andy97

iTrader: (1)

Generally if a cyclist is involved in an 'incident' they wont be riding off anywhere as they will be injured to some extent. You do know that only 90% of accidents involving cyclists are caused by drivers of vehicles.

If the so called incident doesnt involve a collision, feel free to chase them down, and tell them off. You will probably get a reply " sorry mate didnt see you" diffuses alot of situations

dpb

In the same way as its nearly always the blokes behind fault in a shunt

jonc

Generally if a cyclist is involved in an incident and are able to, will ride off and escape any responsibility. Seen it plenty unreported cycle hit and runs, run a red light, knock a pedestrian over, go down one ways, scratch or knock off door mirrors of stationary vehicles etc. They get away with it because they can, motorised vehicles don't because they're registered and can be reported and traced by anyone. If a cyclist is involved in an incident, maybe they should ride like they're likely to come off worse in incidents, plenty don't and ride like it's their god given entitlement to ride how they like. Besides 90% of statistics are made up.

DYK

In most cases it probably would calm the situation,but in the case of this particular cyclist,he appears to purposely chase after motorists.and i know some motorists can act also like morons,but to wind someone up and then starts to snigger and laugh after saying put your seatbelt on i think it would annoy a lot of people.And how come the cyclist didn't get a caution for dangerous cycling speeding off along the pavement.wasn't it on the news a few days ago about some cyclist got fined for speeding along a pavement and knocked down a three year old girl.

andy97

iTrader: (1)

Mitigating circumstances" deranged fatty intent on blood letting"

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Edit: now realized I misread the highlighted comment to mean the exact opposite of what it actually does

Ooperbum

Cyclists are cun!s. I wish them misery. They think they own every bit of land. And they think they are extra hard with cameras. Spineless *****. If I witness a cyclist being knocked over/ran over by a car, i will not bother stop to help, I will drive past and point and laugh!!!

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Good to see you being your usual constructive self there, Ooper.

andy97

iTrader: (1)

My, you recovered quickly from the tumble

Look forward to seeing you on a later video clip!

BL08 EYE

iTrader: (1)

Put registration plates on bikes and make them pay tax and insurance

andy97

iTrader: (1)

No requirement for non motorised transport for registration, next you will want registration on a horse' s @rse

Tax, Please! I presume you mean road tax. Road tax hasn't been around since 1937.

Insurance , well you will be very surprised, most dedicated cyclists have it through club membership or affiliate cycling groups

The Dogs B******s

What ****ing stupid ****ing **** you are.

jonc

Why not? Other than it being motorised, what difference are there to say a motorbike/moped for instance?

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Do you have a registration for your legs? No. Is there anything to stop you from walking or jogging along any road you like, motorways excepted, even if said road actually has a footpath? No.

All sarcasm aside, knowing the usual blundering lack of efficiency with which any government project is undertaken, how high do you think this registration fee would have to be for it to pay for itself? Or are you proposing it would be free, and paid for out of general taxation?

Ooperbum

jonc

Why do cyclists generally show resistance to such a scheme? Let's stick with the concept before we delve into the logistics of it. Registration was brought in for motorised vehicles to ensure owners can be traced in the event of an accident or contravention of the law. It would also benefit cyclists in that if their bikes are stolen and recovered, they can easily be traced back to their owners for example. Why would you not want that?

dpb

I wouldn't mind at all , the logistics aren't easy though

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

There isn't a single country in the world where cycle registration is mandatory (or even optional, AFAIK), nor has there ever been. This will simply never happen, so get over it and start dealing with the fact you have to share the road with these people whether you like it or not. It's the grown-up thing to do.

jonc

There is not a single country in the world where laws for traffiking drugs is preventing it, so why bother with it? Is that what you are saying? If it can't be done or made to work, why bother?

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

As debating tactics go, conceding from the very outset that you don't believe the idea you're proposing will ever be effective is a pretty novel one. Where did you come up with that exactly?

jonc

I think you misunderstood my point.

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Really? I can't imagine why you would. Let's forget about though for a minute and get back to the core question here. Are you feeling any more comfortable with the idea yet that motorists in this country have to share the roads with non-registered cyclists?

jonc

Of course, I have no issues with sharing the road with cyclists or horse, I do so every day without incident. My brother is an avid cyclist/commuter with a head cam in London. I see his vids and some are shocking in both from what motorists and cyclists do that he captures and get away with.

Now answer my question, regardless of the logistics, why are you against the registration to use the roads? I would start with those who use bikes commercially like cycle couriers. I've lost count the amount of times I've seen these fixed geared narrow barred bandits riding with complete disregard to other road users and the law.

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Why are you so insistent on completely ignoring the logistics? Just taking the example you gave of cycle couriers, how would the law differentiate between someone who works as a cycle courier riding their bike on a workday, on their day off, or on their way to or from work? Would the registration apply to the person, their professional activity or their actual bicycle, or some combination of the three? How many hundreds or thousands of man-hours of civil servants' time would have to be devoted to deciding those questions, just for that one specific and rather small sub-section of the wider cycling population, before you even begin starting with the roll-out of the registration process? Multiply that whole shenanigans out by as many different sub-sections of the cycling population as there are in total, and you have a bureaucratic headache fit for a Monty Python feature film.

To answer your question then, the logistics IS the entire problem here, it really doesn't matter whether I'm for or against the idea.

jonc

It would suggest it be phased in and start with the purchase of new bikes and some of the cost burden will included in the purchase price of bikes and would operate similar to how the dvla works. So besides the logistical aspects you're not against the idea of the registration of bicycles? Besides when has a logistical nightmare ever stop the government from doing anything.

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

But what makes you think that in the asburdly unlikely event that this was ever implemented, bicycle registration would be tied to the vehicle as opposed to the rider? You have absolutely no idea at all whether that would really be the case.

Face it, you might as well be debating whether ID cards should be compulsory for living on the moon. It's NEVER going to happen, move on, get over it, put it behind you, deal with the rest of your life. Oh, and thank your lucky stars that even the halfwit cretins we have masquerading as a government in this country wouldn't be stupid enough to actually take up your idea.

pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

I'd agree it's not going to happen, but you seem to be avoiding the question, let's pretend it's easy, do you support it?

andy97

iTrader: (1)

Everything in life doesn't have to be registered on a central government system.

Cycling is and will always be a simple effective mode of a person moving around. It is safe and cheap to do.

The question raised is from drivers, I believe due to the fact that some drivers have been recorded and reported to the police, even prosecuted on the evidence. Drivers are now feeling a little conscious of their actions, so as a retaliatory response they want cyclists to go around with registrations on their bikes,so they can now report incidents to the authorities.

I have no objection to registration in principle, I don't think it will ever happen as its difficult enough to encourage adults, even children to use their bikes more than vehicles. Better policing of poor behaviour is needed on the roads for everyone.

There will be always a general dislike of non mechanised road users by drivers. Its the caged mentality that comes out in most of us! Try and remember(yes it has happened to all of us at some point) when you're in a traffic jam and the car filtering in, is trying to get into your lane nudges in front of you and the blinkers come down and aggression builds as you try and stop them getting in front of you.

Now this applies to cyclists when they are perceived to whizz by car drivers in towns and cities in queuing traffic(I have seen drivers chunter as the cyclists makes progress). Drivers then do the same to cyclists.
But there is one big fundemental difference, it hurts and frightens when a vehicle hits a cyclist- drivers are cocooned in a metal shell isolated mentally and physically from the accident

Once a driver is out of the car and is walking in a crowded street, you never see that person try and push and bash their way through the crowd, because bumping into an object yourself can hurt. This is what drivers invariably forget when they get inside their vehicle.

jonc

Whether it can or cannot be implemented is beside the point. I'm not looking at from a drivers perspective, just at the principle of bikes being registered. As a pedestrian in London, I've witnessed plenty of altercations caused by riders hitting pedestrians, hitting cars and causing damage, performing dangerous and illegal maneuvers being abusive or aggressive because you've impeded there progress etc, and riding off with no further repercussions. They do this because they know they can get away with it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-pavement.html

If that was your child, wouldn't you want someway of identifying the rider? I'm of the opinion that if bikes were clearly registered then there would be a huge change to the cyclists attitude and the way they ride, which can only mean greater safety for everyone. It doesn't stop people from enjoying their rides, it'll still be simple and effective mode of transport. How will registration discourage adults and children from riding their bikes? How can you police "poor behavior"? I won't even go into the logistics of that idea!!!

andy97

iTrader: (1)

And why Peugeot man was ignorant as to road positioning for cyclists whilst passing parked vehicles and the necessary distance(minimum- one car width) you should give cyclists when overtaking

http://road.cc/content/news/159991-v...path-black-cab