'Mr Loophole' lawyer repeats compulsory helmets and hi-viz for cyclists call

The dsy " Loophole Lawyer " takes to the road weating his " Wig & Gown " i will think he has credibility , meanwhile  al he is about , is using Unsafe driving practices by motorists , as a means to advertise his dubious abilities !

Let s hope he goes away , thinks about the reality of life on UK Roads and decides to enable Cyclists to be able to return to their family each time they use their Bike !

Lets campaign instead for all cars to be covered in 2" of polystyrene foam, painted dayglo yellow, have no radio or audio systems to distract the driver and be fitted with cyclist avoidance technology (as is becoming available) as standard.  And make sure the legislation is watertight so even Mr Loopy can't find a way round it.

Isn't it ironic though that a man who makes a living out of helping people get away with breaking the law should want laws imposed on people

I don't agree that cyclists should be obliged to take any action to mitigate cycling or be regulated in any way at all. Carriageways are essential infrastructure used by very dangerous essential machinery. We need to ask who society needs on them to subsist. There should be no unneeded extra hazards on roads at all now ; especially if they not willing to protect themselves.

"Undertaking when approaching left turns, ignoring red lights, not being visible in low light conditions and mounting pavements are just a small number of practices that are commonplace"

That's enough about car drivers, what are cyclists doing wrong?

Quote:

“The Cycling Proficiency test [now replaced by Bikeability - ed] should be made compulsory for cyclists using public highways. To pass it means reaching a certain level of competency and an understanding of the rules of the road.”

The trouble is that we have a driving test and yet countless drivers who shouldn't be allowed on the roads.

As others have pointed out, it would be better to ignore him. His motive for being contoversial (like Katie Hopkins and others) is purely to keep him in the media so he can sell more copies of his book and charge ever increasing fees to his clients. Maybe Road.CC should just pass over him and not give him the publicity.

I wouldn't give this specimen any attention.

Every time someone mentions thta cyclists should have the same supposed "regulation" that motorists do, I just say: "providing we can can get away with intimidating, hurting and killing: plus pollutiing, congesting, causing local and global environmental damage..."

Jes Ridein. And of course black pcars driving at night should be completely ruled out. It is AND lights AND High Viz in the dark or nothing. For ALL motorist. In fact every single car should be painted in reflective paint to be more visable also in the rain or snow.

I would go along with it if all lawyers wear black and white striped suits, ID nameplates and a rotating beacon on their head.

Click bait.

"Accountability" that's hilarious from someone who makes a living out of removing accountability for his clients.  You break the law you should be punished - well only if you can't afford a lawyer to find a loophole.

He's clearly a cunt.

However the high-viz colour doesnt work at night, even reflectives only work at certain angles (for example driving behind a cyclist but not on a cyclist whos travelling past a T junction 90 degrees to your car headlights).  Only good lights on your bike will help.

In my opnion wearing high viz is useless against idiots who dont look in the first place. You'd be better teaching a good lookout and driving cautiously.

I agree with Freeman - Cyclists ARE incredibly vulnerable, and motorists should be made to acknowledge that fact and drive their vehicles accordingly.

Freeman says: “The goal is to improve the quality of driving and cycling by both parties, thus increasing accountability and enhancing road safety.” 

If he wants to increase accountability he should be lobbying for every motorist who kills a cyclist to be charged with manslaughter. In all my years riding a bike I've never knocked over a motor vehicle, driven into one or forced one off the road, but I've had it done to me on many occasions during my fifty odd years of cycling - the latest two incidents only a couple of months ago, the first by a guy going through a red light and the other a week later by a woman pulling out in front of me from behind a car.

Freeman is guaranteed click bait for cyclists. I think he just wants to stir up controversy as he has a book to sell. I won't be buying it - I've already heard all his nonsense.

Yeah, I'm sure the powers that be totally want to hear more from him.

So his book was ghostwritten by Angela Epstein? Hmm; says it all, really...

Could we, perhaps, start calling him "Mr Poophole" ?

It sounds to me that that's what he's talking out of.

Apply Freemans logic and drivers would be obliged to wear helmets.

Perfect idea swldxer! Would be fantastic to see ALL motorists wear helmets. I presume car makers would not like the idea of having to adapt their designs to fashionistas wearing pointed helmets. But, anyway. A Lovely sight for sure. Sea that Ferrari driver with his indeed very sleek helmet design? Or that Bentley driver with is 'flaps' out of the window? I guess that no current car design would fit into the new rules of creating a safe cabin for helmet wearing motorists. But that's of course a minor issue. Might be even good for 'the economy' in some way.

As a member of the legal profession he should be used to making argument based on fact not supposition and innuendo - he hasn't presented any evidence that demonstrates that wearing helmets and hi-viz directly correlates to a reduction in casualties and injury.

Getting the impression that he's using his blog as clickbait for his grubby little business of getting the feckless and reckless off on technicalities.

Bring on the driving helmets.

Why would cyclists be required to wear hi-viz? When will cars only be allowed to come in hi-viz colors? Seems black, grey, dark blue, etc, car colors are all legal...so cool double standard.

Dear mr loophole. We cyclists are doing nothing more that what motorists do on a daily basis. 

undertaking approaching left turns? does he mean filtering, or do we now call passing stationary traffic undertakling?  So if there is a right filter lane at the lights, all the other cars will be 'undertaking' if the right filter is red and the main light is green.

A damning indictment of the road laws in this country, that this numpty can find loopholes