Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Should bicycles have number plates?
my wife told me that our youngest son was nearly hit by a
cyclist crossing Green Lanes at the St Ann's junction, an
elderly resident was hit a year or so ago, on the same crossing,
if you wait long enough at this junction it is a frequent occurrance.
There are many cyclists who do obey road rules, but being
patient at the lights could save a life, whether it be the cyclist
or a pedestrian, road safety seems to not be a priority for
policing, and there seems always an excuse not to do so by
the safer neibourhoods team, I'd understand if it wasn't their
remit. Benefits from cyclist registration system would be insurance
for cyclists, and possibly make bike theft more difficult to get away
with. Cyclist reg. may be another tax, the introduction costs should
be nominal as not to discourage the growth of cycling in London.
It could be argued that cyclists shouldn't pay anything, that the
GLA stump up for a registration system for the contribution cyclists
bring to the environment. Cycling is about freedom of movement
so greater regulation maybe seen as an affront, but more timely
policing is definitely required as part of regular duties.
I'd be interested on views on this either way.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by LSquared on
-
I have "educated guesswork" based on very large samples taken by people whose skill and profession it is to gather and analyse data, and which are used to drive government policy. Meanwhile, you have a bunch of anecdotes and a gut feeling that Something should be Done. Trust me, if you cycled as often as you walked or drove you would have plenty of anecdotes to tell you Something should be Done about careless and antisocial driving.
Some cyclists are behaving anti-socially, yes. Anecdotally, my experience of commuting for the last 5 years is that the proportion of cyclists jumping lights is going down, probably because people taking up cycling in recent years are gaining experience, although with numbers in general increasing you probably are seeing more anti social behaviour in absolute terms.
Also anecdotally, every single day I see all of the following from drivers:
Jumping the red because it was amber for the last car, or the one before that. Driving or texting while on the mobile...I see this at least as much as red light jumping cyclists and once you know what to look for it is astounding what a marked effect it has on the quality of driving. Pulling into the lane without looking because the car in front has stopped to turn right. Overtaking bicycles with less than a foot clearance. Buses starting an overtake than pulling in to a busstop before clearing. Speeding...
It's not all motorists, or even a majority. And i have noticed a marked improvement in the way most London drivers behave around cyclists as cyclist numbers have increased. But it is still many times a day, and any one of those acts creates far more danger than antisocial cycling. The reason this issue is bikes vs motor vehicles is because you are advocating creating new laws and spending time, money and publicity to enforce them on an annoyance, when you could be advocating something that addresses a real source of danger. And the practical problem is that you will be diverting resources which could be policing real safety laws for both cars and bikes into chasing people for not wearing badges.
By the way, the steel cage is what causes the damage to motorists, hence the need for airbags, crumple zones etc. It is not that the cage keeps motorists safe, it is that the cage creates dangers for non-motorists. Cars are not safer; they are more dangerous, they are a greater source of danger.
Finally, one thing I always wonder about this "we have to identify cyclists to stop them breaking the law" thing. Is the only reason drivers obey traffic laws fear of being caught? To me, that is a very scary idea.
-
-
I don't remember ever having to register the amount of miles I've done when driving a car, is that not guesswork too? I'm assuming the DFT had a methodology when they produced these statistics LINK
At what age would a cyclist have to register, five, eight, ten. I was cycling on the road by then. What about tourists, someone on holiday who rides a bike every couple of years at the seaside? How would you ensure that cyclists were using the correct registration, would they have to carry round ID to prove who they were? How big would the registration number need to be. It strikes me that something big enough to be seen as a cyclist is fleeing the seen of a (statistically infrequent) collision would have to be reasonably large. Are you seriously suggesting that all cyclists would have to carry around a big number in case they wanted to ride a bike (a Boris bike for instance), what about cyclists who don't wear a helmet? What about people doing time trials, are you suggesting a big sash over their skin suit?
If it's going to be clipped to the bicycle you're either going to have to redesign bikes to provide a common mounting point (and retrofit that to existing bikes) or devise something that's portable, detachable and would fit everything from a racing bike through to a mountain bike (bearing in mind the various bikes will already have things mounted to them at various points).
This is before we even get to enforcement, what if the rider's wearing a pollution mask, will the onus be on the cyclist to prove that someone was using their registration, are cameras designed to catch number plates really going to work for this (as yet to be designed) registration plate?
Realistically one of two things will happen. The scheme wouldn't be enforced (given that the police said they weren't going to enforce 20 mph speed limits and things such as using a mobile phone whilst driving are barely enforced then this isn't an unrealistic proposition) in which case it would be a huge waste of public money.
People will deem it too much of a hassle to register and fewer people will cycle. The roads and tube will get busier as there will be more people driving and using public transport, a higher rate of cyclist casualties will ensue because there are fewer cyclists on the road, an increase in health care costs due to fewer cyclists leading to less exercise (a Spanish study put the risk:benefit ratio of cycling regularly at 1:77).
As I said elsewhere, it's the difference in perception versus reality. Whilst cycling I have had a couple of cars and a van drive into the back of me whilst I've been stationary at traffic lights but I wouldn't argue that every driver should have a black box fitted to their vehicle to monitor their driving. There are bad cyclists out there, there are bad cyclists out there (many are probably the same people) but some common sense needs to be used when considering how to deal with them.
The laws are already there to deal with bad drivers, bad cyclists (the concerted ticketing at Theobald's Road for instance, although the death this week makes you wonder whether that priority was correct) and the rest. They just don't get enforced, look at the number of cars in ASLs for instance, in legal terms encroaching into an ASL is exactly the same as jumping a red light but car drivers do it with impunity.
-
Permalink Reply by Anette on
-
Something needs to be done, yes. I see cyclists gambling with their lives every single morning, it's a miracle none of the ones I have seen have not caused accidents, serious injury or death. My favourite one was going at speed down Camden Road, in rush hour, whist TEXTING ON HIS MOBILE!!! The amount of near misses with pedestrians are countless, due to cyclists being able to run red lights and not being held to account. The road is for sharing. But the highway code also applies to us all. Shared space equals shared responsibility to keep each other safe. At the moment it feels somewhat one-sided..
-
-
It could be worse, it could be someone in a 2 ton car TEXTING ON THEIR MOBILE!!! Imagine how dangerous that would be.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
You can't even remember the registration plates of motor vehicles. What makes you think you're going to spot one on a bloody bicycle?
My little boy was almost hit by a metropolitan police car that when through a red light on a pedestrian crossing on Wightman road a few years ago and did I get a chance to get the registration number? No. And that's my super power. Registration plates are definitely not a pancea.
BTW, LSquared is another account I use where I am far more lucid, eloquent and knowledgeable.
-
-
I know the junction you mean however that's not where the cyclist died. He followed the traffic around, quite legally and died at the junction adjacent to Holborn tube station. It's currently unclear exactly what happened.
The junction you mention is indeed a problem as I see cyclist use it all the time and they have to battle buses to use it.
-
Permalink Reply by Raymond on
-
I am a regular cyclist and I personally hate and despise those of my group who jump red lights or ride at speed on pavements and towpath even to the point of rebuking them myself. I would be happy to register myself and my bike, in fact I already do have registration and insurance through British Cycling.
The problem lies in how would you recognise the bike in the first place if it whizzed up hit someone and then sped away. You would need a registration plate on the bike and if it was large enough to be read then it would massively compromise the aerodynamics of the bicycle to the point of making them almost unridable. I cannot see anyone on a £3,000 carbon road race bike wanting to add more weight to it and in a way that will slow them down too.
The fact is that there are already laws in place that stop people from riding on pavements or in a way that endangers life, the problem is lack of enforcement. I have seen numerous examples of bikes speeding on the pavement past police cars sitting in traffic and nothing happens, bikes that go through red lights and because the police are not on that particular duty they ignore it. In Camden I have seen police set up at certain junctions and pulling over bikes which try to jump the lights, giving them a warning, but I've yet to see it happen in Harringey.
A cost not factored is that if you were to have registration, insurance and road tax for bicycles then the condition of the roads would have to be greatly improved. A pothole that is a minor bump to a car or van is potentially fatal to cyclist because of the risk of a broken wheel. A badly repaired pothole where they dump a pile of tarmac on the hole and walk away is just as bad as you end up with a a huge bump which when hit at speed could easily fracture a cyclists pelvis. Some roads are so bad that they should only be attempted by mountain bikes such as Stapleton Hall Road between the mini roundabout at Oakfield Road and The Triangle. The whole thing is a random patchwork of holes and bad repairs that you have to weave dangerously just to avoid the hazards.
I am happy to pay for insurance, road tax and registration but if I did then I want something in return. I want roads that I can ride on, I want cycle lanes that I can use because they are regularly cleaned and maintained, I want the psychotic drivers who deliberately kill or seriously injury cyclists by ignoring the law prosecuted for attempted/murder instead of the gentle wrist slapping they tend to get.
-
Permalink Reply by HarringayBirder on
-
I agreed - indeed was cheering - up to the somewhat hyperbolic (ie, wholly inaccurate) last sentence - irony, yes?
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
At 10 o' clock this evening, therefore dark, I was driving sedately from Clissold Park to Manor House. I passed a cyclist wearing dark clothing, with no lights, talking on a cellphone with only one hand for steering and braking.
If I had not seen him, or he had hit a pothole or stone and swerved, I might have hit the idiot. Would LSquared say I was at fault just because my vehicle is bigger than the idiot's ? You may say that he is the exception and only the minority behave like that, but it only takes one " presumed liable unless proven innocent " incident to land me in Jail.
-
-
I'm not saying cyclists are more or less competent road users than motorists.
I'm saying the principle of presumed liability runs counter to natural justice.
-
-
Fair point FPR, but have you ever heard a car say "ouch"..? Not excusing dickhead drivers (and I come across enough male drivers like that, being a female!!), fact is, cyclists needs to be more careful, they do have the most to lose should it all go horribly wrong.
-
-
Not really. If you're a small child and are struck on a crossing by a racer doing twenty-five mph your chances aren't great, are they? Oh, and I also disagree about every cyclist having a near-miss from a reckless motorist every day. Unless I'm blissfully unaware, or outrageously lucky,.. :)
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
