I witness multiple car drivers breaking the rules/law pretty much every time I walk or cycle or get the bus anywhere; the idea that every little misdemeanour could result in a fine is fanciful. Cars cause much more damage than cycles, so that is where the focus should be.
I have a concern about eBkes dodging and weaving in amongst pedestrians. Observed it often enough. Cars I very rarely see driving on the pavement - often there is no room anyway. Except for parking where often the pavement is marked with bays (usually half bays where not being correctly on the pavement is a contravention I believe) or a blind eye is turned to it in certain areas (usually where, if push came to shove, it would be allowed).
If you have evidence that the hierarchy is a problem, feel free to present it. I am pretty sure you don't, though.
Rules for all types of road users have been updated in The Highway Code to improve the safety of people walking, cycling and riding horses.
www.gov.uk
Sorry I meant cyclists in the middle is a problem in the sense that they are caught in the middle. As in a lot of people perceive roads for cars and pavements for pedestrians but completely ignore the cyclists (in many ways).
I think you've just made this up? Any evidence? I think you will find that the idea actually came from other countries.
Where I have seen good examples of cycle lanes it is clear there was more space available than we have in many places I think of.
In Croydon I can see cycle lanes not being fitted in easily.
I'm not sure what you are suggesting or how it could possibly be achieved. Any idea that you would "enforce" any of this is unrealistic.
I agree it is not easy. One would hope that more effort is made to educate and train all levels of the hierarchy. Obviously at the pedestrian and cycle end it is difficult to achieve.
In some countries rules are followed more precisely. In some countries it is illegal to walk across a light controlled crossing if the light/symbol for pedestrians is red. I do it all the time, there is a crossing near my home that I can often easily get across without recourse to stopping the traffic. There are usually big enough gaps. What I hate is people who press the button before looking, look, see no traffic and then walk across anyway. The traffic gets stopped after they have completed their crossing and then the vehicles chuck out pollution getting going again for no purpose. For me that can mean I arrive at the crossing when the traffic has got going again, all bunched up and so no easy chance to get across and I have to wait for the lights to let me cross.
The above is drifting off topic but the point is that culprits are at all levels. Including the car drivers that miss their red light. As a pedestrian I always look because I want to be sure I am safe. Apparently that crossing has killed a few people (island 40mph) !. I rarely drive past that crossing (it is not to/from home) but on one of the few occasions I did I witnessed two cars in adjacent lanes (dual carriageway) go through. I thought one would as the lights on the junction soon after the pedestrian crossing were turning green - I was a bit surprised both made the same mistake.
This is one point I do agree with you on; there does need to be a clear distinction made between ordinary bikes and heavier bikes with motors. I don't know what the existing law in this area is, as I've never ridden an e-bike or similar device and have no plans to.
Yes I would hope that treating eBikes (certainly the larger ones) as 50cc mopeds would suffice.
It is so clear that what most of us viewed as a complete no no up until ten years ago is now a complete free for all.
Unenforced but not necessarily unenforceable.
By that logic, mandatory training for kids on scooters?
Depends how far you want to go. I certainly think cycles as a mode that shares the roads a lot would be a good segment to train. Whether mandatory is a different debate.
I also think having to take a car(etc) driving test every ten years could be beneficial. But this would require a lot more resources which cannot even cope with once in a lifetime car driving tests currently !. I am sure it would weed out some bad habits or degraded driving skills/ability/habits.
But as you say elsewhere. Enforcement would get very onerous.
This seems reasonable, especially if mobility scooters are allowed to do so, however it's not technically within the law. In practice, it's tolerated for obvious reasons.
Yes, but sadly there are a not insignificant number who do not.
That sounds great in theory, but some of the worst members of our society do not want any form of 'education'.
Education - this is the challenge. It gets worse when the worst members of society can get their hands on a dangerous piece of equipment (car/lorry).
In the case of cars the control is they need a licence (implying training) and a roadworthy vehicle. But of course policing that is not 100% watertight.
For eBikes there is currently no test and so no mandatory training - enforcement of existing moped rules should apply.
For ordinary cycles it is hard to enforce BUT would be nice if encouragement led to all cyclists understanding "road sense".
For pedestrians there was training (I remember the "Tufty Club").
For pedestrians and cyclists it is not about training them to behave well towards others but about self preservation.
But actually as a motorcylist there were things I learnt about self preservation.
I refer you back to the ‘hierarchy of road users’.
This is a whole new topic, but if I either see oncoming traffic, or if traffic is behind me, I'd slow down, and stop dead if needed, to force the group to narrow their profile. I wouldn't randomly step in the road.
If I am cycling, and I see a large group coming towards me on the pavement, approaching any pedestrian(s) going the other way, who look like they may step into the road in front of me, I try to pre-empt this by moving away from the side of the road. Sadly, some car drivers are so desperate to overtake me, and are not looking for such hazards, so it can be difficult for me to do so at times.
From a legal perspective, I'm not sure who would be liable for any such incidents of pedestrians feeling forced to step out, but it is probably best discussed in another debate. I also suspect you'd get all sorts of answers from people without legal knowledge, and in any given situation it could depend on very specific circumstances, which may be difficult to generalise.
Space can be created; often council's can't afford the cost, or allocate the funds elsewhere. In some places, roads are closed to create spaces for pedestrians/cyclists, which can help. The more attractive cycling/walking is, then the less space is taken up by cars. Cars take up huge amounts of space in our cities; the lack of space is ultimately caused by us having too many car drivers!
This is where arrogance of those we share space with becomes a factor.
Obviously that's wrong, however I frequently experience car drivers who attempt to force me to divert when I have right of way (and yes some of them do say thank you, some don't).
I think a cycle, as more manoeuvrable, can get round a car struggling across a junction where (some) other cars would stop and let them across.
I have seen a near miss where a car let another car out of a side turning but a cyclist overtook (on the laft side) and seemed inconvenienced.
The factor here is different sized vehicles proceeding at different speeds with different space requirements. The operators of the vehicles will therefore deal with things in different ways - and not necessarily compatible. That example was a nuisance but could similar differences be dangerous ?.
If you hadn't moved, they'd likely have taken similar evasive action themselves; some people take the opposite view to the hierarchy principle and, instead of giving way in good time, expect the more vulnerable user - who has right of way - to step aside (which, if it came to it, they would, as they don't want to get hurt!).
Such attitudes exist among people who aren't very thoughtful of others, regardless of what transport mode they happen to be using. You can find such people driving, cycling or walking. However, some people like to assign such an attitude to a type of user, rather than a category of person.
What you are highlighting is that, if allowed to, it all descends into a game of chicken. That's where legislation comes in, not easy to enforce but better than nothing I suppose. For people with the wrong attitude (regardless of transport mode) it is probably a case of they do not generally think ahead about risks to anyone or anything including themselves.
In end, as you allude to, were are talking about human beings !.
As a side thought, if we were talking about the railways the level of death and injury tolerated on the roads would be considered an absolute disaster on the railways !.
Hierarchy - could add railways one level beyond road traffic of all types - thinking level crossings.
www.bbc.co.uk
