Should a cyclist be allowed on the road

[hackbike 666]

My trigger finger is itchy but I just can't be bothered to go through the same routine again.

 

[slowmotion]

I'm all for the education of cyclists, but that can be by a whole load of means...YouTube, books, parental advice, voluntary cycling courses etc etc. What I am really opposed to is legal compunction.

No, I have no figures to back this up, but my guess is that very, very few cyclists ride in a reckless enough way to cause death or injury to motorists, pedestrians, or others. There will of course be some tragic events for which a cyclist is to blame. Not many though, in the scheme of things, perhaps? We may cause annoyance and frustration, but that is not yet illegal in any other aspect of social interaction yet, is it?

Legislation would be hugely expensive, as the posters above have pointed out, and totally unenforceable. Bike licenses, MOTs, insurance, SORN, blah blah blah, all administered by a load of "jobsworths". (Oh well, it is election week..sorry).

What next? How about the risky pursuit of walking on cliff-top paths? Do we need passes to do that? Do our boots need to be checked for sufficient rubber tread?

Just leave me alone, Big Brother...

 

[snorri]

Another thread that should be in Campaigning and Public Policy, this topic covers wider cycling interests than just Commuting. .

Regarding the suggestion, as others have said it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[hackbike 666]

Only on thing.....I've never thought of taking a video to a higher authority because I have been cut up on the pavement but another ped.

 

[Shut Up Legs]

I thought the testing period in aussie was really long, don't you have to log a certain amount of hours? compared to the UK you could get your license weeks after your 17 with very little driving experience.

I was referring to people's understanding of the road rules and the poor standard of testing to ensure this is the case, not the amount of time it takes to get a license. There are some so-called motorists out there with a very poor understanding of the road rules*. And don't get me started on their attitude (e.g. using mobile phones while driving, running red lights, etc.).

* ...and to be fair, numerous cyclists who also lack a good understanding of the road rules.

 

[Vikeonabike]

You lot must be 'kin joking!!! Cycling isn't dangerous,

You forget BM, we've seen your videos....scares the crap out of me.

 

[ufkacbln]

Only on thing.....I've never thought of taking a video to a higher authority because I have been cut up on the pavement but another ped.

I have!

We had a problem with a footpath where the parents used to just walk straight out without looking... we now have an interleaved barrier and "Beware Cyclist" signs.

 

[NigC]

You forget BM, we've seen your videos....scares the crap out of me.

Not just BM's videos - all of them scare the crap out of me

But what worries me the most is that anyone can take a bike onto the roads regardless of whether they have any knowledge of the HC or any roadsense whatsoever - I'm scared for their safety, as well as mine as a relatively experienced cyclist.

 

[Mark_Robson]

You lot must be 'kin joking!!! Cycling isn't dangerous, and it's defo not dangerous to other-than-cyclists. The more cyclists you have out there the more safe it becomes for everyone. Enforced licensing and training is a load of bawlocks, because the net result is that it'll be less safe for everyone, I suspect.

Mike I would be interested in understanding what your concept of danger is?
And why would training make cyclists less safe? I see you "educating" RLJ cyclists all the time, would training not help educate them also? How many times have we read gripes about POB's? and how many times have we read that reading Cyclecraft would make POB's better cyclists?

IMO I don't think that mandatory training would be realistic or enforcible unless you made it impossible to buy a bike without having some kind of cycling licence first. I would like to see more free voluntary training schemes advertised though as that can only be a good thing.

 

[Browser]

For their own safety, repeat for their own safety, I believe it would benefit a great many cyclists to have to undertake some sort of formal training before riding. I believe it would lead to less pavement riding as the perceived danger of riding on the road would be put into perspective, and woudl hopefully encourage more people to ride more often.
How you would administer, fund and police such a scheme, I wouldn't like to try and think about.
Hand in hand with thism, though, should go better education of all motorists about the correct way to behave whilst driving when one encounters a cyclist.

 

[NigC]

• A relative of mine drove into the path of a paramedic on Saturday, causing an accident, because she didn't understand what the diamond hatching at junctions means. She's been driving for 30 years.
  
• I sometimes get shouted at by drivers for driving in a local bus lane during its inactive period, because drivers don't read road signs.
  
• When I'm cut up and challenge the driver, I'm met with a blank look or indignance when I ask them what the HC says about passing cyclists.

3 quick examples. Where's the training need?

Drivers need a LOT more training with respect to dealing with cyclists - I started a thread on that a while ago and got my typing fingers well and truly burnt

But this thread is about cyclists, which I also believe need at LEAST a basic level of competence before being allowed to use the roads. Besides, if all cyclists were competent road users, maybe drivers would see them in a different light and attitudes may change

 

[AndyCarolan]

I think that any form of mandatory training (even though I believe basic training) would deter many from cycling in much the same way as mandatory helmet use would likely have the same effect.

Personally, I believe that anything that improves conditions on the road is a good idea, but I think one of the first steps should simply be a more active policy of cycle awareness aimed at ALL road users.

 

[Vikeonabike]

Besides, if all cyclists were competent road users, maybe drivers would see them in a different light and attitudes may change

If all road users were cyclists first, then their attitudes may be different.

A 16 yr old can get a license to ride a 50cc scooter on the back of a days training and a theory test. Plenty of cyclists can almost match the speed of a scooter yet we do not need to pass a test on the road.
Granted a cyclist travelling at speed is not quite as dangerous as a scooter, etc.
Most people see a collision as purely A being hit by B because of a mistake by either. A huge number of these collisions are caused by A hitting B who was avoiding C, who drives/rides/cycles off into the distances none the wiser.


As most people will learn to drive at some point in their life why not issue every person a "Road" License at the age of 16. They should have to take a Highway Code Theory Test and Bikeability test to be on the road on a pedal cycle. This would be a pre requisite to taking your driving test (unless physically incapable of riding a bike)

The point here is, if as cyclists they break the law there is the possibility of getting points, which may then delay them in getting a scooter or car license.
It would also act as deterrent to cyclist who regularly RLJ, ride up one way streets etc.

Now I have to admit, this is not going to happen in a month of Sundays, but the benefits to Road safety would be

 

[NigC]

As most people will learn to drive at some point in their life why not issue every person a "Road" License at the age of 16. They should have to take a Highway Code Theory Test and Bikeability test to be on the road on a pedal cycle. This would be a pre requisite to taking your driving test (unless physically incapable of riding a bike)

I can see where you're going with this and I think the idea, in thory, is very good.

Of course, as you say, it's never going to happen. For one thing: how many school kids who cycle to school right now are under the age of 16? I know they will most likely have taken the Bikeability course, but not necessarily and taking the course does not necessarily mean they actually learnt anything.

In the real world, it's never going to happen, but that doesn't mean the idea isn't a good one.

 

[XmisterIS]

It's a good idea, but how can you enforce it? A bike isn't a vehicle (according to the law) and anyone can get on one and just start pedalling! Driving a motor vehicle is somewhat more involved.