Associate
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 875
- Location
- Midlands
Riders Protest Anti-biking Legislation
- Thread starter MADMAN69UK
- Start date
no opinion on the matter?
i actually agree on the high visibility vest wearing at all times and compulsory additional training for all returning bikers who have not ridden in five years. as i can actually see their merit on a safety side, doesn't exactly take a lot of effort to don a High vis vest does it?
Also the additional training idea is a very good idea, number of accidents that happen because of inexperience, just see the first summer weekend accident figures when all the power rangers come out of the garage and act like their on a race track.
I definitely don't agree with removing the speed trap signs or bikes older than seven years entering cities, cant be a emissions thing as new bikes are higher tuned in most case and cause more pollution, most likely that newer bikes have their headlights on dipped beam at all times.
No offence the article seems to be written by a diff and MAg seem t be a bunch of posers, clear example of this is
i actually agree on the high visibility vest wearing at all times and compulsory additional training for all returning bikers who have not ridden in five years. as i can actually see their merit on a safety side, doesn't exactly take a lot of effort to don a High vis vest does it?
Also the additional training idea is a very good idea, number of accidents that happen because of inexperience, just see the first summer weekend accident figures when all the power rangers come out of the garage and act like their on a race track.
I definitely don't agree with removing the speed trap signs or bikes older than seven years entering cities, cant be a emissions thing as new bikes are higher tuned in most case and cause more pollution, most likely that newer bikes have their headlights on dipped beam at all times.
No offence the article seems to be written by a diff and MAg seem t be a bunch of posers, clear example of this is
this just seems to be idiotic, why would anyone campaign against any thing like people being turned away from testing due to not wearing adequate protection...MAG said:
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 875
- Location
- Midlands
The refresher training after being away from biking a while is a good idea, but then that should also be the case for cars too 
I wear a hi-vis vest in winter but wouldn't like to be forced into wearing it all year round. The next step is forcing all bikes to be painted with luminous glow in the dark paint
And again, the visibility issue could apply to cars. Let's ban black cars since they aren't as visible as other colours. Ok, that may be a step too far
I wear a hi-vis vest in winter but wouldn't like to be forced into wearing it all year round. The next step is forcing all bikes to be painted with luminous glow in the dark paint
And again, the visibility issue could apply to cars. Let's ban black cars since they aren't as visible as other colours. Ok, that may be a step too far
The refresher training after being away from biking a while is a good idea, but then that should also be the case for cars too
I wear a hi-vis vest in winter but wouldn't like to be forced into wearing it all year round. The next step is forcing all bikes to be painted with luminous glow in the dark paint
And again, the visibility issue could apply to cars. Let's ban black cars since they aren't as visible as other colours. Ok, that may be a step too far
why not wear a High vis all year round, mine has practically become one with my leather jacket, the only reason why i can foresee people not wearing them is cos of "style" or some over ********, trust me you don't look cool spread eagle on the road with your body feeling like its on fire.
My new job forces me to were a high visibility jacket on site at all times and ive noticed that drivers spot me a lot quicker at junctions but i still make sure i am in a position to take a quick maneuver when coming to junctions
I agree with car divers/ lorry driver/ pilots/ milkmen should have extra training if not operated their vehicle in 5 years. but a car is a lot more visible to the public, i do agree with the new german cars and volvos driving around with side lights on at begining.
From my experience a lot of the SMIDSY accidents can be accounted with poor awareness by drivers and poor road position and road craft by bikers, I myself welcome more visibility for bikers.
I wonder if there's been a few things lost in translation there. If not, then that's a fairly random set of changes. A few thoughts:
- mandatory wearing of high-visibility fluorescent vests
Probably not essential
- banning of filtering
Just police it properly
- removing warning signs for speed traps
Nothing to do with just bikes - affects cars too
- banning bikes over seven years old from entering cities
Emissions? Seems odd
- compulsory additional training for all returning bikers who have not ridden in five years
How do you police this?
Mind you, in true French style, they just ignore laws they don't agree with anyway
- mandatory wearing of high-visibility fluorescent vests
Probably not essential
- banning of filtering
Just police it properly
- removing warning signs for speed traps
Nothing to do with just bikes - affects cars too
- banning bikes over seven years old from entering cities
Emissions? Seems odd
- compulsory additional training for all returning bikers who have not ridden in five years
How do you police this?
Mind you, in true French style, they just ignore laws they don't agree with anyway
depends, some yanks claim that the helmet isn't essential, its such a easy piece of equipment to put in place which has no down sides that i can see and has proven results in multiple areas of industry, environment and road usage, but unfortunately isn't classed as cool...
no idea on this one, seen it done well and seen it done poorly, up to police judgment, tbh
seems like a money spinner to be honest.
Could be emission and safety, i.e new bikes have sidelights on at engine start as standard, if it was a emission issue then they would just limit the cc size of the engine.
Probably police it by linking the license system with the Insurance database, if the bike rider hasn't had a insurance policy against his name for 5 years on a bike then the license gets suspended till re-activated after additional training.
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 875
- Location
- Midlands
I guess the hi-vis thing is mostly style related yeah. The leather jacket I wear is black/white with silver reflective strips, which goes with my black/white helmet and black/white gloves. I purchased them because they are contrasting and help me stand out. I'm happy with my level of visibility as it is currently
Fluorescent is apparently cool though! I wear some, but not all the time.
Insurance system won't work - owning and insuring isn't riding. The 50cc scooter in my shed could be insured and taxed for £50 a year and then 7 years later I could get on a 200 bhp monster.
Ultimately I'd like to know more about why these proposals came about. They wouldn't just be proposed out of nowhere.
Insurance system won't work - owning and insuring isn't riding. The 50cc scooter in my shed could be insured and taxed for £50 a year and then 7 years later I could get on a 200 bhp monster.
Ultimately I'd like to know more about why these proposals came about. They wouldn't just be proposed out of nowhere.
the five year thing is probably there because of the number of people jumping onto supersports bikes after long periods of non riding and injuring/ killing themselves, look at the accident figures for the first sunny weekend of the year for prove of that, the rest i have no idea.
IME car drivers either don't look at all (in which case no amount of High vis clothing will help) or do look and see you (often to the point of making eye contact) but it doesn't seem to register in their brains so they carry on regardless.
High visibility clothing might help in a small number of cases, but I honestly don't think it will significantly improve SMIDSYs.
How would the DVLA know you had not ridden for 5 years? I didn't have a bike registered on the road for probably 15 years, but I still rode a bike occasionally during that time.
Why are people so condescending towards people that don't want to wear a high-vis vest for "style" reasons? Just because you prioritise visibility over style doesn't mean that people who don't are idiots. Just because "style" is an unimportant factor to you, does not mean its irrelevant, it just means that its unimportant to you.
Whilst I would personally have no problem wearing a high vis, I don't at the minute, and the suggestion that I should be forced to wear one ****es me off. This is meant to be a free country, not a "Free-as-long-as-you-don't-take-any-risks" country.
Whilst I would personally have no problem wearing a high vis, I don't at the minute, and the suggestion that I should be forced to wear one ****es me off. This is meant to be a free country, not a "Free-as-long-as-you-don't-take-any-risks" country.
dude, your coming across as a spoilt child, Is the nasty man saying that you should wear a nasty yellow bib that might make the girlie's at the side of the road who cant see your face face through the visor think that your a nerd. dude you frequent a computer component forum...
In most accidents involving a bike its not the bike that has to dealer with consequences their normally out of it or dead its the poor emergency services who have to clean up the mess and then your family who has to deal with the aftermath. all for the sake of driving correctly and wearing a £5 high vis but hey if style is more important than your skin then please carry on, just make sure you've got your donor card at the ready.
Ah yes. The EU making more daft changes......
Really unpopular stuff too.
Banning of filtering -
Increases congestion and enviromental damage... just because bikes can get there quicker doesnt mean you need to be spiteful about it.
Hi - Vis -
If you cant see my headlight, hear my exhaust or have any awareness of my presence then no silly jacket is going to save me.
Banning of bikes +7 years -
Really makes no sense other than to support the crippled economy and dwindling bike sales.
My 2003 has sidelights from ignition switch on and headlight on perm so cant see that being the reason why. I cant see the emissions being anywhere near as bad as most cars .. ?
The 5 year thing is good in principle mind but id like to have thought common sense would be better than legislation tbh.
Really unpopular stuff too.
Banning of filtering -
Increases congestion and enviromental damage... just because bikes can get there quicker doesnt mean you need to be spiteful about it.
Hi - Vis -
If you cant see my headlight, hear my exhaust or have any awareness of my presence then no silly jacket is going to save me.
Banning of bikes +7 years -
Really makes no sense other than to support the crippled economy and dwindling bike sales.
My 2003 has sidelights from ignition switch on and headlight on perm so cant see that being the reason why. I cant see the emissions being anywhere near as bad as most cars .. ?
The 5 year thing is good in principle mind but id like to have thought common sense would be better than legislation tbh.
This just sounds like treating the symptoms and not the cause.
Surely the most effective way of improving road safety is to educate road users more, especially to improve their observation skills as most car drivers are completely oblivious to *everyone* on the road, but especially to motorbikes/cyclists.
Why not have mandatory retesting if you're involved in an accident that is deemed your fault? Would be one way of weeding out those road users that are regularly involved in accidents.
Surely the most effective way of improving road safety is to educate road users more, especially to improve their observation skills as most car drivers are completely oblivious to *everyone* on the road, but especially to motorbikes/cyclists.
Why not have mandatory retesting if you're involved in an accident that is deemed your fault? Would be one way of weeding out those road users that are regularly involved in accidents.
Very good idea, only issue could be the government could take it too far and bring in mandatory testing for any infraction then charge you for the pleasure.
So why don't we ban bikes then? You can use a car or take the bus. If we are talking about someone having to scrape you into a bucket, if you are twice as safe with a high vis as without, you are 10 times safer in a car or on the bus.
Interestingly, you'll note that I said I don't mind wearing a high vis - I don't, but that's as much a function of not having one as anything else - if I had one, I might wear it, especially in winter. The fact that I get ****ed off by this stuff is nothing to do with "the girlies on the side of the road", its to do with the slow erosion of our ability to decide our risk levels for ourselves.
Oh, and by the way, if I "interpret" your post to
I can make you sound like a **** as well, so how about you stick to what was actually said? I'm talking about the right to make a choice, not trying to justify a particular one.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
So basically - if you don't ride around looking like an eejit who's learning how to swim you're going to die.
Oh purleeeaase!
I don't wear a hi-vis vest on the bike and never will. I'd sell the bike first.
I'm guessing you're newly qualified and are still in brainwashed safety mode.
The fact is, that people who wear hi-vis vests on bikes (who aren't coppers) look like total spanners, and aren't confident enough in their own riding.
I've been knocked off and had my leg broken. The silly doris never even looked right at the junction so wouldn't have seen me anyway.
When the sun's out I ride in a t-shirt. Flame me all you like.
Not going to flame you, it's your life choice to increase your chances of death on the roads
I was going to say that perhaps you should have improved on your defensive riding and ability to read the road. That might have saved you the injuries!
I wear hi-vis in winter, in summer generally not.
As for the OP, seems like the French are trying to Nanny State bike riders a little too much. Education of people is cure for the long term problems they are trying short term fixes for; don't penalise those you are trying to protect!
Damn French and EU laws. If I couldn't filter on a bike I'd just stop riding. It's what makes my morning commute 15-20 minutes instead of 45-60.