Urgent review looking at road laws for cyclists

jds_1981

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... e-alliston

Well, Just wow.

pblakeney

Excellent! Reinforcing the the fact that we have every right to be on the road, and treated as traffic. As long as we act as traffic...

thistle_

I'm not too concerned about a review, hopefully it will come out that the wanton and furious law does it's job (despite the archaic name) and maybe they'll just up the maximum sentence.
Maybe there will also be some sort of jaywalking law introduced...

What concerns me is the speed at which this has come about. How has Mr Briggs managed to meet with ministers and convince them to act so quickly? The news reports say Mr Briggs has pushed for this after Alliston's conviction however I suspect something's been going on a lot longer since the case first came to the attention of the media over the last few weeks.
Apparently it's "too difficult" to prosecute under the wanton and furious law, but the BBC article refers to 2 cases (in 2009 and 2015) where others were prosecuted.

Thick Mike

This *could* have the potential to be very good and improve the lot of cyclists and pedestrians alike. However...

Ben6899

I'm not fitting a reg plate to my bike.

mattsaw

Has there been any other cases where a new law would (and logically) have been applied?

bendertherobot

Mattsaw wrote:

Has there been any other cases where a new law would (and logically) have been applied?

Difficult to say.

It's hard to determine whether section 35 of the OAP 1861 is equivalent to causing death by careless or dangerous driving. The max sentence is low, which puts it closer to careless but that's not deliberate, it just is.

I'm having a stab at a table which compares offences, I will try and post it in due course. IF we have new laws that mirror the driving offences the sentencing guidelines will almost certainly be set lower, to deal with risk.

You could argue that Alliston would have been charged with death by careless and, if so, he could have had a lighter sentence. I suspect that he would still have been charged with dangerous though.

A point to note is that Alliston would 'only' have got 12 months had he pleaded guilty. So comparisons should be made in relation to that, not his 18 months, where motorists have pleaded.

mattsaw

bendertherobot wrote:

I'm having a stab at a table which compares offences,

It would be very interesting to see that.

On one hand I'm of the opinion that anything that punished any reckless road users would be a good thing.

On the other bringing in new legislation seems reactionary when there it arguably applies to less than a couple of cases every few years.

Additionally there is a secondary argument that long(ger) custodial sentences aren't IMO don't really address issues of poor driving or cycling. It's a costly solution that doesn't address the causes provide a resolution) or I would certainly like to see more community based sentences followed by much longer or permanent driving (or cycling for that matter) bans.

bendertherobot

There are, broadly, these outstanding issues:

1. No offence of causing serious injury by careless driving, has to be addressed.

2. Whether cycling offences should match existing offences and level of sentence.

3. Laws in relation to pedestrians

4. Juries. There's an issue at the moment comparing cases where motorists have 'gotten away with it' to Alliston. A comparison I don't think is helpful. But at the root of it is juries.

fat daddy

Ben6899 wrote:

I'm not fitting a reg plate to my bike.

oh I dont know .. It would be like the two months after a sportive when you see people riding around with the numbers still on their bike

Perhaps they will register the person and not the bike so you get to wear your "race" number on your shirt

veronese68

thistle (MBNW) wrote:

What concerns me is the speed at which this has come about.

Government policy being dictated by press hysteria. They have to do something while the story is still in the news to try and make themselves look good and distract from all the stories the show them as a complete shower of sh!t.

bendertherobot

I'm happy with a reg plate. I'll mount it on a 1.5 m pole sticking out from my right hand seatstay. Problem solved.

bendertherobot

Veronese68 wrote:

thistle (MBNW) wrote:

What concerns me is the speed at which this has come about.

Government policy being dictated by press hysteria. They have to do something while the story is still in the news to try and make themselves look good and distract from all the stories the show them as a complete shower of sh!t.

Part of that is being driven by cycling pieces/media/twitter righteous indignation on the internewt.

Ben6899

fat daddy wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

I'm not fitting a reg plate to my bike.

oh I dont know .. It would be like the two months after a sportive when you see people riding around with the numbers still on their bike

Perhaps they will register the person and not the bike so you get to wear your "race" number on your shirt

We'll probably have to pay "road tax" as well.

jds_1981

thistle (MBNW) wrote:

Maybe there will also be some sort of jaywalking law introduced...

What concerns me is the speed at which this has come about. How has Mr Briggs managed to meet with ministers and convince them to act so quickly? The news reports say Mr Briggs has pushed for this after Alliston's conviction however I suspect something's been going on a lot longer since the case first came to the attention of the media over the last few weeks.
Apparently it's "too difficult" to prosecute under the wanton and furious law, but the BBC article refers to 2 cases (in 2009 and 2015) where others were prosecuted.

Please no jay walking laws. People should be allowed to cross the road..

My concern was with the speed and target, as the referenced article states

Cycle campaigners questioned why ministers were acting urgently over the case when they had delayed a promised review into all road traffic offences and sentencing for more than three years.

Which would be a much better idea.

kingstongraham

Should the offence not be in relation to the action, not the consequence? Otherwise, it's no deterrent at all. Most times people ride/drive like idiots, someone doesn't die, but the action of the idiot is still the same.

jds_1981

bendertherobot wrote:

I'm happy with a reg plate. I'll mount it on a 1.5 m pole sticking out from my right hand seatstay. Problem solved.

I don't think one would do it. Better be safe, have two numbers, one on a metre stick to the right, one on a metre stick to the left.

fat daddy

jds_1981 wrote:

I don't think one would do it. Better be safe, have two numbers, one on a metre stick to the right, one on a metre stick to the left.

I so want to be riding behind you when you are filtering through traffic

thistle_

fat daddy wrote:

jds_1981 wrote:

I don't think one would do it. Better be safe, have two numbers, one on a metre stick to the right, one on a metre stick to the left.

I so want to be riding behind you when you are filtering through traffic

Put them on hinges with a little lever on your handlebars to turn them upwards, doubles up as a handy trafficator.

anonymousblackfg

I could look at the positives and think if Cyclist were held to the same account as motorist you could blat into anyone, kill them and walk. Or the negatives and wonder why some Daily Fail nonsense about a risk which is 8 times lower than being killed by your own bedding needs laws against it and actually gets traction with ministers.

thistle_

jds_1981 wrote:

thistle (MBNW) wrote:

Maybe there will also be some sort of jaywalking law introduced...

Please no jay walking laws. People should be allowed to cross the road..

Sorry, that was a poor use of words. "Careless walking in the carriageway" or "Walking without paying due care an attention" sort of thing.

Veronese68 wrote:

They have to do something while the story is still in the news to try and make themselves look good and distract from all the stories the show them as a complete shower of sh!t.

I wondered if that was also a factor...

hopkinb

People generally have a faulty perception of risk. There is a vanishingly small chance of a person being hit by a cyclist, and an even smaller one of being killed or seriously injured by one. But a couple of close passes by a kid doing a wheelie on the pavement, or a couple of sightings of a cyclist running a red is inflated into a plague of dangerous cyclists on the pavement, none of whom stop for red lights or obey speed limits etc etc. Meanwhile cars continue to kill and seriously injure literally thousands every year.

Most of the anti-cyclist ire is driven by people in towns & cities who have spent £000's on a shiny metal box to keep them warm while they sit in ever longer queues, then they see some scrote on a tatty pushbike get somewhere quicker than them, magnified by seeing a small proportion of those scrotes get there even quicker by jumping red lights.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

bendertherobot wrote:

I'm happy with a reg plate. I'll mount it on a 1.5 m pole sticking out from my right hand seatstay. Problem solved.

+1 !

bendertherobot

Bear in mind how many committees this will need to get through, how much evidence, risk will be scrutinised. It has almost no chance.........

That said, it has cross party support......................................................

graeme_s-2

The Guardian wrote:

Cycle campaigners questioned why ministers were acting urgently over the case when they had delayed a promised review into all road traffic offences and sentencing for more than three years.

What a load of bull shit!

jds_1981

fat daddy wrote:

jds_1981 wrote:

I don't think one would do it. Better be safe, have two numbers, one on a metre stick to the right, one on a metre stick to the left.

I so want to be riding behind you when you are filtering through traffic

Traffic? I only ever cycle down the middle of paths

bendertherobot

jds_1981 wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

jds_1981 wrote:

I don't think one would do it. Better be safe, have two numbers, one on a metre stick to the right, one on a metre stick to the left.

I so want to be riding behind you when you are filtering through traffic

Traffic? I only ever cycle down the middle of paths

He's a pinball wizard

mrb123

bendertherobot wrote:

Mattsaw wrote:

Has there been any other cases where a new law would (and logically) have been applied?

Difficult to say.

It's hard to determine whether section 35 of the OAP 1861 is equivalent to causing death by careless or dangerous driving. The max sentence is low, which puts it closer to careless but that's not deliberate, it just is.

I'm having a stab at a table which compares offences, I will try and post it in due course. IF we have new laws that mirror the driving offences the sentencing guidelines will almost certainly be set lower, to deal with risk.

You could argue that Alliston would have been charged with death by careless and, if so, he could have had a lighter sentence. I suspect that he would still have been charged with dangerous though.

A point to note is that Alliston would 'only' have got 12 months had he pleaded guilty. So comparisons should be made in relation to that, not his 18 months, where motorists have pleaded.

Which may well then have been suspended.

kleinstroker

Ben6899 wrote:

I'm not fitting a reg plate to my bike.

Neither am I, I do though think it might be an idea for commercial cyclists ie deliveroo riders etc to have to go on some sort of test, and maybe carry some sort of ID

Walls82

If its a case of updating the laws then fair enough but I'm slightly worried that knowing our clueless politicians it could be turned into some anti cycling law.

Its slightly depressing how ant bike this country this is:

Estimated early deaths(other factors involved not the sole cause) pollution the London is 9,500

People under 75 dieing of heart disease 153,000

People under 75 dieing of cancer 63,000

All of which could be reduced by more people cycling, instead cycling is made out in the press to be something exceptionally dangerous done by lawbreaking hooligans. If someone gets hit by a car the first thing people ask is if they were wearing a helmet,like running over a cyclist is fine but wearing a helmet isn't(i'm neither for or against helmets, but do think they distract massively from the bigger issues in cycle safety).

Personally I think forget cycling infrastructure its too late to do anything meaningful and concentrate on educating people on safer driving and cycling. You can buy a bike on the ride to work scheme easily but there is no info on how to ride safely to work, my 5 year old son shoulder checks more than some of the people I come across on my commute to work!

rich_e

kleinstroker wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

I'm not fitting a reg plate to my bike.

Neither am I, I do though think it might be an idea for commercial cyclists ie deliveroo riders etc to have to go on some sort of test, and maybe carry some sort of ID

The problem with the likes of Deliveroo and such companies is that I presume it's like Uber where they are essentially self-employed. Do such companies provide the worker with insurance, or are they responsible for that themselves?

I do think it would make sense that anyone who is employed to use a bicycle for their job has insurance and a road worthy and legal bike. With the gig-economy though, I'm not sure who the responsibility lies with, obviously if it's enforced on the employer, they will have to make regular checks.

But then it all comes back to how do you go about policing that?
As the only time that's going to happen is either during an accident like this particular case or occasional police stop-check drives.

But then it all still comes back to the crux of targeting cyclists when there are plenty of other offences being committed. I've seen many a terrible moped delivery rider on L plates, I'd imagine there are many working unlicensed and get away with it.