Chief Constable Nick Gargan (Ed: Oh, hai!) has floated the idea of giving police community support officers the power to fine cyclists who ride in the dark without lights.What a splendid idea! Who could possibly disagree? They are endangering themselves and also other road users.
Oh. Wait!
But the idea has not gone down well with some cyclists.And I bet I know just which sort. As does Tom Paine.
Bristol Cycling Campaign told him that "effort should be on reducing collisions and injury to cyclists with more prosecutions for bad driving".Or, to translate: “Look, everyone knows it's only motorists who are ever at fault, so we'll carry on wearing dark clothing and weaving in front of large metal vehicles with complete impunity, so there!”
Councillor Mark Bradshaw, Bristol's transport leader, said that although he supports penalty notices for cyclists, he believes the fine should be rescinded if lights are then bought and fitted.Why? If I’m fined for a dodgy exhaust I don’t get my fine rescinded. Nor if, after tearing through a built up area at 100mph, I then drive sedately for the next 100 miles.
Why should cyclists be treated with such deference and leniency? Because they are 'saving the planet'? Sod that!
Secretary Martin McDonnel said he thinks police should instead be looking more at motorists parking in or obstructing cycle lanes.Why can’t they do both? Both are, after all, an equal nuisance and a danger….
There used to be a thing called a "seven day rectification notice" handed out for stuff like dodgy exhausts etc.
ReplyDeleteYou got 7 days to fix and have checked by the police and then no fine. Not sure if it is still in existence but if so, no reason cyclists shouldn't have the same
Cyclists respond badly to criticism?
ReplyDeleteHow can you possibly say that?
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/features/fairpoint/10800707.Cyclists_are_a_nuisance_on_the_road/?ref=mr
Stonyground says:
ReplyDeleteSome cyclists do have lights on their bikes and ride properly, just saying.
No lights?
ReplyDeleteAt night?
Take 'em out.
One less.
Bunny
ReplyDeleteIf I road without lights on my bike, which I have in the past due to not being properly prepared I should take the consequences of my actions. If it is a fine given by a plastic policeman, then I would have got off lightly, had I been run over by an articulated lorry, then that would have been my own bloody fault.
Gosh. Nick 'too busy to oust dangerously lazy plod' Gargan? The same Chief Constable who steadfastly refuses to name his officers who were recently convicted for crimes which a senior policeman admits were "appalling"?
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Mr Gargan's work schedule is impressive. How many CC's can find the time to present first-aid certificates, belittle the Crime Commissioner, harass cyclists and post tweets every day, Julia?
And no policeman has done more to maximise and accelerate a super pay-off with Platinum Pension.
I thought that riding a bicycle after dark without lights was still an offence, as is riding on the pavement (see highway code).
ReplyDeleteIt appears now that cyclists are 'green' thus cannot ever be in the wrong.
Ex cyclist
Rightwinggit +1
ReplyDeleteTell them Darwin sent you.
There's nothing for it - cyclists should be forced to wear swivelling, helmet-mounted cameras, as are currently being proposed for our feral police officers by the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe.
ReplyDeleteIt's the only way to keep the buggers in check.
Only yesterday I was almost knocked down on a pedestrian crossing in the dark by a cyclist in dark clothing with no lights on his bike. Sitting at the red light on my bus last night at one of the most dangerous roundabouts in London - one that I negotiate with great care and apprehension when driving - an unlit cyclist shot straight out into traffic.
ReplyDeleteI am sure both gentlemen would say they had clearly evaluated the situation and were safer than they would have been if they had waited to set off with other traffic, but what would Plod say to me if I made the same evaluation when driving my Ferrari?
I accept without reservation the need to treat vulnerable cyclists with care when driving. Indeed don't want to hurt any other road user - I just want to arrive safely. I accept the Highway Code requirement to treat them as any other vehicles when overtaking. But I expect cyclists to comply with the code too and neither to swap between vehicular, pedestrian and mad bastard modes at will, nor to go unlit at night.
There's nothing wrong with cyclists but I am sick to death of the holier-than-thou, I'm saving the planet mate so get out of my way arrogance of the militant among them.
Fine cyclists who ride without lights at night? What a marvellous, wonderful idea; get on with it!
ReplyDeleteI drive a car, and ride bikes. As the former, I'd very much prefer if cyclists would make my life a lot easier and use decent lights. As the latter, I try my very best to be very, very visible.
So, one Cateye rear light (powerful red flashy thing), one Glo-Toob (omni-directional red flashy thing), one Respro UK reflective harness (Lime green reflective and hideously eye-catching thing), reflective ankle bands and a Cateye front light. Oh, and an amber flashy thing on a wristband, for when I'm turning right in traffic.
That's about £100 just in reflective and light-emitting flashing things. It works, too; turn that lot on and drivers can see you from way back; I use it a great deal of the time; at night obviously, when the sun is low in the sky, and even just on dull, murky days. The batteries cost next to nothing, so better to have it and use it, than to have it and need it.
So, by all means prosecute the lightless morons; the daft gits deserve it!
One thing that never seems to be mentioned when it comes to the problems of cyclists using roads and pavements. That is neither were designed with them in mind. In hindsight maybe they should have been but even so would that have made a difference as the cost of doing so would in all probability have been prohibitive and in many cases impracticable and provision for cyclists would still not have been included. Roads are for fast hard material clad motor vehicles and pavements for slow moving lightly clad pedestrians. The using of bicycles on both road and pavement is incongruous and incompatible as they are highly vulnerable on the one and dangerous on the other. So until some means is found so that cyclists can get from a to b without using roads or pavements they should get off them and either walk or go by motorized transport. If they do not wish to do that then I suggest they do not use pavements at all, obey the highway code, act with humility instead of arrogance accept that they will be punished with the full weight of the law for any transgressions like other road users are. They should also accept that the major onus for their safety if they feel impelled to continue to use them in inappropriate places such as roads rests with them.
ReplyDeleteOne way of dealing with this is to issue the Police and CSOs with a set of metal cutters so when they happen across a cyclist at night without lights they then chop the bike frame in two followed by "Try riding that, now. You have a nice day." I am sure that after a while, the message would get through.
ReplyDeletePenseivat
"Not sure if it is still in existence but if so, no reason cyclists shouldn't have the same"
ReplyDeleteGood point. Does anyone know? Have we slipped into the inevitability of automatic fines?
"Cyclists respond badly to criticism?
How can you possibly say that?"
Heh! Light blue touchpaper...
"Some cyclists do have lights on their bikes and ride properly, just saying."
Yes, they do. But seem to be outnumbered by those who don't, sadly.
"It appears now that cyclists are 'green' thus cannot ever be in the wrong."
Spot on!
"There's nothing wrong with cyclists but I am sick to death of the holier-than-thou, I'm saving the planet mate so get out of my way arrogance of the militant among them."
ReplyDeleteAmen! And it's never that sort that end up under the wheels of a tipper truck, is it? It's their naive followers.
In that way, it's just like any other religion..
"That's about £100 just in reflective and light-emitting flashing things."
Given how much all the other kits costs these days, it's a good investment!
"They should also accept that the major onus for their safety if they feel impelled to continue to use them in inappropriate places such as roads rests with them."
But they never, ever will...
"I am sure that after a while, the message would get through."
As someone who'd be equally happy to see unlicensed, uninsured drivers surrender their cars to immediate crushing (second offence, to be inside 'em) I applaud this!