OT: New driving laws and cyclists etc

Like the unfortunate cyclist that was run over, who...

left the pub at 11.30pm did not have lights or reflective clothing on a poorly lit road and fell off after a collision with another cyclist

Wrong. people have been done for exceeding the speed limit on a horse.

They can and do go faster without breaking the

Please quote the relevant law that states cycles aren't subject to speed limits.

That was in 2015. Now see this report from 2021:

The Royal Parks, who maintain the park, confirmed on 30 September that their 20mph speed limit did not apply to bicycles, and this was corroborated by the Metropolitan Police last week."

Cite?

I haven't looked for figures specific to crossings, but I have looked at overall figures from a couple of years before Covid (all KSI, not just pedestrians), categorised by the vehicle causing the KSI. When converted to KSI per million miles travelled, pedal cycles were slightly worse than cars. Cars were actually the safest road vehicles other than buses, with vans, coaches and trucks being by far the worst.

Another stat (from a TRL report IIRC) was that for pedestrians killed or seriously injured, the primary cause was "Pedestrian failed to look" in

Given your practice when asked for evidence I think it's generous of me to point you to the Road Traffic Act 1984.

I don't have a reference to the relevant law, but I do have some text from a lawyer, that was published in a newsapaper:

'The Highway Code and the Road Traffic Act speeding limits apply only to motor vehicles and their drivers.

However, it is possible for local authorities to impose speed limits on cyclists but this is rarely done. The local council would have to state specifically the limit and the penalty for breaching that limit.

The case is different however for royal parks. Previously, speed limits in royal parks were applicable to bicycles, because the, The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997 amended by the Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces (Amendment) Regulations 2004 outlined that speed limits in the parks applied to all vehicles.

This was amended to be specific to motor vehicles meaning that it does not apply to bikes. It was then un-amended (revoked) such that speed limits do apply to bicycles in royal parks as follows:

"Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road

On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St James's Park or The Regent's Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph. On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not exceeding 20 mph. On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15 mph. On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not exceeding 10 mph.".'

Pancho:

Pancho:

So why do you do it?

What possible relevance do offences allegedly committed by others have to do with offences committed by cyclists?

That cyclists are hypocrites.

lol!, why would you do that?

Did you have a point you were going to try to make?

Does a report in the local rag of someone being flashed by a Gatso mean that the cyclist reading it is entitled to disobey a red traffic light?

There's no need to put yourself to any real trouble in providing an an answer. A straight "Yes" or "No" will suffice.

Or you can not answer at all, which will be taken as a "Yes" that you didn't have the courage to provide.

Christ on a bike, that's lame.

To prove a point. Kind of like your use of stats. Are you stupid, or simply stupid?

Yes, people who bang on about the crime of cyclists while ignoring the crimes of motorists are hypocrites. It is a simple point.

So the points are: Dave is a hypocrite, and you are using strawmen, as you so often do.

This is a thread about a motorist convicted of a criminal offence, isn't it? Not about your repeated straw men.

At no point have I defended lawbreaking, or been an apologist for lawbreakers. I wasn't the one who started making bigoted remarks about "cyclists" being criminals, I merely pointed to the hypocrisy of those who do. Unlike yourself, I wasn't the one defending lawbreaking.

I think the point about cyclists who break the law is that they do so apparently with a sense of entitlement, with monotonous regularity, and with a sense of astonishment when they are nicked.

But what was the point? What is the question that "KSI per million miles" is the answer to?

Does it mean people are more likely to be killed by a bike? no.

Does it mean people are more likely to kill someone while riding a bike? no.

Does it mean someone is more like to be killed if we switch a journey from a car to a bike? no.

As do motorists with speeding and other crimes.

In fact, many motorists sense of entitlement is so great that they fail to acknowledge the obvious high level of criminality by motorists, even after they have their noses rubbed in it.