Punishment for cyclists?
- Thread starter Gammawolf
- Start date
I think in certain cases cyclists should be punished a lot harder than they currently are, for instance in cases of running red lights and riding on the pavement.
In my life I have never been hit by a car, however I have been hit twice by cyclists riding on the pavement. The first was by some chav **** who just rode off and whom the police never found, the second was by a "business man" who didn't want to ride on the road because it was a bit wet. In the first instance I received 2 broken ribs, in the second nothing more than a bruise and the cyclist was very polite and apologetic, iirc he was fined but I didn't take it any further as he wasn't going very fast.
Honestly I find most cyclists to be perfectly reasonable and law abiding people who treat drivers/pedestrians/other cyclists with respect, however in cases where they don't and act like no law applies to them, I think they should be brought down hard. Having their bike destroyed would be a nice result.
In my life I have never been hit by a car, however I have been hit twice by cyclists riding on the pavement. The first was by some chav **** who just rode off and whom the police never found, the second was by a "business man" who didn't want to ride on the road because it was a bit wet. In the first instance I received 2 broken ribs, in the second nothing more than a bruise and the cyclist was very polite and apologetic, iirc he was fined but I didn't take it any further as he wasn't going very fast.
Honestly I find most cyclists to be perfectly reasonable and law abiding people who treat drivers/pedestrians/other cyclists with respect, however in cases where they don't and act like no law applies to them, I think they should be brought down hard. Having their bike destroyed would be a nice result.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 17,625
- Location
- Newcastle U/T
Car or cycle? And why do some people think the difference matters?
Caught on camera doing it in a car, automated ticket to your registered address.
Caught on camera doing it on a bike... nothing?
I fail to see how people can't understand how this seems a little biased?
Balddog, look at it this way, more people are killed each year doing DIY than are killed by cyclists. Many more infact. Should we demand that all household tasks are carried out only by those with training and certification?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/data...-statistics-causes-death-england-wales-2010#_
gives an excellent example, 2 people killed by cyclists in 2010, 3 in 2008, non in 2009.
THAT is why they don't need training and certification compared to car drivers.
More people were killed by wasps and bees! Should we destroy all of them?
Tbh I think the link speaks for itself.
Ah so its only deaths that matter is it? I see.. As with the previous poster, I've never been hit by a car but a few times by bikes. Luckily nothing worse than some bruises and cuts. but as it was a cyclist, theres zero comeback, zero identification and zero consequences. He just mutters sorry and then gets back on his bike and goes on his merry way.
You can't use such statistics in this argument because the entire point is that cyclists don't get identified or punished and therefore their incidents are not recorded. ...Unless of course you ignore everything short of deaths.
How many incidents were there in 2011 of cyclists running into pedestrians? You can't possibly know, of course...because the vast majority are not recorded.
That doesn't mean its ok.
You're ignoring the point i'm making though. There are far more dangerous things out there that require no form of training or ID so why should cyclists have to go through such a process?
I'd imagine the number of deaths are probably roughly correllate to the number of accidents as well.
You could also argue that not every car incident gets recorded. How many times have you seen cars with little dents and scratches in the sides of them off people opening doors? You can bet that the majority of them don't hang around to apologise or pay for it! Hell I know i've never hit anyone's door (i'm really anal about it) but all of the cars i've owned have head dents off people doing it to me and not once has anyone been pulled up for it.
I'd imagine the number of deaths are probably roughly correllate to the number of accidents as well.
You could also argue that not every car incident gets recorded. How many times have you seen cars with little dents and scratches in the sides of them off people opening doors? You can bet that the majority of them don't hang around to apologise or pay for it! Hell I know i've never hit anyone's door (i'm really anal about it) but all of the cars i've owned have head dents off people doing it to me and not once has anyone been pulled up for it.
Last edited:
Pedestrian casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Seriously injured by cycles: 434
Killed by cars: 3,495
Seriously injured by cars: 46,245
Figures apply to Great Britain. Source: Department for Transport
this basically.
The number of times it would be necessary for cyclists to provide ID are so few and far between it's a none issue.
In 2008, pedal bikes made up 1.8% of urban, non-motorway traffic but were involved in just 0.25% of pedestrian deaths and below 1% of serious pedestrian injuries
During the same year, there were 13,272 recorded collisions between cars and bicycles, resulting in the deaths of 52 cyclists and no car drivers or passengers
A study of collisions between cyclists and other vehicles from 2005-07 found police allocated blame to drivers in 60% of cases, to the cyclist in 30% and to both parties in the remainder
Source: Department for Transport
Last edited:
You are allowed to hurt yourself. DIY doesn't hurt others. Where it does ask about H&S laws.
Your point is that because such and such is dangerous and requires no training, this other dangerous thing shouldn't either?
Really?
Is something not sinking in there? YES REALLY! Why would you spend millions possibly billions to fix something which has a very low possible fatality rate? Minor damage etc is a non issue. Hell, should everyone start wearing barcodes in the case they cause criminal damage?
The dangers of it pale into insignificance compared to other dangers!
I've given you the facts to support it! Have a look at the link I posted again and you can see that it is one of the lowest causes of death (and by extension probably accidents/damage) compared to other things. More people accidentally suffocated in their own duvets! I didn't even know that was possible!
Are you that blinkered to a hatred of cyclists you can't see that it's really a non issue?
Last edited:
No but you are also not listening to me. Why is DEATH the only measure of whether or not something should have stricter controls upon it?
Why are you not acknowledging the fact that a huge huge number of bicycle related accidents do not get reported or recorded?
and no, you do not get to make that extension at all...lower accidents as an extension of lower deaths? are you serious? there are HUGE amounts of unreported accidents involving cyclists. are you so blinded by your own bias that you cannot acknowledge that?
I dont hate cyclists at all, car drivers are far worse. but car drivers face consequences for their actions on the road whereas cyclists almost never do.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,080
- Location
- Between Realities
What if you saw a cyclist throw away an apple? OMGBBQ!
How do you know a huge number of accidents go unreported? How do you know it's greater than the number of people that don't, to use my earlier example, report bee stings. I've been stung 5 times in my life and not reported any. Damn, those bees are getting away with assault!
If someone warrants the damage/injury to be serious enough they will report it. Simples.
If it's not getting reported it is not an issue it's only people with a vendetta that seem to get all up in arms about cyclists.
Getting clipped by a cyclist will do a lot less damage to you/property than getting clipped by a car. It's physics. That is why cyclists do not require a license.
Also bear this in mind about cyclists, if they're commuting then chances are they will be following the same route day in, day out. Thus take a description like any normal person who is injured by another would, report it to the police with a time/place and chances are, they'll be there tomorrow.
Last edited:
and who gets to decide what injury is serious enough? oh if only there was a rofl smiley on this forum. Not an issue if its not reported? wow...I don't really know what to say to that.
bee stings? are you seriously comparing the actions of cycle based road users to insects? really now.....get a grip man. we are talking about human negligence here, not the instinctual actions of an angry winged beastie.
THE POLICE! If you are injured by another you report it to the police and THEY HAVE TO RECORD IT and it goes down in statistics like the ones i presented. If they are not recording it it is not getting reported to them and thus not a problem. Or at least not enough of a problem for the person to warrant making a 30 second phonecall to the police non emergency number.
Surely anything that people can't be bothered to spend 30 seconds doing is by definition a non issue?
And yeah i'm comparing it because they are of that little consequence!
at least the bees have the decency to die after stinging you.
A common misconception. Only one species of bee die after stinging (the honey bee).
They aren't reported because theres no way to identify or catch the cyclists. That is the crux of the issue.
You are welcome to think however you wish sir. Let us just hope that none of your loved ones are hit by something so harmless as a 15 stone man on a bike.
Read my prev post where I point out that they're likely to be there again...so take a frigging description.
Other criminals don't flash ID and yet they get caught...
except most people don't because whats the point?
it also takes a lot longer than 30 seconds.
just like if a cyclist clips a car and does say £100 in dent/paint damage, do you really think any motorist is going to report it and lose their no claims bonus (and still have to pay if it's under the excess) ?