It's a good reason not to use cyclepaths, since that's where you're most likely to hit a pedestrian. Or is that off-road and not covered by the proposed law?
Believe it or not, the carriage way, the footway (if parallel to the carriage way and within 14 yards of the carriage way), and the cycle way, are all considered the same road. So if you have a large road with a carriage way, a cycle lane, and a footway, and it has a smaller road coming in from the left, and the car in the carriage way wants to turn left, the cyclist in the cycle lane, and the pedestrian on the footway have right of way, and can walk or cycle straight across the smaller road, and the car turning left, plus any cars on the smaller road have to give way. This is why it's utter madness that you get many cycle lanes where you have to give way at every T junction, rather than the continuous cycle way that you get here in the civilised world.
It is also worth noting that the UK highway code explicitly says that if you are doing more than 17mph, you should consider using the carriage way instead on safety grounds. UK cycle lanes and cycle paths are non compulsory, unlike much of the continent (Germany being a curious exception of dubious gray areas, resulting in much shouty motorists).
Referring back to the case, there were complicating factors, mostly summed up by the fact that he was twat who rather than slowed down, attempted a manoeuvre that led to the woman's death. Pedestrians step out into the road, I think it's my responsibility as a cyclist to be in a position to avoid them even if that inconveniences me. It would be nice if drivers would adopt the same philosophy.
This is one of the arguments in favour of adopting primary position rather than hugging the gutter. It gives you more space to maneuver.
As a cyclist (and a motorist) is is your duty to be aware of your surroundings and read the road ahead, you need to be able to look ahead and make the judgement, what if that kid runs out after their ball, what if that pedestrian wants to cross, etc... This is why many advise you cover your brake levers in built up areas. It's why on street parking is the devils work (too many places for hidden small people to run from). This is why the theory test has the hazard perception test. It's also why most drivers drive way to fast for the conditions...
For both cyclists and motorists brakes have improved greatly, and for many with fully functioning brakes you can stop very very very fast. But while your brakes have improved, reaction time goes up with age, which can in many cases off set the technological improvements. Some car manufacturers have tried to find solutions to this with auto braking functions. But I wouldn't rely solely on them.
I don't blame the husband for chasing this, of course (though it would be nice if he'd put his efforts into road safety in general), but the chap got a significant sentence for his crime, disproportionate considering that if he'd hit her in car he'd probably not have even been prosecuted. Probably, ha. He'd just have to claim he didn't see her and it would be accepted. Another sad accident.
The nasty party^W^W tories put out an advert on twitter that they were doing a consultation on cracking down on dangerous cyclists, saying they wanted to bring it in line with motorists. This was widely greated by cycling twitter as a good thing, as it would reduce the possible sentence for all cyclists... I don't think that was the tories aim.
The problem with consultations is that they're really just platforms for people to document their particular prejudices rather than soliciting evidence and expertise to base decisions and policy on.
Agreed. See the CS9 and CS11 consultations for text book examples of this.
Of course, they're investing time and effort in something that will rarely if ever be used, and does nothing to improve road safety. Of course, it doesn't antagonise drivers – that poor entitled majority – which is probably the point, because if they really cared about road safety, well, they'd have to, wouldn't they?
If they cared about road safety they would go for the simple acts of:
a) change the default liability in the case of an accident
b) teach vulnerable road user awareness (including cyclists), in the driving education process
c) Teach The dutch reach door opening setup.
d) Fund a big advertising campaign about how to over take cyclists, aka the education element of Op close pass.
J
