Death by Dangerous Cycling

tillson

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 29, 2008
5,249
3,197
The government is looking at introducing a new offence of causing death by dangerous cycling following concerns that there is no suitable legislation to deal with riders who are involved in incidents such as hitting pedestrians on pavements.
A transport minister has privately promised to support a bill presented to the House of Commons by Andrea Leadsom, the Conservative MP for South Northamptonshire, who is campaigning on behalf of a family whose teenage daughter was struck and killed by a reckless cyclist.
The move follows a significant increase in cycling in many parts of the UK over recent years and a parallel spate of alarmist media stories about "Lycra louts".
The plans have been criticised by cycling groups who argue such deaths are so rare that a new law is unnecessary, as well as a distraction from a far bigger threat to pedestrians posed by cars. In 2009, the last year for which road death statistics have been collated, no pedestrians were killed by cyclists whereas 426 died in collisions with motor vehicles.
Cyclists can be fined for dangerous or careless cycling but more serious offences can only be dealt with under a section of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act originally aimed at the "wanton or furious" driving of a horse-drawn carriage.
Leadsom introduced a bill to the Commons last month, using as an example Rhiannon Bennett, then 17, who was killed by a speeding cyclist in 2007. The cyclist was fined £2,200 after prosecutors decided that dangerous cycling was the only appropriate charge.
While such MP-sponsored bills rarely get beyond a first reading, the road safety minister, Mike Penning, has promised the Bennetts his support. "My department will consider the merits of the proposed Dangerous and Reckless Cycling Bill in consultation with the Ministry of Justice."
Mark Wardrop, a solicitor who has been working with family, said: "He met us afterwards in the lobby and said to the effect of: we agree with your arguments, and we're in the process of updating a lot of road traffic laws to bring them up to date. We would look at trying to tag this on to another bill if possible."
Leadsom, a regular cyclist, insists she only wants to clear up a legal anomaly and is not seeking to vilify fellow riders.
But the national cycling group, the CTC, argues this is unnecessary given that courts have used the 1861 act in the last decade to jail two cyclists who killed pedestrians, while drivers who kill cyclists routinely receive non-custodial sentences.
"If the Department for Transport really wants to consider this as a serious proposal, then they need to consider the use of all road traffic offences," said Chris Peck, the CTC's policy co-ordinator. "Currently, only around 25% of road deaths are prosecuted using causing death by careless or dangerous, or causing death while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. We have recorded dozens of cases where the deaths of vulnerable users, including many cyclists, are simply never prosecuted."
Jorren Knibbe, a barrister who writes a blog on cycling law, argued that while Leadsom's bill would "fill a gap in the law" but it would be wrong for cyclists and motorists to receive similar punishments for the offence.
He said: "The number of pedestrian casualties brought about by cyclists each year is tiny, whereas the risk posed by cars is, statistically, much greater. So greater deterrents are needed for motorists, because it's much more important for everyone's safety that motorists are made to think twice before driving dangerously or carelessly.
"More generally, it's a shame that the rare time which parliament spends talking about cycling should be taken up with this bill, when no one in recent memory has put forward any kind of positive cycling legislation. As Leadsom admitted, 'in the vast majority' of accidents involving cyclists the cyclist is the victim. It would surely be a better use of parliament's limited time to legislate for that vast majority of cases instead."

(Source: The Guardian)
 

DBCohen

Pedelecer
May 2, 2007
155
0
Manchester
Ahh, but it will play well in the right-wing tabloids, won't it? Stuff the rights and wrongs if you can get a bit of positive press while making cuts...
 

NRG

Esteemed Pedelecer
Oct 6, 2009
2,592
10
Discussed at the end of the Jeremy Vine show today....should be available on iPlayer a little later.....
 

allen-uk

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 1, 2010
909
25
Well, and in some ways I hate to say it (as I would only use the Daily Mail if there wasn't any Andrex available), but as a cyclist, motorist and pedestrian, it certainly is about time that the menace of yobs riding bikes through crowded shopping streets was tackled.

While I know that merely making something illegal (or making a noise about it) doesn't solve the problem (mobile phones in cars, for example), a message does go out, and it all might help change the general lackadaisical attitudes to bikes on pavements.

Allen
 

Scottyf

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 2, 2011
1,403
-1
Pointless Law. Don't see the point and no one will take notice.
 

Barry Heaven

Pedelecer
Sep 19, 2009
162
0
I thought this Government were all about cutting red tape and regulation? Why is a Conservative MP even considering introducing yet more regulation? Given that this Government have committed to only introducing more regulation if some other regulation is then repealed I will be interested to find out what that other regulation is going to be.
 

Mussels

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 17, 2008
3,207
8
Crowborough
Well, and in some ways I hate to say it (as I would only use the Daily Mail if there wasn't any Andrex available), but as a cyclist, motorist and pedestrian, it certainly is about time that the menace of yobs riding bikes through crowded shopping streets was tackled.

While I know that merely making something illegal (or making a noise about it) doesn't solve the problem (mobile phones in cars, for example), a message does go out, and it all might help change the general lackadaisical attitudes to bikes on pavements.

Allen
It already is illegal. :)
 

allen-uk

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 1, 2010
909
25
Sure it is, as using mobile phones in cars was already illegal (without due care and attention), racist and sexist language and behaviour were already illegal, and on and on. But making a specific offence can sharpen the mind of both offender and enforcer.

A.
 

Barnowl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 18, 2008
954
1
Sure it is, as using mobile phones in cars was already illegal (without due care and attention), racist and sexist language and behaviour were already illegal, and on and on. But making a specific offence can sharpen the mind of both offender and enforcer.

A.
It doesn't seem to have worked with mobile phones.
 

morphix

Esteemed Pedelecer
Oct 24, 2010
2,163
119
Worcestershire
www.cyclecharge.org.uk
Sad to see cyclists being penalised. Yet again the government overreacting and caving into pressure most likely. Proving once again that we're living in a nanny state. It's sad that someone died in an accident with a careless cyclist but as the article said these accidents are very rare. Accidents will happen. How many people die just walking and falling over or walking into something because they weren't looking properly?

I have a high vis jacket I've started wearing and I think it might be a good idea to wear it when using pavements so people can see you better. A bell is essential too. I make good use of mine when going around corners or along country lanes.
 

Scottyf

Esteemed Pedelecer
Feb 2, 2011
1,403
-1
I use people like ramps.
 

banbury frank

Banned
Jan 13, 2011
1,565
5
Hi

morphix But do you where your Hi vis to bed just in case a cyclist runs you over in the night when your asleep But I think the bell around the neck is a bit over the top ( humor )


My pet hate is Cyclist on pavements Full stop I can understand under10

on little bike with stabilizers supervised by an adult

But adults on the pavement asking for trouble I thought it was a fixed penalty for riding on the pavement never herd of one being issued

The other problem is the disabled scooters that do 14 MPH one hit my dog in the park they are total illegal should be 4 mph they are heavy and at 14 MPH can kill

My Sympathy goes out to anybody who has lost a loved one due to a cyclist hitting them



Frank
 

DBCohen

Pedelecer
May 2, 2007
155
0
Manchester
Fixed penalty? That would require the attendance of a policeman. When you do see them nowadays, they are in cars, not walking around on pavements, so the chance of a cyclist getting served are minimal.
 

Bikealot

Pedelecer
Aug 21, 2010
26
0
This is a private member's bill that is very unlikely to become law (I hope) and I think nicely captures both the anti-cycling prejudice that stains our country and the increasingly 'Kafkaesque' nature of British law making that believes everything causes risk so we must legislate against everything rather than invest in changing attitudes and infrastructure. It is as disproportionate as banning running on the pavement which is, as we all know, clearly dangerous and might result in a collision.

In my view, a far better and proportionate use of Parliamentary time would be to introduce a "strict liability" law when a driver hits a cyclist.
 

morphix

Esteemed Pedelecer
Oct 24, 2010
2,163
119
Worcestershire
www.cyclecharge.org.uk
Hi

My pet hate is Cyclist on pavements Full stop I can understand under10

on little bike with stabilizers supervised by an adult

But adults on the pavement asking for trouble I thought it was a fixed penalty for riding on the pavement never herd of one being issued

Frank
I take your point about cyclists on pavements... it can be annoying sometimes and dangerous as people often don't expect cyclists to be there.. the law is a bit of grey area with cycling on pavements, because some local authorities allow it and others don't. Some, like my town, only allow it where it's reasonable and where there's signs... some of the pavements in beauty spots in my town are divided in two, half for cyclists and half for pedestrians which I think is a very sensible approach (in theory) but I find much to my annoyance that pedestrians frequently walk or stand in the cycling lane having a conversation! Surely it works both ways..if we're expected to watch out for them, they should respect our rights of access and watch out for us too. I think it would be a sad day if cyclists were completely banned from all pavements by central gov, but I can understand banning from town centres and built up areas and I know that is where the police will nab you if they see you riding through.
 

allen-uk

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 1, 2010
909
25
Come on fellow pedelecers: that's all a bit knee-jerk, isn't it?

Listen: you DON'T have to be anti-bike to condemn dangerous cycling, whether on roads or pavements. I drive a car, too, and utterly condemn those idiots I see on their mobile phones, or worse, texting while driving. But I'm not anti-car. Just anti-idiot!

Objectivity will keep us sane, and the opposite might be true, too.


A.
 

Alex728

Esteemed Pedelecer
Dec 16, 2008
1,109
-1
Ipswich
careless and dangerous cycling and riding on the pavement has been an offence on the statute book since bicycles were invented. In the 1980s in SE England coppers did enforce it, and in my town they still do.

The real issue is some parts of our country have such a high violent crime level that cops genuinely do not have the time/resources to deal with it.

The time of most specialist road policing officers is usually taken up by dealing with the aftermath of poor driving standards of motor vehicles :rolleyes: and the SNT (local bobbies) have to deal with other anti social behaviour and crime including in some cases violent crime.

However in my town (Ipswich) and even in the rural villages, cops do target dangerous cycling, riding on pavements, not having lights etc and the penalty is £30-£80 FPN depending on the severity of the offence.

I'm not a fan of zero tolerance (and TBH led a somewhat rebellious youth) but I am all for the cops encouraging people young and old to use the road in a safe and sensible manner..

As for those in London and other cities I reckon they will soon "get what they wished for", as there is a trend of young gang members using bicycles as pursuit and getaway vehicles against their rivals, for whom the consequences are sometimes fatal. I would expect these youths do not follow traffic laws either...
 

Alex728

Esteemed Pedelecer
Dec 16, 2008
1,109
-1
Ipswich
The other problem is the disabled scooters that do 14 MPH one hit my dog in the park they are total illegal should be 4 mph they are heavy and at 14 MPH can kill
I passed one of these things some years ago in Reading (I was on my pushbike then), the old codger riding it was on the pavement. I remember having to pedal hard to overtake it, and despite having a LCD speed display on my bike (calibrated against a GPS unit) I was still in disbelief that I had passed this at such a speed.

In Norfolk they actually have skills tests for mobility scooter riders (bear in mind in some East Anglian villages a 50 year old is a youngster :D)
 

Mussels

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 17, 2008
3,207
8
Crowborough
Fixed penalty? That would require the attendance of a policeman. When you do see them nowadays, they are in cars, not walking around on pavements, so the chance of a cyclist getting served are minimal.
I see lots of police on the beat, both PCSOs and real coppers. I see them on foot and increasingly on bicycles, not just in the city centre but patrolling housing areas. Just because you don't see them doesn't mean they aren't there.