Essex police: If cyclists were more safety-conscious they wouldn’t get killed

Over 80% of incidents involving cyclsits are not the fault of the rider. Those are the DfT's own statistics. It sounds like the Essex police haven't bothered to read any recent crash data analysis and have stuck with the Daily Mail approach instead.

Dear commissioner,
I am dismayed and infuriated by the ill informed comments of PC Deborah Gray and utter waste of precious police resources by Essex Police to penalize cyclists in Chelsmford conducting Operation Blue nose. The current government is spending millions of pounds encouraging people to be more active and reduce emissions which have a beneficial effect on the environment and the economy and positively promote the use of the cycle to commute to work, so why oh why are Essex police targeting the cyclist? A cynic would say they are an easy target as opposed to targeting the increasingly aggressive driving manner of many motorists.
I have a few basic questions for you to consider?
How many times has a cyclist killed a motorist or pedestrian in the last 12 months in Essex?
now reverse the question;
How many times has a motorist killed a cyclist or pedestrian in the last 12 months in Essex?
The ignorance surrounding the road safety advice regarding helmets is astounding, are you aware of the 2006 study by Dr Ian Walker from the University of Bath found that drivers passed closer to cyclists wearing a helmet when overtaking than they did to those without them. The driver's subconscious sees them as less vulnerable and therefore less worthy of a wide berth.
I'm sure someone some where had good intentions but this smacks as a victim blaming culture, akin to telling people to not smoke or drink. The police should stick to enforcing the law and not nannying the community they serve. Put simply it isn't there job. There may be a perceived risk but people are not breaking the law by not wearing a helmet, the benefits to the nation and the individual massively out weigh the risks, I could quote a ton of statistics at you to support this but I'm sure you are already aware. The police are on very dodgy ground. To the community it feels like a form of harassment, whatever next advising fat people to lose weight?

I like the building site analogy. But they should take it seriously.

* Dangerous machinery would be properly risk assessed.
* Lorries couldn't move without a banksman checking the blindspot.
* If there's an injury or death, it gets properly investigated, those responsible are at least fined, and recommendations on avoiding the accident feed back into best practice.

Which is pretty much the opposite of what happens on the roads.

So, yes, treat roads like building sites for a while.

The Filth at their finest. Bunch of losers. They did absolutely nothing when I was knocked off and left for dead. Most of them are thick arrogant over weight slobs who could do with riding a bike themselves at rush hour on a busy road when it's peeing with rain.

Far more pedestrians and motorists get fatal or life-changing head injuries per mile travelled in towns than cyclists do. Why aren't people up in arms about them choosing not to wear helmets? If it's a sensible suggestion that cyclists should be required to wear helmets then, given the huge quantity of evidence, it must be even more sensible that drivers and pedestrians should too?

In fact why stop there? If everyone not driving a motor vehicle was required to be cocooned in a three foot thick layer of bubble wrap then drivers could presumably just do away with the pesky "awareness" obligation that comes with piloting a few tons of metal around the place and instead just keep their eyes on more important stuff like their mobile phone/lunch/makeup/whatever.

"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" ... translation: "Sorry mate, I wasn't looking".

Around 90 cyclists were stopped in Chelmsford on Friday and police had previously stopped around 120 in Basildon.

Sgt Freeman said: “About 50 per cent had no lights and were given verbal warnings. About 50 per cent had no reflective clothing and 75 per cent had no cycle helmet.”............................................................

Well Sergeant Freeman how were you ever promoted?
Police are supposed to work with facts and all your quotes above are, "Around" 90 cycles stopped "about" 50 % and so on.

Surely you are educated enough to give a factual report after all "around" 90 cycles is not a lot. Perhaps you did not have enough fingers and toes. Or are you rather over egging the pudding to make you operation look good for all those above you who are only interested in figures.

Facts please

As an Essex resident I am not happy with the quotes from these officers. One of the challenges we all face is that "cyclists" like "motorists" are treated as one homogeneous mob. The reality is that we are all different.

There is an issue in Essex with some cyclists (as there is with some motorists); but not one's like me! In the area I live I regularly see teenagers and people of all ages riding bikes, in the dark on the road, with no lights, no bright clothing and of course they have chosen not to wear a helmet (although remarkably many of the adults do!). This is a problem of education that needs to be addressed with police enforcement backing it up.

I dread the day that I fail to spot one of these idiots as they bunny hop off the pavement, across the road and my car sends them of to collect their Darwin award. If it does happen I'll be the one having to live with it.

It should be born in mind that (as with most of the UK) Essex hates spending money on children and youth services (they actually hate children basically; Southend is different). Therefore it is cheaper to let the police "educate" rather than running an extensive program of training courses.

Needs to be a difference made between 'cyclists' and 'people who happen to be on a bike'.

It's normally the latter who have no lights, no helmet etc. (hi-vi stuff is largely irrelevant if you're lit up enough anyway).

Oh look, bike snobbery is even prevalent among bike riders it seems.

If Essex police actually bothered to stop dangerous driving in their county, fewer cyclists would get killed there.

Quote:

I saw 3 ninja cyclists riding home tonight wearing stealth black and with no lights.

Does anyone else's irony detector go off when they read comments like this? Just me?

usual police nonsense, blame it on not being able to see the cyclist, of course ....

In the past I was a regular cyclist in Bristol, on ordinary roads. (I now need a van to transport my tools & equipment)

I have had a number of accidents where I have fallen at high speeds over the years, but never once hit my head. Yes, I received minor cuts & bruises, scraped elbows, etc, but never any serious injuries, despite most of these occurring in the presence of motor vehicles.

I was knocked off my bike by a tanker within weeks of arriving in the city to start work, and all that was damaged was my bike. He thought he could get past me before the road narrowed - he underestimated my speed!

I have been knocked off my bike by a car driver who was distracted at a roundabout, all I suffered was a dislocation of my colarbone. (I was wearing brightly-coloured lycra at the time, but he still didn't see me, even though I know he was looking in my direction!)

I rode into the side of a car that appeared from nowhere at a difficult junction - and received a bruised a finger & friction burn, whilst causing over £1000 damage to the car!

It isn't about making cyclists more responsible for their own safety, it's about making drivers more aware. And until the penalties they face are more realistic they really don't need to do so. The CPS is reluctant to prosecute for "Dangerous Driving", preferring the easier-to-prove "Careless Driving" charge - which unfortunately has a much lower tariff, one which really isn't much of a deterrent to your average driver.

Only when the penalties for causing death by driving in any form are made high enough to provide a true deterrent will we see drivers taking the care they should when in the presence of cyclists. (It's a bit like the suggestion that all cars shold be fitted with a spike in the middle of the steering wheel. If they were all drivers would be far more careful to avoid accidents!) Apparently we all drive to "a perceived level of danger" - there is no real danger to car drivers from cyclists, either from the accident itself or the consequences, so they can, in effect, ignore them.

In the past I was a regular cyclist in Bristol, on ordinary roads. (I now need a van to transport my tools & equipment)

I have had a number of accidents where I have fallen at high speeds over the years, but never once hit my head. Yes, I received minor cuts & bruises, scraped elbows, etc, but never any serious injuries, despite most of these occurring in the presence of motor vehicles.

I was knocked off my bike by a tanker within weeks of arriving in the city to start work, and all that was damaged was my bike. He thought he could get past me before the road narrowed - he underestimated my speed!

I have been knocked off my bike by a car driver who was distracted at a roundabout, all I suffered was a dislocation of my colarbone. (I was wearing brightly-coloured lycra at the time, but he still didn't see me, even though I know he was looking in my direction!)

I rode into the side of a car that appeared from nowhere at a difficult junction - and received a bruised a finger & friction burn, whilst causing over £1000 damage to the car!

It isn't about making cyclists more responsible for their own safety, it's about making drivers more aware. And until the penalties they face are more realistic they really don't need to do so. The CPS is reluctant to prosecute for "Dangerous Driving", preferring the easier-to-prove "Careless Driving" charge - which unfortunately has a much lower tariff, one which really isn't much of a deterrent to your average driver.

Only when the penalties for causing death by driving in any form are made high enough to provide a true deterrent will we see drivers taking the care they should when in the presence of cyclists. (It's a bit like the suggestion that all cars shold be fitted with a spike in the middle of the steering wheel. If they were all drivers would be far more careful to avoid accidents!) Apparently we all drive to "a perceived level of danger" - there is no real danger to car drivers from cyclists, either from the accident itself or the consequences, so they can, in effect, ignore them.

Isn't it the job of the police to catch criminals and prevent crime?

How many of those cyclists stopped were criminal, or were likely to cause a crime to happen?

How many reports of dangerous driving (which is a crime under the RTA) do the police follow up or investigate?

Does someone see a disjoint here?

Imagine if there was an increase in sexual attacks on women in Essex. Instead of investigating the attacks the police response is to stop women and offer them advice on what to wear.

Police are currently part of the problem not the solution.

My initial reaction was WTF, but I assume what the police are saying is use common sense. The problem is I fail to see what this will achieve as if you had common sense you would not be in this category anyway. For instance, the idiot this morning riding at 7.30, poor light, rush hour on the a30, a fast single lane, no lights and his 'hi vis' jacket obscured by his low vis rucksack.

Wearing black is fine, but add some reflective elements and decent lights.

There there is the road safety aspect. Fellow cyclists, stop jumping or riding through red lights, no need what so ever.

I do wonder whether this attitude had anything to do with the failure to prosecute the driver who knocked me off at a roundabout in Essex (just...) last June.

We all hate the cycling ninjas. Because they give us a bad name. But, as said, cycling without a helmet is not illegal. Cycling without hi-vis is not illegal. How about the police actually follow up on things that actually are illegal?

“Men do generally not like to wear helmets. I have been to many accidents where cyclists have got head injuries. They can be pretty serious injuries.”

I'm sure he's also been to plenty of accidents where drivers have got pretty serious head injuries, not sure why cyclists should be a special case here.

Fair point, it does seem to be something of a losing battle.

Much like oozaveared who I quoted, I'm a daily rush-hour commuter across a town that doesn't have a massive cycling population (i.e. drivers don't necessarily expect to see cyclists about), so I do what I can to stay visible purely in the interests of self-preservation!

My rather fetching day-glow tabard does at least offer my employer a bit of free advertising when I'm out and about, so at least somebody wins...

UK police stop all black cars which do not have headlights turned on in crackdown on drivers who are not safety conscious! Imagine? No me either

Oh, and the TdF is riding through Chelmsford. Police road block checking for hi-vis and lights in the middle of summer?!

Having watched the programme Horizon on BBC2 on Monday its become evident that the driving test as they stand are wholly inadequate.
They need to take into account the ability or inability of human beings to function during multiple tasks, some of us are biologically unable to see whats right in front of us whilst we concentrate on other tasks ie cant see cyclists/pedestrians whilst driving, surely that needs to be addressed?

Agree entirely oozaveared
I passed mine after 6 lessons, it seems driving has become a right rather than a privelege, with no thought to the inherent danger in allowing a mass of untrained people to swan about as they please at the controls of large metal boxes on wheels.

What the police are saying here is simple common sense, lessen the odds of being a statistic. But they do need to state / recognise that nothing can protect a rider from the more idiotic drivers out there and that the Police are in a better position than most to help cyclist's safety (issues with funding, courts aside).
Start with the most serious threat and work down from there, and stop giving the moron drivers (and defence lawyers, insurance companies etc) more fuel for their own blame-avoidance.

don't see how it can be common sense to blame victims for an incident, we wouldn't accept the police saying women should dress in a manner which wouldn't attract rapists, and how on earth do you dress so as not to be stabbed should we all be issued with stab vests?