Saving Cyclists Lives

[My login is Henrietta]

Incidentally, regarding horses on the road, a former mounted policewoman (who is now a traffic cop) informs me that horses are on the road by ancient right, cars etc are on the road by licence and this still applies so motor vehicles should give way to horses. It's the "steam gives way to sail" principal.

Under common law, pedestrians, horse riders and carriage drivers have public user rights over the whole width of land designated a highway. Usually this is between the hedges and fences on either side of the carriageway and this area may include verges. These rights may, however, be restricted where limitations are imposed such as the provision of a footway, along which only pedestrians have user rights. This and other legal requirements effectively limit the width for vehicular users to the made-up carriageway, what we call the road. Horse riders can lawfully cross a footway, say at a road junction or verge-crossing, and ride along the verge at the back of a footway if it exists. There are exceptions to this, however; for example, if a Traffic Regulation Order or local bylaw exists specifically forbidding horse riders the use of the verge. You would know of such an Order by the display of signs indicating the ban.

However. it doesn't really matter who has precedence, or the right of way. As many road users have found to their cost over the years, it is all very well being right, but if the other person doesn't respect that you could find yourself being dead right.

[My login is Henrietta]

An interesting and revealing observation. So why is it that motorists seem to be more considerate to horse riders than they are to cyclists?

I've ridden horses on the roads for over 60 years until recently when a hip injury finished my riding days and I've driven a car ditto for 50 years and my father who was a keen cycling club member in his youth taught me how to drive when there are cylcists on the road so I know from whence I speak. I endeavour to give the same courtesy to cyclists when I'm driving as I do to horses. No-one knows better than driver/riders that cyclists need the same courteous and sensible precautions as horse-riders do.

However, while there are a few idiot horse-riders who don't think that the requirement for hi-viz clothing and a basic knowledge of the Highway Code applies to them, cyclists are not without blame. I drive along Glossop Road to Charlesworth several times a day, seven days a week and sometimes the behaviour of SOME cyclists is downright scary! (Incidentally, I know how dangerous the road is so I observe speed limits and road markings as a matter of course.)

Hi-viz clothing seems to be unknown among a certain type of cyclist while some others think a tiny reflective patch on the heel of their shoes or on the back of their helmets is sufficient. I've even come across a cyclist at night on an unlit part of the road dressed in dark clothing on a dark-coloured bike with no lights or hi-viz reflective clothing. S/he was lucky that night but I haven't seen him/her since......!

Horse riders are advised by the British Horse Society's "Riding Road Safety" training, to ride two abreast as they can more easily be seen. BUT they are expected to do so sensibly and not to cause an obstruction to other traffic and move to single file to allow vehicles to pass where there are double white lines. There is a group of cyclists (possibly a cycling club) which turns out regularly on Glossop Road. They ride two-abreast  - so far so good - but this involves them wavering about all over the road and causing what appears to be a deliberate obstruction.

There is also the cyclist who regularly tries to race my car when I'm trying to overtake him in a safe place!

Interestingly, the safest cyclists that I see on Glossop Road seem to be those using their bikes for transport rather than enjoyment.

[Dave]

Living on a fairly busy road in the area, horses seem to have become more common lately. It's startling to see motorists slowing to an absolute crawl behind them, waiting until it's absolutely, completely safe to do a full overtake into the opposite side of the road. The horse rider waves gladly. Then a person on a bicycle follows and gets skimmed less than a ruler width at 30mph+ by a motorist on a bend with poor visibility of oncoming traffic. They cling resolutely to the handlebars. If motorists could show the same level of respect to both, they might encounter fewer "defensive / selfish" cyclists, everyone might get along better, and people might just get where they're going in good time

An interesting and revealing observation. So why is it that motorists seem to be more considerate to horse riders than they are to cyclists?

[rsh]

Horse riders are generally very courteous to motorists - an example that some cyclists would do well to emulate.

Living on a fairly busy road in the area, horses seem to have become more common lately. It's startling to see motorists slowing to an absolute crawl behind them, waiting until it's absolutely, completely safe to do a full overtake into the opposite side of the road. The horse rider waves gladly. Then a person on a bicycle follows and gets skimmed less than a ruler width at 30mph+ by a motorist on a bend with poor visibility of oncoming traffic. They cling resolutely to the handlebars. If motorists could show the same level of respect to both, they might encounter fewer "defensive / selfish" cyclists, everyone might get along better, and people might just get where they're going in good time and alive.

By the way - I'll remember next time I'm crossing a busy road not to press the button and stop traffic, in case I "selfishly" hold up other people's fantastically important journeys by wanting to get from A to B myself safely! Same thing, isn't it?

Back to the petition - seems to be a great idea to me and ludicrously sad that people will overlook the inherent dangerous and outdated design of these kinds of vehicles for a cheap Daily Wail whinge. Those moaning that "cyclists shouldn't be undertaking them anyway" must be unaware of how often a large vehicle will start to overtake and then turn left across a cyclist, perhaps without even spotting them. When the vehicle is alongside a cyclist they've only a poor chance of seeing if it's indicating or not with the small side indicators at the front. With this idea they might be given valuable seconds to brake in time to let it pass and turn. Seems a minor but commendable improvement to genuinely save some pointless deaths.

[CTCREP]

We are now approaching 1000 views on this subject, OK some are repeat views but my statistics appear to show that probably less than 0.1% are willing to support a scheme that would probably cost the vehicle owners less than £50, certainly less than a tank of fuel, but could well save a cyclist's life.

You may well ask why haven't more cyclists signed. If you cycled you would know that for at least 50 years those in authority have failed to recognise cyclists needs. Cyclists have had to fend for themselves, so why bother with a petition to Parliament that you know is unlikely to go any further. If we are lucky it will be debated in Parliament, but unfortunately by people who do not understand cycling.

I give one simple example, a question was put to Parliament about how many cycle lanes there are in the country.  I think even motorists and pedestrians recognise that few if any are fit for purpose.  So what was the purpose of this question?  No doubt the politician will be able to say to the constituents that the question has been raised. The Governments answer was that they don't know as it is the responsibility of the Local Authorities, which the politician should have been questioning and with the right question. How many cycle lanes are there that meet the Traffic Regulation Orders  standards?  I can tell you, very few.

So back to the original subject. Please sign this petition below and probably save a cyclists life.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/123652

If you simply want to discuss road users behaviour then please start another post.

[Dave]

I did write that.  But I also wrote:

Vehicles should give cyclists and horses a wide berth.  They should not enter the 'bicycle box' at traffic lights. 

... because I am attempting (obviously unsuccessfully!) to describe examples of the kind of reciprocal courtesy and consideration which road users should show to one another, and indeed do, more often than not.  But in the rare cases when cyclists or horse riders deliberately prevent other road users from proceeding at their normal speed, when it is possible for then to avoid causing such an obstruction, that is neither courteous not considerate.

Or, to put it another way:   

Everybody agrees that the idiots should stop being idiots, regardless of what type of road user they are.

[marpleexile]

No. All road user need to give and take and that includes totally selfish cyclists who deliberately and unnecessarily obstruct motorists as well as selfish motorists who do not give cyclists sufficient room or consideration.

I think you missed my point rather. Everybody agrees that the idiots should stop being idiots, regardless of what type of road user they are.

Indeed.  This is what I have repeatedly said, but sadly these people are determined to cast them selves as victims, so they deliberately misinterpret what we say.  It's very strange.........

No you haven't Dave. You have specifically stated that in instances where all road users are being adversely affected by the same conditions (be that rush hour traffic or whatever) that motorists should have priority:

The slower road-users (horses, tractors, bicycles) should pull over and allow faster vehicles to pass if a queue builds up behind them

[Dave]

No. All road user need to give and take and that includes totally selfish cyclists who deliberately and unnecessarily obstruct motorists as well as selfish motorists who do not give cyclists sufficient room or consideration.

Indeed.  This is what I have repeatedly said, but sadly these people are determined to cast them selves as victims, so they deliberately misinterpret what we say.  It's very strange.........

[mikes]

Petition

Can I bring the subject back to its original purpose. I have created a Government Petition  that I believe could save cyclists lives.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/123652

The discussion on the behaviour of all road users is not the issue and would be better as another post.

At the moment we have had 593 readers, I don't have that many signatures.

Unless you have an objection to trying to save another human beings life, please sign the petition.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/123652

I will not sign this petition whilst stupid cyclists attempt to kill themselves through no fault of the drivers of vehicles turning left.  A few lights are not going to make a damn difference to these idiots who seem to think they own the road.

[Condate]

Gotcha, other road users give, and motorists take.

No. All road user need to give and take and that includes totally selfish cyclists who deliberately and unnecessarily obstruct motorists as well as selfish motorists who do not give cyclists sufficient room or consideration.

[wheels]

It's not complicated! It's simply known as give and take.  Vehicles should give cyclists and horses a wide berth.  They should not enter the 'bicycle box' at traffic lights.  Cars should allow buses to pull out of bus stops.  The slower road-users (horses, tractors, bicycles) should pull over and allow faster vehicles to pass if a queue builds up behind them.

It's called courtesy and consideration.   It's that simple.

All sounds a bit one way Dave.  Give and take seems to be all about the motorist taking.

[marpleexile]

It's not complicated! It's simply known as give and take.  Vehicles should give cyclists and horses a wide berth.  They should not enter the 'bicycle box' at traffic lights.  Cars should allow buses to pull out of bus stops.  The slower road-users (horses, tractors, bicycles) should pull over and allow faster vehicles to pass if a queue builds up behind them.

Gotcha, other road users give, and motorists take.

[Dave]

The question is, what happens in a situation where all the road users can't proceed safely at their own normal speed (such as rush hour traffic or narrow roads, etc, etc)? You appear to be saying (although I could have completely misunderstood what you mean) that in such circumstances, other road users (such as cyclists) should interrupt their own journey to allow motorists to "proceed at their own normal speed".

It's not complicated! It's simply known as give and take.  Vehicles should give cyclists and horses a wide berth.  They should not enter the 'bicycle box' at traffic lights.  Cars should allow buses to pull out of bus stops.  The slower road-users (horses, tractors, bicycles) should pull over and allow faster vehicles to pass if a queue builds up behind them.

It's called courtesy and consideration.   It's that simple. 

[marpleexile]

Unless you have an objection to trying to save another human beings life, please sign the petition.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/123652

I do have an objection to the nanny-fication of society though. Cycling up the blind side of a HGV is just stupid, even more so when approaching a junction. Anyone dumb enough to do it should be aware of what the consequences might be, and should be prepared to accept them.

On a practical point though, should your petition be successful it's likely to cause more problems than it solves as not every larger vehicle will have these lights fitted, but this solution encourages cyclists to go up the blind side unless they see side-lights flashing.

[marpleexile]

As the Highway Code says, 'It is important that all road users are considerate towards each other.' So as far as possible, each road user should allow others to proceed safely at their own normal speed.

Nobody is arguing with that.

The question is, what happens in a situation where all the road users can't proceed safely at their own normal speed (such as rush hour traffic or narrow roads, etc, etc)? You appear to be saying (although I could have completely misunderstood what you mean) that in such circumstances, other road users (such as cyclists) should interrupt their own journey to allow motorists to "proceed at their own normal speed".