Drivers who “used road like a race track” at speeds up to 100mph jailed after cyclist left with broken neck

Have you been on the double espressos this afternoon, STFD?

Having looked at your more recent posts I think you need to calm down and take a deep breath...

Honestly, I'm just so fed up of people thinking that driving unsafely is something that is ever acceptable and I'm sick and tired of people pandering to it and/or not calling it out for what it is.

.

That's good.

.

Now, whatcha gonna do about it?

.

Call it out every time I see it. Online and in person. Just yesterday I was nearly run over on a zebra crossing because someone was overtaking 2 cyclists approaching said zebra crossing, and because they were committed to the stupid overtake, felt that they had 2 options. 1) abandon the overtake and pull back into their lane (trouble being that the cyclists were, funny thing, still there) or 2) continue their overtake at the expense of running me over. Fortunately they went for seemingly hidden option number 3, moments before hitting me (which was of course, to come to a stop).

And I made sure to tell the driver (just in case they hadn't already realised it) that what they did was very dangerous and endangered 3 lives for no reason at all.

I don't disagree, I just think your use of language is beginning to raise some eyebrows on here

Good.

I admire your passion but I'm not sure the way to make progress is to use bad language. Most of us are frustrated with poor driving around vulnerable road users and the lack of police action when it is reported. Some of us are trying to do something about it by uploading to NMOTD, which road.cc has very kindly provided as a repository for examples of poor and inconsistent police responses. Hopefully it will bear fruit when cycling organisations realise that the way to get people cycling is not infrastucture but dealing with the minority of dangerous drivers effectively. They will then have the evidence needed.

I am afraid it won't happen in my lifetime but I don't think we should give up just yet.

Bungle_52 wrote:

I admire your passion but I'm not sure the way to make progress is to use bad language.

Yes, swear it better - on a niche forum too - probably won't change the world.  I can relate to getting pretty het up by the general lethal ignorance / DGAF attitude out on the roads though.

Bungle_52 wrote:

[ NMOTD make it better / police it better ]  ... Hopefully it will bear fruit when cycling organisations realise that the way to get people cycling is not infrastucture but dealing with the minority of dangerous drivers effectively.

I'd like it if this were the case because that would make it much easier.  (I do think mass cycling is a good thing even for existing cyclists.  I'm not an elitist / I'm alright Jack type).  The majority of people in the UK (e.g. not us here on road.cc) don't cycle not because they've looked at the stats, or even been scared off by stories in the media.  They don't cycle because they have a car or otherwise use motor transport which we've prioritised.  They don't cycle because no-one else they know does and they're not "cyclists".  They don't cycle because it's not social and if they did they'd have to ride single file unlike any other transport mode.  They don't cycle because it's not enjoyable and they just don't feel comfortable cycling around motor traffic.  They don't cycle because the whole environment is reinforcing that it isn't convenient and there's a lack of good parking and bike storage.  They don't use the existing infra because it's crap and it doesn't form a network.

So if the question is "how to get more people cycling" then the answer is both much better enforcement AND infra.  The infra part is the only thing which has actually been shown to get more people cycling (see examples in Seville, Bern, Copenhagen, The Netherlands, Germany ...).  I guess removing the cars would do as a start.  Remember the lockdown during the pandemic?  There were some other factors there too however e.g. little to do and the increase was likely in "recreational" cycling.  However I can't see any likelihood of removing even 50% of all motor traffic - especially on the main streets and arteries which get people where they actually want to go.  Certainly not without "alternatives" e.g. mass cycling!

I should add - another note about "police it better" is that most people I've talked to seem to believe that if you hit someone with your car you will have the book thrown at you!  So they already believe that policing / enforcement is much better than it currently is.  And they still don't cycle.  They also have little idea of the actual "safety" of cycling - they just go on gut feeling.

Behaviour change is possible.  In the short term people fight to keep things the same - so there is some competition between transport modes for users.  Noting this you can see that like the example of Stevenage if you build good cycle infra but it's great for driving, people will drive.  So for the journeys which have potential to be cycled e.g. mostly short trips within urban settings these need to be more convenient than driving or getting a bus.  Change needs both push and pull.  The hard part (push) is this needs restrictions on motor traffic.  The "positive" (pull) side has lots of options.  As well as dedicated cycle paths it can be made possible / easier for cyclists to take shortcuts through existing infra (e.g. "filtered permeability").  There are ways for cyclists to avoid traffic lights or pass them more efficiently.  More direct routes, basically.

As always, very much in agreement.

Though I must mention that it's not just gut feeling, a lot is mind, but many have purchased the bicycle with great intentions, but been terrified/bullied within a couple of journeys.

It's the reason that there are so many almost new bikes gathering dust and growing cobwebs in sheds and garages across the land.

Yup.  For most people lack of access to a bike isn't the issue.  (I know it is for a few people).

My last flat was in a really poor neighbourhood.  There was some car ownership but it was low.  Most balconies had bikes sat on them.  Not all were kids ones either.  We were almost directly on a really good mini network of off-road paved paths: you could get direct to town, one of the stations, a couple of supermarkets.  And far as I could see most bikes never moved from one year to the next.

Now that place was definitely a different world than the media's "just about managing" (lower) middle classes.  However some of the factors were the same.  Convenience of storage and use was poor.  The only safe storage was inside or carrying bikes through your small flat to the balcony.  That's after you'd got them up the stairs when the lift wasn't working, which was quite often.  The paths and pavements were sparkly with broken glass and daubed with dogshit which is a great combination for maintenance.

A bike would be a chunk of money there - if one was nicked or trashed that would be a big drama, you might not bother again.

Lots of young families there - not easy to take several kids around if you've only got a cheap mountain bike and you still have some roads to deal with.  Lots of disabled people / people in poor health too.  Our fast road speeds and cycling infra which sometimes requires climbing stairs is no help for that.

Absolutely. When you get close-passed, beeped at or even sideswiped for being too slow in the roads, and berated for cycling faster than walking pace (or just plain unable to cycle at more than walking pace due to pedestrian traffic, dog leads, etc) on cycle paths, what else is left?