanes

 

[Slick]

I like the left turn on red thing. I've driven a number of times in America and gave seen it working well, although obviously it's right turn for them. I think it could work well here for everyone.

 

[Drago]

Sign up to your local cycle campaign group and play an active role in having conditions improved for cyclists in your locality.

That's good advice, although many local groups have stepped beyond the event horizon into slavering looniness and associating with them will do nothing more productive than waste your time. Scope them out to be sure they're a sensible bunch before donning you're kagoule.

 

[Drago]

T'was briefly mention on the news yeeterday, the AA have come up with the idea thwt drifwrs daught using their mobile phones should have the phones crushed.

Not bad, but I reckon crushing their cars would be an even bigger deterrent.

Make all traffic offences come with an automatic ban. 14 days for the very minor, right through to lifetime bans for drivers who kill and for drink/drug drivers. Confiscate their cars while they serve the ban.

Mandatory GPS or roadsign recognition speed enforcement.

Get rid of the hardship argument in court. If you're going to be that much in the mire you shouldn't have committed the offence in the first place.

Hire a load of roads policing officers, and introduce legislation that prevents them being dragged away to backfill other police posts.

 

[mjr]

As sheddy above mentioned, presumed liability could / would make a huge improvement to cyclist and especially pedestrian safety.

The other huge improvmen t would be to get rid of 90% or more cycling lanes

I don't think presumed liability would change that much while most drivers think they won't be caught, or if caught not blamed because it was only a cyclist. Other changes and official positions that cyclists help us all rather than being contemptible scum would do more.

I'd also require all cycle lanes to be upgraded to a minimum spec rather than removed, so we get more bicycle streets and fewer gutter lanes. Most paint+signs footway conversions can go die, though.

 

[Drago]

Presumed liability in (Denmark, can't remember where now?) Is being challenged in court. Presumption of guilt is counter to be the domestic law of than nation, and the ECHR Article 7.

Presumption of guilt is counter to domestic UK law, going right back to common law and time immemorial, so can never be introduced here.

 

[mjr]

Presumed liability in (Denmark, can't remember where now?) Is being challenged in court. Presumption of guilt is counter to be the domestic law of than nation, and the ECHR Article 7.

Presumption of guilt is counter to domestic UK law, going right back to common law and time immemorial, so can never be introduced here.

Guilt is criminal law. Liability is civil law. They're different things. I shouldn't need to explain this to ex-police. And because of this, I expect those challenging presumed liability in Denmark or wherever to lose.

You can't help start with some presumption of liability. At the moment, it starts with a presumption near 50-50, which is demonstrably on average unfair to cyclists. Rebalancing that seems a good idea to me, even if I don't think it'll produce the culture change that some think.

 

[Drago]

Guilt of a criminal offence, e.g., dangerous driving and squaring a cyclist, is criminal law. As is careless. As is infringement of any regulation under the RTA that leads to a collision. The police deal, and ultimately a court of law decides.

Minor knocks and scrapes is tough sheet either way civil law as you saw. Petty solicitors deal, charging each other making loads of cash, often more than the victim receives. That's my insurers problem, not mine. Presumed liability is counter to all law in the UK as it stands - if parties can not decide on a question of civil law only a court can adjudicate on liability. There is no mechanism or convention that exists in UK law criminal or civil legislation that automatically apportions liability for loss - only a cort can do so. Without massive changes to all sorts of legislation it can never be introduced here, and never will. I souldnt have to be explaining that to a civilian now, should I?

Article 7 makes no distinction in the nature of legislation.