Bus driver jailed for mowing down road user he argued with

[jon0844]

I cycle. I don't jump lights. I feel a requirement to do the right thing, even if there's nobody actually watching me. I'd know. Same reason I don't fare evade even when it would often be dead easy to.

There's a big difference in how some people think. If anything, I'd say that mainland Europe is becoming more like us than us ever becoming more like them.

Of course I am generalising, but if you look at London then - as you've said yourself - there's a clearly identifiable group of users that skew the figures. If you did get everyone cycling, things might change - but it's a catch 22 situation. My wife would never dream of cycling in London. Even I'd think against it, from a danger point of view - and I've cycled for years, and even did my cycling proficiency course as a child! Having an interest in transport, from walking to cycling (admittedly, I don't cycle much now) and then public transport, I try and see the bigger picture.

 

[transmanche]

How about training the cyclists for once?

And after the four points you quoted, the list of recommendations continued...

5. Improve cycle training

It's a package of recommendations. No single change will bring about the scale of improvements needed.

Rather than laying the blame on the drivers of large vehicles, who are trained, rather than the cyclists who have no compulsory training whatsoever.

There was no blame being allocated. Merely a list of practical recommendations to reduce the death toll. (And remember, drivers of vehicles up to 7.5T may not have had any specialist training whatsoever.)

Also, HGVs already have a load of mirrors on the n/s (newer ones have 3 or 4), but there will always be blindspots, as with any vehicle.

Which is why the recommendation was to 'Improve mirror configuration' - far too many HGV's do not have additional blind spot mirrors.

Any half decent cyclist knows that you NEVER cycle up the inside of a large vehicle in traffic. To do so with one indicating left is just suicidal.

And you've assumed that the cyclist is at fault, without considering that the driver may have drawn up alongside the cyclist. Or that the turning vehicle failed to indicate/did not indicate until the traffic lights turned green. We don't know, but I would probably guess that it's a mixture of both.


People make bad decisions. Not 'just cyclists' or 'just motorists'. But people. The weak point in any system is the human element. if you can reduce the death toll by simple, inexpensive design changes - then it makes sense to do it.

I'd like to see advances made in the area of all eight recommendations. But that can only happen if attitudes change first. If everyone who reads this thread gives a second thought the next time they are a road user; to consider what effect their actions have on other road users (whether pedestrian, cyclist or motorist) - then we'll be half-way there.

 

[Muzer]

Basically, all our problems will be over once we perfect robot cars

 

[radamfi]

My wife would never dream of cycling in London. Even I'd think against it, from a danger point of view - and I've cycled for years, and even did my cycling proficiency course as a child!

But London doesn't have Dutch style infrastructure! That is the reason why you, your wife, and most other people in the country don't cycle. It feels unsafe because you have to share the road with motor vehicles. Dutch people who come here don't cycle.

I reiterate the question: if the UK had Dutch style infrastructure (i.e. comprehensive 4m wide cycle paths, cycle signals, priority at all side roads etc.) would British people cycle?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Improve cyclists' conspicuity
Use of cycle helmets

The Dutch don't wear cycle helmets or wear bright clothes. Doesn't stop the Netherlands being by far the safest place in the developed world to cycle.

 

[90019]

There was no blame being allocated. Merely a list of practical recommendations to reduce the death toll.

I think what frustrates me is that whenever anything comes up about the dangers of cycling, it seems that the immediate response is that everything else must be changed to try and make it safer for the cyclists, and (unlike that list) in a lot of cases there is no mention of actually training the cyclists themselves to make them safer riders.

Anyway, on that point I wasn't talking about the list as such, but about what actually happens.
I was recently behind a truck at a junction that was indicating left but had moved out to the right get the trailer round the junction. Whilst waiting there, a cyclist came along, seemingly completely oblivious to everything going on around him (with headphones in, just to add to it) and sailed right up the inside of it, then pulled out into the traffic without looking. Thankfully the truck hadn't moved, or the cyclist would have most likely been run over, and the driver of the truck almost certainly blamed.

What I do want to see is more responsibility for cyclists, because as things stand just now, they can do pretty much what they want and get away with it, and when they get injured or killed doing soemthing moronic, the finger gets pointed at any drivers involved unless they can show the cyclist was to blame.

(And remember, drivers of vehicles up to 7.5T may not have had any specialist training whatsoever.)

Thankfully that changed, I think it was 2001, so now you no longer automatically get the C1 and D1 entitlement. However, yes, 7.5T trucks may be being driven by someone with no extra training - something I would like to see the end of, as some of the 7.5T drivers are a menace.

Which is why the recommendation was to 'Improve mirror configuration' - far too many HGV's do not have additional blind spot mirrors.

Generally it is only old trucks that only have a single mirror on the n/s, and I can't remember the last time I saw a truck without at least a wide angle mirror.

And you've assumed that the cyclist is at fault, without considering that the driver may have drawn up alongside the cyclist.

Which is why you don't sit over to the side of the lane when at traffic lights, because allowing drivers to do that is letting yourself be put in danger.

Or that the turning vehicle failed to indicate/did not indicate until the traffic lights turned green.

That doesn't matter - anyone stupid enough to ride up the inside of a large vehicle shouldn't be riding on the roads.
This part of the quote applies regardless of the situation;

Any half decent cyclist knows that you NEVER cycle up the inside of a large vehicle in traffic.

There is NO excuse to ride up the insde of a large vehicle. EVER.

I'd like to see advances made in the area of all eight recommendations. But that can only happen if attitudes change first. If everyone who reads this thread gives a second thought the next time they are a road user; to consider what effect their actions have on other road users (whether pedestrian, cyclist or motorist) - then we'll be half-way there.

I do agree with this, but more effort needs to be made towards cyclists, in particular I'd like to see the laws being enforced more strictly for cyclists on the roads, particularly those who run red lights or ride on the pavements.

 

[transmanche]

The Dutch don't wear cycle helmets or wear bright clothes. Doesn't stop the Netherlands being by far the safest place in the developed world to cycle.

But that's exactly why the Transport Research Laboratory's eight recommendations are spot-on. Because as you said...

London doesn't have Dutch style infrastructure!

... so the recommendations are based on the reality of London and it's infrastructure.

 

[radamfi]

But that's exactly why the Transport Research Laboratory's eight recommendations are spot-on.

Because as you said...... so the recommendations are based on the reality of London and it's infrastructure.

So surely the answer is to provide Dutch style infrastructure in the UK. You won't get mass cycling in the UK without it.

 

[jon0844]

So surely the answer is to provide Dutch style infrastructure in the UK. You won't get mass cycling in the UK without it.

Yes, that would be something to aspire to - but it won't happen will it? Or at least not for a LONG time (perhaps if/when it becomes near impossible to run a car for VED, insurance, congestion charge, fuel, servicing costs etc).

 

[transmanche]

So surely the answer is to provide Dutch style infrastructure in the UK.

Oh if only! I don't think there's the political will - although Boris is at least trying to do something with the Cycle Super Highways in London... but that's just the tip of the iceberg of improvements needed.

You won't get mass cycling in the UK without it.

Sadly I don't think we'll ever get Dutch-style mass cycling outside of Cambridge. Most of the UK is much hiller than most of the Netherlands!

 

[jon0844]

Even in Hatfield, I sometimes forget how hilly it can be (I am reminded when I begin to struggle as I'm in the wrong gear).

 

[transmanche]

Even in Hatfield, I sometimes forget how hilly it can be (I am reminded when I begin to struggle as I'm in the wrong gear).

I feel your pain... hock:

 

[radamfi]

Sadly I don't think we'll ever get Dutch-style mass cycling outside of Cambridge. Most of the UK is much hiller than most of the Netherlands!

Hembrow debunks all the excuses that people make when they say you can't have mass cycling in their country.

http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2011/02/all-those-myths-and-excuses-in-one-post.html

Regarding hills:

Another plea from people who imagine that the Netherlands is completely flat and that this is the reason for cycling. It's not as simple as that. In a flat country, headwinds are phenomenal, so it's not really so big a gain for cyclists as is often imagined. That's something that people who live in the area of the UK called Holland, which is just as flat as the Netherlands, also know. However, they don't cycle any more than people elsewhere in the UK because they don't have cycle-paths and their towns have been developed to exclude cyclists. What's more, not all of the Netherlands actually is that flat. In fact, the Amstel Gold cycle race is held here - and is famous for its vicious hilly course. Limburg is a hilly province in the Netherlands. Also bear in mind that Switzerland achieves a much better cycling rate than many other countries, despite being rather mountainous, and that in Britain in 1949, over 30% of total road distance travelled was by bike. The geography hasn't changed, though road conditions have.

 

[transmanche]

Regarding hills:

It was a tongue in cheek comment...

 

[jopsuk]

With regards lorries and blind spots, apparently Crossrail, at at least one site, has started turning away any lorries that arrive that do not have their required standard of blind spot mirrors, warning stickers and bleepers- not on the basis of safety on the site, but of safety for other road users in London. Non-delivery due to being turned away is at the haulage contractor's expense. They were all well warned, yet something like 10-20% were turned away on the first day they implemented the checks.

 

[GearJammer]

With regards lorries and blind spots, apparently Crossrail, at at least one site, has started turning away any lorries that arrive that do not have their required standard of blind spot mirrors, warning stickers and bleepers- not on the basis of safety on the site, but of safety for other road users in London. Non-delivery due to being turned away is at the haulage contractor's expense. They were all well warned, yet something like 10-20% were turned away on the first day they implemented the checks.

Er, whos required standard of blind spot mirrors?

And who the hell are crossrail to say what trucks are safe or not safe for other road users in London? Think Crossrail should stick to playing trains and leave the trucks to the road haulage industry!

And as ive said before..... you can stick 101 bloody mirrors and camaras round a truck cab... theres still only 1 pair of eyes in the cab to check em all with and you can't look everywhere at once!

I think theres a simple way to improve cyclists attitude.... they should all do a cycling test at the age of 17/18 and be issued with a cycling licence with basic name and address (like the driving licence) and nobody without one should be allowed to ride on the road or buy a push bike from a shop and let them know that if there caught breaking any road rules then its quite simple, the bike will be confiscated and destroyed.
It could be enforced by doing random stop checks on cyclists and servelance of traffic junctions.
I doubt it would totally cure the problem but it would stop cyclists thinking there untouchable and make them think a bit more often!

 

[radamfi]

I doubt it would totally cure the problem but it would stop cyclists thinking there untouchable and make them think a bit more often!

As I have stated in numerous posts on this thread, the Dutch way of providing a nationwide network of quality cycle paths means there is no longer conflict between cyclists and motor vehicles. Where a cycle path exists, cyclists are not even allowed on the road, and there is no reason why they would want to be on the road anyway when the cycle path is so good.

 

[exile]

Er, whos required standard of blind spot mirrors?

And who the hell are crossrail to say what trucks are safe or not safe for other road users in London? Think Crossrail should stick to playing trains and leave the trucks to the road haulage industry!

And as ive said before..... you can stick 101 bloody mirrors and camaras round a truck cab... theres still only 1 pair of eyes in the cab to check em all with and you can't look everywhere at once!

I think theres a simple way to improve cyclists attitude.... they should all do a cycling test at the age of 17/18 and be issued with a cycling licence with basic name and address (like the driving licence) and nobody without one should be allowed to ride on the road or buy a push bike from a shop and let them know that if there caught breaking any road rules then its quite simple, the bike will be confiscated and destroyed.
It could be enforced by doing random stop checks on cyclists and servelance of traffic junctions.
I doubt it would totally cure the problem but it would stop cyclists thinking there untouchable and make them think a bit more often!

I agree - if the same "one strike and your vehicle is crushed" rule is applied toi motorised road users.

 

[185]

I agree - if the same "one strike and your vehicle is crushed" rule is applied toi motorised road users.

Greater Manchester, with the stupidest, dumbest motorists in the UK would have a serious scrap metal problem if this was implemented.

 

[jon0844]

Er, whos required standard of blind spot mirrors?

And who the hell are crossrail to say what trucks are safe or not safe for other road users in London? Think Crossrail should stick to playing trains and leave the trucks to the road haulage industry!

They can surely do what they want? Comply with the rules or don't get any work from Crossrail. Like anyone, if you don't like it - don't work for them and deal with someone else.

I see no harm in a company trying to think of the bigger picture, corporate responsibility and all that. Frankly, I'd hope that more businesses will do the right thing, and customers will reward those businesses.

However, I do also agree that cyclists should NEVER undertake a lorry, bus or even a car - and that cyclists should be given training (stopping short of a licence perhaps).