Letter on Dangerous Driving in The Times

[Jaded]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3876119.ece

I think this needs our full support - loudly!

[Dave]

Why bother? It'll just turn into yet another 'lycra louts' clusterf**k. I notice that the first comment has a dig at cyclists, when the letter doesn't mention them at all...

--
Edit: Of course, the letter does mention cyclists. The comments also seem to have been removed (as of 10:45)?

[Regulator]

Why bother? It'll just turn into yet another 'lycra louts' clusterf**k. I notice that the first comment has a dig at cyclists, when the letter doesn't mention them at all...

Are we reading the same letter?  Geffen makes reference to "Dangerous driving endangers everyone using the roads, but the people most affected are children, older and disabled people and anyone using the streets on foot or by bike."  OK - he doesn't use the word 'cyclist' but the meaning is clear.

Overall, I think Geffen makes the point well and has the correct emphasis - dangerous driving endangers all road users.  The police and CPS should take these matters more seriously.

[Jaded]

Why bother? It'll just turn into yet another 'lycra louts' clusterf**k. I notice that the first comment has a dig at cyclists, when the letter doesn't mention them at all...

Yeah, on second thoughts you are right. Lets all do bugger all. 

I'm not sure why you think that I'm suggesting that all everyone does is send in comments? There are other ways of supporting Roger.

[Charlotte]

...firstly through making sure you're a member of the CTC, LCC, etc.

If you can't spare the time to campaign for the rights of cyclists, I'd suggest that you ought to consider supporting an organisation that does.

Good Work, Roger - you're a Top Chap 

[Dave]

I'm not sure why you think that I'm suggesting that all everyone does is send in comments? There are other ways of supporting Roger.

Perhaps you should have made your original post more clear then?

I wasn't aware that because it was written by someone Very Important, that we should treat it differently than all the similar links that get posted to this (and other) groups.

[Jaded]

Whatever.

[Ian H]

Trying to get more people to cycle is allied to changing perceptions of danger on the road:-

"The biggest reason why parents did not let their child cycle on the road was concern about safety - but only 3% knew someone who had been in an accident."

[Regulator]

Is it just me?  I can't see any comments on this letter...   

If there are comments, can someone please post a link... 

[Phil]

There were some when I first followed the link.  I broke the habit of a lifetime and posted a reply, and now I can't see any of them. 

Anyway, there were two.  The first said something along the lines of 'But wait! Cyclist all jump red lights, plough through pedestrian crossings, and go the wrong way down one-way streets! That's not fair! Waaaaah! Mummy!'

The second said: 'What a splendid chap you clearly are for posting something like that! Only the other day I was mildly inconvenienced by a cyclist who went to the front a queue of respectable god-fearing car drivers at a roadworks, waited at the red light, and then went through! On a green light! All the cars had to follow him! Disgusting! Should be shot! Let's put the car first for a change!'

I said their comments were irrelevant and that a dangerous motorist was a whole lot more threatening than a dangerous cyclist.  Obviously too much controversy for the Times to handle. 

[Phil]

They're back.  Here they are in case they get removed again:

Dangerous drivers should be prosecuted, but so should dangerous cyclists. Red lights, pedestrian crossings, and one way streets do apply to cyclists not just motorists.

Andy, correze, france

Quite right!

We have road works, one lane is closed, the path through is narrow. A cyclist rode to the front of the queue as traffic waited for the lights to change, then rode out as the lights changed. All the of traffic had to wait as the bike went through. Think cars not bikes - give & take

Jon, Worcester,

[mattc]

I said their comments were irrelevant and that a dangerous motorist was a whole lot more threatening than a dangerous cyclist.  Obviously too much controversy for the Times to handle. 

Bloody typical. A perfectly rational debate is ruined by some trouble-making student hippy cyclist. There's always one that ruins it for the rest ...

[Eccentrica Gallumbits]

There's a letter in the Edinburgh Evening News today telling us we should know our place and keep tight to the left to make way for everyone who's paid road tax.

[Regulator]

There's a letter in the Edinburgh Evening News today telling us we should know our place and keep tight to the left to make way for everyone who's paid road tax.

Have you got a link please?   

[Pingu]

There's a letter in the Edinburgh Evening News today telling us we should know our place and keep tight to the left to make way for everyone who's paid road tax.

That would include a lot of cyclists and exclude a sizeable chunk of motorists.

[Edit] Not that there is such a thing as 'road tax', of course 

[Eccentrica Gallumbits]

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/opinion/Let39s-see-zoo-back-up.4052195.jp

[mattc]

...firstly through making sure you're a member of the CTC, LCC, etc.

If you can't spare the time to campaign for the rights of cyclists, I'd suggest that you ought to consider supporting an organisation that does.

As the CTC are the only people doing anything at all for cycling, they have my support. However, apart from Mr Geffen standing up and being counted, there does not seem to be any official drive by the CTC to change things in any substantive way. Here is the last response I got  (on the old forum):

Could anyone from the CTC give us some idea of how the CTC is currently, err, pulling on this matter?

Well, I believe one current matter involves responding to the recent consultation on changes to the CPS guidance for dealing with highway offences. Mostly it is the long, slow process of building consensi with other vulnerable road user groups to try and strengthen the law in relation to road users' behaviour towards one another. This ain't exciting "weight pulling", but it is vital "tugging" in the right direction.

And the more motorists there are cycling then the more people there will be who will pay greater respect to cyclists (on the basis that they would behave unto others... etc).

Don't expect one day all the drivers in the country will suddenly wake up and think: "ahh, I want to drive really carefully around cyclists from now on AND respect their rights to use the roads"

Charlotte,
Do you know of any firm plans by the CTC to Actually Do Anything?

[Julian]

AIUI the CTC have been influential in pressing for a new offence of death by careless driving.

That's a phenomenally good start.

[mattc]

AIUI the CTC have been influential in pressing for a new offence of death by careless driving.

That's a phenomenally good start.

Liz,
I'm afraid my Little Brain has lost track of all the ins-n-outs of the different offences. My layman's view of matters in recent years has been that the list of offences and sentences have always been adequate, but that enforcement is sadly lacking (and CPS always go for the easiest win).

Does this latest offence change things for the better? (I really WANT to hear good news!)

M

[Julian]

It means those who kill with their cars are more likely to be prosecuted and more likely to be convicted, so yes.  I think that's good news.

[mattc]

I have become rather cynical and battle-weary recently. When I see some convictions I might actually celebrate this.

(I actually think we also need more ammunition against the lower-level stuff - the general abuse and non-lethal violence which (disproportionately) puts people off riding ).

[dkahn400]

They're back.  Here they are in case they get removed again:

[

They seem to be coming and going. When first I looked they were there. Next time they had disappeared. When I looked again just a minute or two ago all three comments had returned.

[nitpickles]

It means those who kill with their cars are more likely to be prosecuted and more likely to be convicted, so yes.  I think that's good news.

Except that AFAIK there are no immediate plans to bring it into operation - the CPS and Sentencing Guidelines are still not finalised.

[Pedaldog.]

Didn't somebody mention the offence of "Causing Danger to other road users" that carried a possible 5 year incarceration?
If you get F' ed up by somebody report it to the police and say you want to press that particular charge. I'll certainly do it should the need occur and would like to hear anybody else do the same.

[TheLurker]

AIUI the CTC have been influential in pressing for a new offence of death by careless driving.

That's a phenomenally good start.

OK I'm not a CTC member so I can't really complain about what the CTC does or does not do, but I wonder if the organisation might be better taking a longer view and going for the DSA and their training schemes for Driving Instructors?  Teach the driving instructors that cyclists are to be respected and (eventually) we (I hope) get drivers who don't treat cyclists as litter.  Might be pushing on an open, well unlocked, door at the moment with the consideration they're giving to stressing safe driving skills as part of the revisions to driver training.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk/7387384.stm