Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 2nd November 2009 Change Date Latest Issue

Cyclists get away with murder says police chief

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 06 November 2008
POLICE have launched a crackdown on city centre cyclists who think they can "get away with murder" by disobeying the rules of the road.
Racing along pavements, ignoring traffic lights and travelling in the wrong direction on one-way streets are three offences highlighted by officers.

But now they are to get tough with offending cyclists, warning they are risking their lives.

Inspector Andy Gilhooly, of the central policing team, said: "They think they can get away with murder and a lot of them think it is fun and acceptable. It's actually very dangerous and serious."

The crackdown – Operation Appetite – began on Saturday and it is to intensify by the end of the month as officers become more "robust" with offending cyclists.

A team of ten officers on bikes took to the city centre on Saturday afternoon, patrolling the area until after 8pm, issuing warnings to offenders. As the operation intensifies, warnings are expected to turn to fines in a bid to improve safety in the busy shopping area.

During Saturday's initiative, police warned 12 cyclists for offences, including failing to attach lights to their bikes for use after dark, as well as dangerously riding on pavements.

On a number of occasions, as patrols waited at notorious junctions – mainly on Princes Street – they witnessed cyclists screeching to a halt when lights turned to red – only because they had seen the police.

Insp Gilhooly said: "It was clear they were just going to keep on going through the red light, but then they saw the patrol."

Cyclists were also warned for recklessly using their bikes on pavements – although strictly not a crime – putting the safety of pedestrians at risk by dangerously weaving in and out of crowds.

Police say they are frequently contacted by shoppers in the city centre who are angry about the conduct of cyclists. Many are regularly seen heading up one-way streets – especially South St Andrew Street – in a bid to make it to their destination quicker.

Insp Gilhooly said: "In general, cycling is a big thing in Edinburgh and we encourage it. It promotes healthy living and means there are fewer vehicles on the roads.

"Most cyclists are fine, but there are those who spoil it as it's all about getting somewhere as quickly as possible for them."

Further problems encountered by officers involved cyclists chaining their bikes in inappropriate places, including gates to houses in the city centre and lampposts on central reservations. Sometimes bikes are found on posts in George Street, often slipping down on to the pavement or road, causing a tripping hazard to passers-by.

Officers believe it is mainly younger cyclists who cause problems, stressing older users appear more willing to adhere to the law.

Insp Gilhooly said: "All we are asking for is common sense. Ultimately, this is for the safety of cyclists as well."


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 November 2008 10:52 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Transport
 
1

Mr Crisps,

Musselburgh 06/11/2008 11:42:51
So let's guess, now the police are categorising bad cycling as 'murder' they'll arrest a few cyclists and claim their clear-up rate on murder investigations is greatly improved?
2

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 11:44:45
Let's hope they do take action on this.

I have no problem with cyclists generally, as long as they obey the same rules of the road as everyone else. If a car runs a red light, it should be stopped and booked. The same goes for cyclists.

The worst types are those who think it's OK to hurtle down pavements at high speed, expecting pedestrians to jump out of they way. And those who happily weave through pedestrians crossing the road at the Green Man, as they pedal on through a red traffic signal.

Most cyclists are responsible, and obey the rules of the road. But it's time to crack down on the arrogant minority who think they are above the law.
3

,

06/11/2008 11:50:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

James (1),

06/11/2008 11:52:42
#1 You take things to literally! If I think you are a tube I do not actually believe you are a long cylindrical object I just think you are an idiot who cannot see this problem needs addressed.
5

,

06/11/2008 11:55:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

allknowing,

06/11/2008 11:57:22
I note in the pic the police are breaking the law too.

Thats a busy road, so why are they cycling doubled-up???
7

The Parky,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 11:58:27
#1 - Great post

#4 - Get a life.
8

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 11:59:22
#6

Maybe they are waiting at traffic signals, sitting patiently in a queue behind some bloke in a 4x4?
9

W S,

06/11/2008 12:01:19
Calling bad cycling “getting away with murder” is ridiculous. It is nothing like murder. And this is a minority of cyclists. I hate the way people like the guy above call all cyclists scum. The article implies all cyclists are breaking the law. That is just not true.
10

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:02:32
As the police themselves say in the article, *most* cyclists are fine. The ones who break the rules are the minority. Don't let that stop your abusive remarks though.
11

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:03:00
#9

Certainly an unfortunate choice of words from someone in the Polis. You would think he would know better.

It's a serious issue, that does need to be tackled. But calling it "getting away with murder" is rather excessive.
12

Cappo Del Monte,

06/11/2008 12:03:18
#6

I think the law allows cyclists to cycle 2 abreast ;-)
Although not having read the highway code for a number of years it may have changed lol
13

Hmm?,

06/11/2008 12:03:27
There are plenty of cr*p cyclists but there are a LOT more cr*p drivers on the roads. Perhaps the Police might be better targeting the latter?

For instance, how about a crack-down on the drivers who drive through red lights at the Lothian Road/Princes Street and Picardy Place/York Place junctions?
14

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:05:46
#9 thats the reality though, bad cycling can lead to murder!!!!

If a cyclist skips a red light, and a car has to perform an emergency stop causing it to swerve and kill a pedistrian, thats murder, and the cyclist should be locked up.

#8 look at the pic again, they are most certainly cycling!
15

alex paterson,

edinburgh 06/11/2008 12:05:59
Cycling is a great way of keeping fit,but cycle on the road,and if you are that keen have a go at a velodrome.
16

Scat Man,

06/11/2008 12:06:23
#4

surely the answer to your problem is to cycle is it not? They clearly get from Dean Bridge to Barnton quicker or in the same time that you do.
not a cyclist myself, just trying to save yer heid fae burstin mr angry!
17

Scat Man,

06/11/2008 12:08:02
sorry meant #5
18

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:08:02
#13

Is anyone saying that bad drivers should not be booked? No.

But, statistically speaking, I'd think there are a larger percentage of cyclists who jump red lights compared to drivers. Certainly, there are far more cyclists who think it's alright to use their vehicle on the pavement.

Yes, there is bad driving, but it tends to be quite heavily policed already - speed cameras, red light cameras etc.

Bad drivers should be booked, but so should bad cyclists.
19

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:09:31
"Cyclists were also warned for recklessly using their bikes on pavements – although strictly not a crime – putting the safety of pedestrians at risk by dangerously weaving in and out of crowds"

What!!!!!1 its agaisnt the law, Period

Quote highway code

"64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.

[Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129]"

An re the double cycling, on busy roads you should "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"

All very clear to me.


20

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:11:39
#16, no thanks, dont want to get soaked,sweaty or breathe in fumes all day.

Nah, i'll stick to the car thanks.
21

CyclingEdinburgh,

06/11/2008 12:12:18
"Many are regularly seen heading up one-way streets – especially South St Andrew Street – in a bid to make it to their destination quicker."

Edinburgh is supposed to have a policy of allowing cyclists to go 'contra-flow' in one way streets "where practical"

Generally the tram works in the centre of the city have made things worse for cyclists and it's far from clear where they (or motorists) are supposed to go.

I believe cars are not currently supposed to use Shandwick Place, but.......
22

Local Lass,

South Queensferry 06/11/2008 12:13:41
#6 The law to all "vehicles" on the road. Unless you are overtaking you cannot drive side by side on the same lane (pretty impossible for two cars to drive side by side, I know but it mainly applies to cyclists/motorcyclists). I ride my motorbike to work every day, rain or shine. It is not illegal to "filter" through traffic, providing you do so safely and with due regard to other road users. In this week alone, I have almost been swiped by car drivers who swerve left/right or change lanes without using their mirrors properly. However, some cyclists are giving those of us on two wheels a bad name, and have total disregard for everybody - including motorcyclists. All I can say is that I haven't seen any cyclists wearing anything other than a dodgy plastic helmet. At least I've got Kevlar to protect me when I come off (touch wood).
23

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 12:14:22
#13:

"There are plenty of cr*p cyclists but there are a LOT more cr*p drivers on the roads. Perhaps the Police might be better targeting the latter?"

I agree.

However the idea of targetting bad drivers went out of the window with the advent of speed cameras. Some basic maths...

1. Two police officers spend an hour driving round, looking for bad driving, pulling people over and dealing with it. Maybe they'll pull about half a dozen drivers and out of them, maybe ticket one or two. Revenue earned? Less than £100. Cost? The petrol used in driving around, plus the wages of two coppers for an hour. Net loss? £100's.

2. A police officer and a civvy park a van on a motorway bridge outside rush hour and point an LTI 20-20 at passing vehicles for an hour. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. Revenue earned? Anything up to £10,000. Cost? The diesel to drive the van out and back plus the cost of a copper's wages and a civvy's wages (usually less) for an hour. Net profit? Many £1000's.

However, in the former case the contribution to road safety is considerable. In the latter it is negligable. It's all down to money nowadays and that is wrong.

24

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:14:47
#21

All true, no doubt. But still not much of an excuse for the minority who like to jump red lights, weave through pedestrians crossing at the green man, or ride on the pavement.
25

Layabout MSP,

06/11/2008 12:16:52
Why the law allows any unlicensed users on our roads is beyond me!

For everyone's safety - it's time a couple of laws were introduced that forced cyclists to pass some form of driving test before taking to the road and have their bikes regularly checked for road worthiness. I'd go one step further by introducing a Road Fund Licence too - they use the roads so they should pay for their upkeep.
26

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 12:17:09
There should be a free left on red for cyclists, if they judge the manouvre safe. Agree we should be careful when cycling on pavements. I try never to do that where there are pedestrians, but we should anyway maintain the same speed as pedestrians if there are an

Cycling without lights is reckless and inconsiderate of the poor sod who finally squashes you flat. They may feel it's a job well done, but there's just the possibility they'll feel guilty.
27

,

06/11/2008 12:17:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
28

Scat Man,

06/11/2008 12:18:15
#20

are you sure you don't get sweaty when you're in mid-rage?

Traffic report:
"Dean Bridge closed due to burst heid"
29

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 12:19:20
#5 : just desist from overtaking us then. As you have yourself observed: you're not going to get there any faster than we are.
30

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:19:49
#25

Very true. Introducing some form of licensing, and compelling cylists to have insurance just as drivers do, would go a long way to improving cycling and safety.

Obviously, their licensing would need to be much cheaper than for motor vehicles though.
31

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:22:16
#31

Edinburgh not exactly noted for its soft parking regime...
32

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:22:34
#29 So you expect cars to drive at the same speed as cyclists?????
33

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 12:22:55
#15: I tried a velodrome once, but they are very hard to steer.
34

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:23:03
#30 agreed
35

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:23:03
#25 - cyclists do pay for the upkeep of the roads, via council tax, income tax, VAT and VED on the cars many of them own.

I'd rather see drivers have to take a cycling test as part of the driving test, seeing as they're the ones who are most likely to kill someone with bad driving.
36

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:25:09
#36

Dont speak cr4p.

Any VED they pay is for the car, not also the bike!!!!

If you honestly think any council tax revenues, income tax or VAT is spent on roads you are a fool. VED revenue far outweighs what is spent on roads.

Cyclists pay for nought!

Using your VED logic, i pay council tax on my first house, so shouldnt on my second!
37

,

06/11/2008 12:25:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
38

Eighteen Seventy-Four,

06/11/2008 12:26:13
"Why they dont wait in queues like everyone else is beyond me."

Your not very bright.
39

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:26:51
#35

Did you just agree with me on something? Wow...this whole Obama-inspired spirit of co-operation is really starting to spread... ;-)
40

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 12:27:57
#25: A driving test for cyclists is in fact a pretty good idea.

Conversely, I'd also require that in order to get a driving licence, folks have to cycle on the roads for a year. It'd make people much more aware of traffic and the dangers of failing to anticipate the other guy's stupidity and thus improve their driving when they get to it.
41

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:28:19
#37 - you're the one talking cr*p. All taxes go towards roads maintenance, therefore everyone who pays any sort of tax contributes to road maintenance. Cyclists pay income tax, VAT, council tax and VED on their cars (if they own them) so contribute to roads maintenance. You don't have to like it, but it's true.
42

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 12:29:31
#33 What a stupid comment!! Did you not understand what #29 was saying??
43

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 12:29:51
#33: one driver has confirmed that drivers do maintain the same average speed as cyclists. Why not just require it and make everyone safer?
44

Journalistic licence,

On ma bike 06/11/2008 12:30:10
OK, so who got killed in this 'murder' story?
45

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:31:33
#42

All true, to some extend. But then car owners also pay all of that too.

The point is that, in order to use the roads, all motor vehicles MUST pay VED. It is illegal to drive on the roads without paying it, or without proper insurance or a license. The same rules, adapted for cycles (lower VED and insurance) would go a long way to eliminating poor cycling.
46

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:31:38
#40 indeed i did, your right, i have this warm glow inside me, oh wait, thats just my pocket warmer ;-)

#39 Why? Is that the sum total of your debate


#38 "You probably show aggression towards cyclists, going by the tone of your posts"

What makes you say that? Re my post again. I said I leave plenty of room for cyclists, but aftet the 4-5th time, it does get tiresome, so why bother?

You need some ange management classes. I really do hope we meet someday, as you wouldnt last very long :-)

"Cars do not own the roads"

Who said they did?
47

Bill MacD,

06/11/2008 12:33:20
If this Chief really accused cyclists of "murder" he should be severely reprimanded for such disgraceful and insulting accusation. Murder is one of the most serious offences and to tar cyclists with such a label simply to make a rhetorical point brings the entire police force into disrepute. He should apologise and retract. Shame on him.
48

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 12:33:42
#37: Wear and tear on the roads is proportional to the fifth power of the weight of the vehicle. I'll pay a quid per annum in road tax if you promise to pay that quid multiplied by your car's weight ratio to my bike's, to the fifth power.

That'd be thousands per annum for you, but it's only fair eh?
49

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:34:16
#42

What part of that did you not understand.

The revenues collected by VED alone, pays for all roads and yet some. So no other taxes are required to help fund the roads.

Cr4p you speak, i think so.
50

Cappo Del Monte,

06/11/2008 12:35:16
#6 & #19

So really you were WRONG again, operative word there is "not more than 2 abreast "
Looks like 2 abreast in the pic lol
This is going to be a lively one today.
Cyclists on pavements, jumping lights, ignoring signs are all breaking the law, so fine them.
They do it to motorists, cyclists are governed by the same laws
It wont last, its just another flash in the pan from the cops, pretend to enforce the law for a month then forget about it again
51

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:35:35
#50, see my post 51. Its already all covered by motorists.
52

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:35:46
#47 - bikes are zero-rated for VED because they don't cause pollution, in the same way that certain "green" cars are zero-rated. If you're going to reclassify bikes so that they have to pay, then you need to do the same for zero-rated cars, surely?

#48 - why bother leaving room for cyclists? Well, partly because the Highway Code requires it - you must give cyclists at least as much room as you would give a car. But mainly because passing too closely could cause serious injury or death to the cyclist. Isn't that enough reason?
53

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:36:57
#52
Erm , read this out loud
"and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"


54

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:38:31
#54
But mainly because passing too closely could cause serious injury or death to the cyclist. Isn't that enough reason?

So then why is it ok for them to come sneaking up the left when traffic is at a stop leaving nothing but an inch?
55

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:40:42
#54

I'm not saying that bikes (or indeed "green" cars) should pay the same rate as cars. But a nominal fee for road upkeep, coupled with a cycle license scheme and mandatory insurance for cyclists, would level the playing field with other road users and improve safety for all. Surely, that would be a good thing?
56

Eighteen Seventy-Four,

06/11/2008 12:43:18
"Why they dont wait in queues like everyone else is beyond me"

Brainless comment of the day.



57

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 06/11/2008 12:43:24
#51 rubbish.
The Council maintains the majority of roads, and that is paid for out of Council tax and government grants.
VED does not come into it.
58

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 12:45:05
At long last, it is not before time that the police do take appropriate action against the pavement pedallists, those who cycle through the green pedestrian lights and those who cycle without lights, etc.

Having said all of that, it is also time for the Local Authorities to address the problem of supplying safe 'corridors' for cyclists to use throughout the Town, whoever thought up the idea of cyclists sharing the bus lanes must be the prize muppet of this century.



59

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:45:20
#56 - traffic which is at a stop generally doesn't hit people.

#57 - I don't know if it would improve safety. Look at all the morons who passed their driving test and still drive like blind chimps on acid.
60

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:46:16
#59

This Council maintains roads?

And where do you think the Government grant money comes from? The tooth fairy? Santa? Or, just possibly, from VED?
61

Journalistic licence,

06/11/2008 12:46:38
What's more worrying is that the cops and courts are letting murderers away with murder.
62

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:48:35
#62 - all the tax collected from all sources goes into a big tax cauldron where it is stirred about and then dished out again. The government grant money to councils comes from all sources of taxation. Money for maintaining roads doesn't just come from VED, and VED doesn't just pay for road maintenance.
63

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:48:58
#61

You are still failing to see the point. You have to pass a test, buy a license and buy insurance before you can drive a car. If you don't, you are breaking the law. If you are caught without them, you are removed from the road for safety reasons. So why not have the same rules for cyclists. It wouldn't eliminate 100% of bad cycling, but it would at least put in place the legal framework to enable it to be targeted.
64

Cappo Del Monte,

06/11/2008 12:49:56
#55
Hmmm look at the pic, no traffic behind them = no a busy street duh
Big straigh road hmmm not a bend duh

And as they are in a bus / cycle lane ha ha
65

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:50:33
#64

Possibly not, in accounting terms. But, in reality, the government pays money from VED to Councils to maintain roads.
66

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 12:51:57
#48 I would last longer than you. I keep my fingers crossed we meet.
67

Cappo Del Monte,

06/11/2008 12:52:13
#55
I know when you are at primary school you have to read out aloud, (I am sure you still do when you attend )
But as you grow up ( which no doubt in ten years or so you will ) you can stop the reading out aloud
68

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:52:22
#66 i see no bus/cycle lane!!!! Its classed as a busy road, therefore......

#64, are you daft. VED raises enough revenue to pay for all roads plus some more.What part of that dont you understand?
69

allknowing,

06/11/2008 12:54:08
#68

Ha ha , your just a child. Have fun cycling in the rain tonight. I really hope we do meet. A sweaty chimp like boy on a bike vs me. Mmm....
70

Tam Weea,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 12:55:58
Cyclists should be banned from the roads. A hazard to all car drivers.

Weirdos who are too scared to drive a car.
71

Artemis,

06/11/2008 12:56:03
#70 - I understand that, but you seem unable to understand that VED is not specifically ringfenced for road maintenance, and in fact that all taxpayers's taxes contribute to road maintenance. Anyway, if you're so sure that VED raises enough and more for road maintenance, why are you so insistent that cyclists should pay it? Why would you want to tax people to pay for something that's already more than paid for? Vindictiveness?

Now, let's get back to your remarks about it being too tiresome to pass cyclists safely. Do you think leaving them enough room is more tiresome or less tiresome than facing a manslaughter charge?
72

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 12:57:46
#73

Even if we lay aside the VED argument, why should cyclists not be licensed and insured before being allowed to use the roads?
73

Hamish Scott,

06/11/2008 12:59:24
Cyclists, like all other road users, should at least be licensed (subject to a cycling test) and insured. Tests ensure road users have a basic knowledge and ability of how to use a public highway, licensing provides a means of preventing road use by those who are unable to use the public highway appropriately. Insurance means they can be made responsible for any damages they cause.
It would help if there was more segregation of cyclists from other road traffic as bicycles are so mismatched with motor vehiclese e.g.take cyclists of Princes Street and provide them with a dedicated cycle lane on George Street for travelling east-west, with a physical barrier between the cycle lane and other traffic lanes. It's done in other cities.
74

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 12:59:32
#71 A sweaty chimp like boy...I'm nothing like... versus a shirt lifter who hides in the safety of his car. You're a typical " behind the stearing wheel hardman", but in reality a total pansy.
75

allknowing,

06/11/2008 13:00:41
"Vindictiveness?" Nope I would call it fairness.

After passing the cyclsit 4-5 times, it does become tiresome. But where on this entire tread did i say i didnt????

Do you make things up in your world to keep you happy?

Please answer Skips question.... we're still waiting.
76

Ecco Warrier,

Embra 06/11/2008 13:00:54
I think a lot of the problem is caused by threshers at the universities. I have lost count of the numbers i have passed cycling with no lights since clocks went back. Police should concentrate around the Uni's.Perhaps the Uni's could also remind their students of the laws.
77

allknowing,

06/11/2008 13:02:29
#76 keep on believing it, you can chant it tonight on your way home in the wind and wet. Ha ha ha, very nice. Remember to chant though wont you!
78

king.kenny4,

The burgh 06/11/2008 13:03:13
i think when a motorist hits a cyclist who has jumped a light he should get a small sticker depicting the said person like the world wars one & two fighter pilots.
79

NYC Hibee,

edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:05:21
it's buses breaking the law, not bikes they need to crack down on!
80

GordonJ,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:07:48
allknowing:

I am afraid you are incorrect with regards to VED. VED stands for "Vehicle Excise Duty", this has nothing to do with funding for the roads, but is a tax that people pay who have cars that pollute the atmosphere. Hence the reason that people who drive the least polluting type of cars actually pay £0 for their VED.

All funding for roads comes out of Council and Income Tax.

Also, your infantile challenges for people "to meet you" are ridiculous. Anybody who could look after themselves would have no need to make those challanges - you must be a bit of a weakling!!!
81

Ron D,

Enybru 06/11/2008 13:10:31
It's certainly easier than doing something about the vast number of cars that infringe the highway code. The police could sit at any set of traffic lights and stop all the cars that go through every time the lights turn red but bicycles are clearly far more dangerous.
82

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 13:12:23
#79 I like the wind and rain!! I don't need the warmth and safety of my car, otherwise I would drive instead of using my bike.

83

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 13:13:41
#82 Your right!! He is a keyboard hardman, but really a wet blanket!!
84

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 13:15:42
#78 Ecco Warrier - You should change your ID to " Green Warrier". And I don't mean environmentally friendly!!
85

East at Easter,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:16:03
about time they cracked down. They just go through green lights like they own the place. Why should they get away with it? Im sure the police will weed them out
86

Artemis,

06/11/2008 13:18:55
#74 - I haven't decided how I feel about mandatory insurance and licensing for cyclists. Many, many cyclists have insurance anyway, via their household insurance or through a bike organisation like CTC. Making it more difficult and more expensive to cycle will discourage people from cycling, at a time when we should be encouraging more people to cycle. More people cycling makes the roads safer for everyone, helps to keep people fitter and doesn't deplete oil reserves - cycling is a good thing for everyone. Making it more difficult isn't helpful. Perhaps everyone should have to do a cycling proficiency test at school, perhaps everyone should have to undertake several months of cycling on roads as part of a driving test. Cyclists are not the danger - the number of people killed by cyclists on roads and pavements is about one a year, which is much less than the 100s a week killed by motorists. Targeting licensing and insurance for cyclists seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut, really.
87

Quantum Dougie,

06/11/2008 13:20:00
I think The Hallucinist and allknowing should meet in Princess street gardens for fight. We could sell tickets for it. Then sell popcorn and beers on the night. Quids in. You fancy that lads?
88

Pond Hall,

06/11/2008 13:20:08
about time, but there are just as many car drivers who think that cyclists aren't there.

Cars Overtaking, cutting up the cyclist as they cut in to avoid the car on the other side of the road or take the next left turn.

Interesting picture of the 2 police on the bikes.

Find cyclist cyling 2 a breast are just adding danger to the road, not helping other road users overtake, or if the cyclist on the inside swerves to avoid a pot hole, the cyclist on the outside end up well on the other side of the road.

No 60 highlights the old lights problem. Very few have lights and many with are not street legal !!


But red lighs cyclist are the worst

Seen one chap go through 3 red lights within half a mile, best one if when he mounted the pavement to cycle round the red light at the pedestrian crossing
89

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 13:22:58
#89 Sounds good. Would you want to waste your time and money for 1 round though?
90

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:24:41
#42:

"All taxes go towards roads maintenance..."

Actually, less than 10% of all vehicle related taxes get spent on the roads. Christ knows what happens to the rest. Maybe it goes to buy satellite dishes for single parent lesbians with 14 kids... Or perhaps it goes to replenish some of the money that the stupid labour government has encouraged the banks to lend out.
91

Bob 2,

06/11/2008 13:27:30
Cars should be banned from the roads. A hazard to all cyclists.

.
92

Scat Man,

06/11/2008 13:28:50
#89

that would be a barry pagger. I would fear for the Hallucinist though as allknowing is an angry man.

I'll sell t-shirts marketing the event.
93

Bob 2,

06/11/2008 13:29:18
31 Sods Law,EDINBURGH 06/11/2008 12:20:02
I am not a bike lover, but topick on these people alone is not fair. All road users are guilty of bad driving/riding. Parking of vehicles is also a issue. If you are going to get tough you have to get tough with everyone


Best comment of the day from Sods Law
94

Quantum Dougie,

06/11/2008 13:32:33
#91, You're not allowed weapons in your hand bag mind.

#94, like the t-shirts idea. They could have the slogan "Road rage, now reaching an internet near you"
95

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:32:38
Have to agree with 'Sods Law', everyone should be cracked down on. What's interesting is that a story about cyclists behaving badly (and I'll freely admit that SOME do) attracts a lot more bile than a story about motorists behaving badly.

Anyway, this entrenchment is sadly predictable:
http://www.citycycling.co.uk/issue21/issue21page12.html

Make love, not war... ;)
http://www.citycycling.co.uk/issue13/issue13page17.html
96

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 13:33:48
Artemis

VED generates annually revenue several times the amount spent both through Highways Agency / Transport Scotland on trunk roads and local authorities from Revenue Support Grant on local roads. The fact that it is credited to the Consolidated Fund rather than ring-fenced is specifically to mask the magnitude of the disparity between income and expenditure.
97

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 13:33:50
#94 Angry man?? He's a premenstrual pansy!!
98

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:34:36
p.s. Artemis is right about VED not being ring-fenced - if it was, given I own a (very nice) car that I choose to leave at home for commuting purposes should I get a rebate?

p.p.s. very very odd that the classic car I'm intending to buy, being more polluting that the modern car I have, would be exempt from VED by reason of age. It's an odd kind of tax, maybe it should just be added onto fuel instead so it was truly in line with vehicle use/pollution?
99

Gridlocked,

06/11/2008 13:34:47
Personally I find pedestrians more of a nuisance. They cross roads at unsuitable places and pay no attention to cars or bikes or traffic signals. Even on the pavement, most of them walk with no consideration for others. Lets tax them and make them take out insurance.
100

Scat Man,

06/11/2008 13:40:16
#99

Maybe so, but he will be brandishing a large purple head, so beware.
101

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 13:40:37
#82 Vehicle Excise Duty originally had nothing whatsoever to do with pollution. This is merely another ploy to generate additional revenue. "Duty" is also a misnomer for what is in reality an annual tax. If you imported a bottle of vodka and put it aside, I imagine you'd be quite put out if you received another request for payment of import "duty" a year later.
102

Scotish Exile,

06/11/2008 13:40:47
Been a long time coming and well done to the police, there are a cyclists out there that openly flout the law and they should be locked up, as should car drivers who do the same.
103

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 13:44:41
#102 Well he can take it to CC Blooms then!! I'm not that way inclined!!
104

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 13:45:13
#82 "All funding for roads comes out of Council and Income Tax."

Complete and utter nonsense.
105

Vlad Tepes,

Snagov 06/11/2008 13:45:50
This paper reported that the bike squad had been detailed to combat drug crime and vandalism among our youth. Obviously didn't fancy cycling round Drylaw if they could check bike-lights instead.
Question: If a bus is parked all over the advanced space for bikes and a cyclist goes safely through the lights to avoid being crushed, who will the police hassle?
Clue: It won't be the bus driver.
106

Artemis,

06/11/2008 13:53:00
#100 - if I was in charge I'd scrap VED as it is now and add a bit more tax to fuel. The more you drive, the more you pay. I don't see the point in people with small cars they leave at home paying the same as people with petrol-guzzling large cars they use every day.

#103 - do you think anyone who posts here could buy a bottle of vodka and put it aside for a year? Apart from I Love To Eat Sellotape...
107

GordonJ,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 13:54:11
#106

Of course it does. VED has nothing to do with road funding. It's a tax on polluting cars, plain and simple, has been for many years now (used to be on enginve size, now on emissions). It used to be called road tax, because it paid for road use, but not any more.

Get your facts straight!
108

council never win,

06/11/2008 13:59:54
a senior policeman should now better than to demonise one type of road user unless he's just trying to score political points by jumping on the everybody-hates-cyclist-jeremy-clarkson-bandwagon.

As a cyclist and a driver I see both driving through red lights all the time! The oolice should clamp down on both.
109

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 14:07:51
#109

Utter poppycock. VED is a massive revenue generator over and above road maintenance. The statutory change of title and moving the income from the Department of Transport Appropriation Accounts to the Consolidated Fund was required in order to remove the ring-fencing so that the huge surplus could be applied in funding other Departments. The application of various bands according to the CO2 output of specific vehicles was merely cynical exploitation of the green trend to (very successfully) provide an additional huge net increase in revenue.

I assure you I know my facts on this better than you.
110

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 14:20:07
# 88 Artemis

"I haven't decided how I feel about mandatory insurance and licensing for cyclists. Many, many cyclists have insurance anyway, via their household insurance or through a bike organisation like CTC."

- Maybe, but isn't that insurance just to cover for theft of the bike? It's not the same as the comprehensive or 3rd party insurance that all motor vehicle users are legally obliged to have. That insurance covers them for damage to other people's property/vehicles or for injuries to other road users or pedestrians. That's the type of insurance that all road users - including, in my opinion, cyclists - should be required to have. If I am knocked down by a car, break my leg and miss work, then I can make a claim against the driver's insurance to cover my medical expenses and other losses. If I am knocked down, even on a pavement, by a cyclist then I enjoy no such protection.

111

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 14:25:10
# 88 Artemis

"Making it more difficult and more expensive to cycle will discourage people from cycling, at a time when we should be encouraging more people to cycle. More people cycling makes the roads safer for everyone, helps to keep people fitter and doesn't deplete oil reserves - cycling is a good thing for everyone. Making it more difficult isn't helpful. Perhaps everyone should have to do a cycling proficiency test at school, perhaps everyone should have to undertake several months of cycling on roads as part of a driving test. Cyclists are not the danger - the number of people killed by cyclists on roads and pavements is about one a year, which is much less than the 100s a week killed by motorists. Targeting licensing and insurance for cyclists seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut, really."

- It's not about making it more expensive for cyclists, it's about making it safer for everyone. If the vast majority of cyclists do indeed ride safely and within the law, then insurance costs should be minimal. Insurance is calculated in terms of risk and, if the risk of a cyclist injuring or killing someone are low, then so will be the costs of the insurance. But, by requiring a license and insurance of all cyclists then you will insure that the minority of cyclists who do ride dangerously and cause accident or injury can be properly held to account for any damage or pain that they cause.
112

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 14:33:57
#112 Fair point, but are there really many people on long-term sick as a result of cycling misbehaviour? I think you'll find many more people damaged by cars.

Swapping my bike for a hobby-horse for the minute, my particular problem just now is the behaviour of many First Bus drivers who, unlike the generally considerate LRT folk, seem to delight in overtaking far too close and cutting in sharply, in quite an intimidating manner.

They've certainly driven me off London Road - Meadowbank - Portobello Road in evening rush hour.

Cycling misbehaviour should be challenged, but in proportion to the harm it does.
113

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 14:34:24
Whoops...that "insure" in the 3rd last line of post #113 should have been an "ensure"...

Always proof-read before posting, Skip!
114

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 14:36:47
#114

Yes, no doubt more people are injured by cars. No-one is disputing that. But then car drivers have that insurance so it's kind of a moot point.

Just because more people are injured by cars than bikes, doesn't mean we should ignore all injuries caused by bikes. More people are killed by cars than guns...does that mean we shouldn't have laws governing gun misuse?
115

Hagbard Celine,

Under a cloud 06/11/2008 14:37:30
#111 As you are such an expert please remind me when this happened. I can never remember if it was 1935 or 1936.
116

THE BPRENTICE,

06/11/2008 14:40:38
19/55 allknowing - good points very well made - nice one.

I like this article ... its the motorbikes that do my nut in - they creep past you when they should hold back and wait - no wonder the casualty ratings are so very high for them. Similar to cyclists - its like they think riding how they like is okay?
117

Sloane Ranger,

06/11/2008 14:41:05
I was knocked down and seriously injured by an idiot cyclist, who didn't even help me to my feet/phone an ambulance. He just shouted "for f$%^s sake" and cycled off. Lothian and Borders finest didn't even dignify my "accident" with anything other than to tell me to be more careful! I was crossing at a crossing on the green man!
Cyclists don't seem to understand that the red light concerns them too!
118

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 14:51:27
#69: You'll find if you continue to read out loud as an adult, nobody sits next yo you on buses. It's great!
119

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 14:52:20
#117 Hardly relevant - ask a historian.
120

,

06/11/2008 14:52:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
121

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

06/11/2008 14:53:16
I'm glad the cops are stopping at 8pm. I wouldn't like them to hassle me cycling home p1ssed.
122

Hagbard Celine,

06/11/2008 14:57:27
#117 I'll ask wikipedia as the self-proclaimed expert clearly doesn't know. The answer is 1936!! If you were driving a car in 1936 no wonder you're senile! Perhaps its time to hang up the driving gloves grandad.
123

Slightly Cynical,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 14:57:50
All cyclists should join the CTC as their membership does provide them with third party insurance in case they cause a crash and a specialised legal service to recover damages if they're hurt by a careless motorist.

The whole problem is a lack of mutual respect. Cyclists need to ride by the rules and respect other road users and stay off the pavements unless they are supervising a child cyclist or are a child themselves and in either case cycle at an apporirate speed.

Motorists need to respect cyclists many of whom, if they weren't cycling, would be in a car in front of them, in the queue

I hope that next month the police will be patrolling the cycle lanes ticketing parked cars and "dog in a manger" lane blocking motorists.
124

Maisie from Morningside,

06/11/2008 14:58:50
Perhaps the police should visit the Promenade at Portobello which is infested with cyclists ignoring the "no cycling" signs.
125

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 15:02:37
#126

A good post for someone so (slightly) cynical! :-)
126

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 15:04:33
Maisie, the police (and the council) have actually come out in the past saying that the Prom is a better alternative for bikes than the road through Portobello and, despite the signs being renewed a year or so ago, they are willing to turn a blind eye to cycling there.

Like Mr Cynical says, it's a lack of mutual respect really. A minority in both 'camps' causes a rift between all sides.

A guy in a BMW 7 Series pulled out of a parking space right in front of me two nights ago - do I think ALL BMW drivers are idiots?

Oh.

Erm.

And Skip, from earlier on, you're also right about the actual number of incidents being 'reasonably' irrelevant, but on car drivers all having insurance, was it yesterday or the day before was the story that police are catching 150 people a month on the roads without insurance or licences?
127

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 15:06:46
#129

###SIGH###

Repeats self again...

Yes, driving without insurance is illegal, and rightly so.

Anyone driving without insurance is breaking the law, and deserves to be arrested / have their car impounded/crushed, etc...

BUT cycling without insurance ISN'T against the law. Which it should be.
128

The Hallucinist,

06/11/2008 15:08:19
123 Local Lass - Well said.
129

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 15:09:25
#125 I never "proclaimed" myself to be an expert in the history, and why would you think I was driving in 1936?
130

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 06/11/2008 15:17:04
If cyclists are to have insurance as some claim on here, then what about insurance for pedestrians ?
They can cause accidents too. But where does it stop?
This is getting silly.
Motor vehicles MUST have insurance, that is the law.
Everyone else doesn't. Keep it that way.
131

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 15:17:13
Fair enough Skip - 130 odd comments on here I was, ah, 'skipping' through.

Expect to see no cyclists left on the road if insurance is made mandatory. Mind you, if insurance really is tied to potential damage/injury then the amounts will be a lot less than for driving.

Will there be different rates depending on type of bike, age, employment etc in the same way? Could you get away with not paying insurance if you only used,say, a mountain bike at places like Glentress?

I actually think it's one of those ideas that sounds quite good, but the practicalities of it mean that it would actually be more expensive to run than money would come in. Unless it was self-funded of course by higher premiums, which again would then lead to less bikes (and, conversely, more cars) on the road.

I think some research is needed into this to see just how much (monetary) damage is caused by cyclists a year.

p.s. I'm covered by membership of British Cycling 'and' my home insurance (which yes, does have third party cover for damage caused by me - most do, it would include me as a pedestrian headbutting and breaking a window, just for example).
132

Local Lass,

South Queensferry 06/11/2008 15:27:44
#131 and #133 You guys can join my bike gang anytime.....
133

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 15:28:18
#135

OK, so let's make membership of British Cycling mandatory. :-)

As I said, I'm not about driving cyclists off the roads (just off thee pavements). I've been known to cycle myself, from time to time.

I just find it strange that, as I driver, I am legally required to pass a test, buy a license, be covered by insurance and put my car through mandatory saftety checks each year before being allowed to drive on the roads. If I drive dangerously or, god forbid, injured someone, I can be locked up. If I drive on the pavement, they would throw away the key.

But, if I ride my badly maintained, uninsured bike dangerously at breakneck speed down the pavement and hit and injure a poor granny, I can probably expect to escape almost scott-free.

With that type of imbalance in the law, it's easy to see why many people's views of cyclists can become tainted.
134

muggins,

edinburgh 06/11/2008 15:30:08
insurance for pedestrians ? thats ridiculous !! since when did pedestrians become a hazard to life by whizzing past ringing their stupid bells to make way for others..why should they have ' rights ' to ride on the pavement ? they seldom indicate when turning off or pulling out, they are a law unto themselves and its about time they were made to pay if they want to use the roads OR pavements.. cyclists should have to pay insurance they are nothing but parasites on the road.
135

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 15:39:24
Nice to get a balanced view Skip. If slightly odd on here.

Every 'side' sees itself as a victim really. I could go off just now and find half a dozen examples of drivers this year killing cyclists who got a fine less than £1000.

I can see exactly why people's views of cyclists can become tainted - what I don't really understand is why we accept the amount of people killed by cars every year. It's seen as 'one of those things'. 'Car drivers believe they can get away with murder' would have been seen as a ridiculous headline.
136

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 15:45:38
#140

Yes, the headline - and the statement from a high-ranking police officer who should know better - are ridiculous.

But I still believe that something should be done to tackle the minority of poor, red-light jumping, pavemount mounting cyclists who give the others a bad name.

Proper enforcement of the law would be a good start. So, Mr Polis, it's really over to you.
137

tumshie heid,

06/11/2008 15:49:57
Drivers like bpprentice need educating. I too am sick of ill informed drivers spouting on about bikes "jumping the queue" What they don't seem to get is that it's perfectly legal and one of the greatest benefits of cycling/motorcycling.
Perhaps if they cared to glance in their mirrors every now and then instead of playing cd's etc then they might be more aware of whats around them and wouldn't be surprised when a cyclist appears "from nowhere"
It smacks of jealousy because they are stuck in queues and two wheelers aren't.
138

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 15:54:58
As an aside, while I remember...

Someone mentioned earlier of the need to properly seperate cyclists from other road users for reasons of safety.

I agree 100% with that. It always struck me as profoundly daft to have a combined bus/cycle lane, for example.

What a great idea...place the smallest and most vulnerable road users in the same lane as the largest, heaviest vehicles. What genius came up with that one?

In many other countries, there is a separate channel for cyclists, divided by a physical barrier, to keep cyclists and motor vehicles or apart.

You can either build these on the road, or alternatively on the pavement if it is wide enough.

That is the type of thing we should be looking towards.
139

Mr Henderson,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:01:23
Wow, they caught 12 cyclists in 8 hours. There is a junction just behind police HQ were cars regularly jump red lights during rush hour. They could net 12 per hour there easily. Also, if they had sat at the junction of Charlotte Square and Queen Street they could catch several cars per hour making an illegal left turns.

As for the cyclists, I'm not sure it's murder they are getting away with but suicide. It's like playing Russian Roulette riding a bike on the streets of Edinburgh. (perhaps that's why they prefer the pavements)
140

hibbyspurs,

06/11/2008 16:04:10
Hang on a minute here.... For all you luvvies out there slamming bad drivers in an attempt to defend cyclists...

1. To drive a motor vehicle (lawfully) in this country, you MUST pass a test set down by the DVLA to prove that you are a fit, safe & competent driver.

2. If you drive a motor vehicle in this country (again lawfully) you MUST obtain insurance to at least cover 3rd parties in the event of an accident.

3. If you break the laws of the road and ar caught in a motor vehicle you will be fined, have your license endorsed, be disqualified from holding a driving licence.

4. Should you have points or have been banned you can expect your insurance premium to increase as well.

There are many offences which would result in at least a fine or points but most likely both... Including:

Failing to stop at a red light
Driving the wrong way up a one way system
Driving on the pavement
Parking on the pavement
Parking on zig zag lines
Crossing block white line to overtake
Ignoring a crossing patrol officer
Failure to stop at a zebra crossing
Ignoring direction given by a traffic warden

However to a minority of cyclists all of the above are fair game and seem to constitute part of the "fun" of cycling which seems for some to be the ability to see how much they can wind other road users up with their incosiderate use of the road....

Like the cyclists that stay so far out in the road just it seems to block cars from getting past, caring not a jot that the person in the motor vehicle has a machine which can travel immesaurably faster than their "pedal power"

Cyclists dont need a licence, pay insurance, pay road tax either.

Therefore if this initative makes some of these idiots on two wheels adhere to the same rules as the rest of us then it is to be applauded and welcomed.

I do understand its a minority of cyclists that drag the rest of you down by the way......
141

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:05:09
The problem with that Skip is that you're never going to get that beside every road in the country, so at some point cyclists are going to have to go on the road, and with them having been removed from the road in other places both cyclists and drivers will be even less likely to know how to interact when they ARE together.

It's a bit prevention rather than cure. The problem is, as you've said, the lack of respect on the roads. If, keeping the tenor of the original article, there was a spate of murders of dwarves we wouldn't say that all dwarves should wear anti-stab jackets - we'd seek to stop the attacks in the first place.

With cyclists it seems that we need to remove the 'victim' rather than address the problem.
142

gorgeousgorgieboy,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:05:33
Standing with a pal on a narrow pavement outside the pub having a fag, we were confronted with a cyclist who was riding on the pavement the wrong way up the one -way street. If you get my gist.

Christ he was very annoyed when we refused to move over and let him ride past. He had to get off and walk the bike around us, muttering whatever cyclists mutter to themselves on these occasions.

Never mind, I managed to stub out my fag on his saddle.
143

Anth,

06/11/2008 16:09:23
Hang on a minute here.... For all you luvvies out there slamming bad cyclists in an attempt to defend motorists...

1. To drive a motor vehicle (lawfully) in this country, you MUST pass a test set down by the DVLA to prove that you can pass a test on a single given day.

2. If you drive a motor vehicle in this country (again lawfully) you MUST obtain insurance to at least cover 3rd parties in the event of an accident.

3. If you break the laws of the road 'and are caught' in a motor vehicle you will be fined, have your license endorsed, be disqualified from holding a driving licence.

4. Should you have points or have been banned you can expect your insurance premium to increase as well.

There are many offences which would result in at least a fine or points but most likely both... Including:

Failing to stop at a red light
Driving the wrong way up a one way system
Driving on the pavement
Parking on the pavement
Parking on zig zag lines
Crossing block white line to overtake
Ignoring a crossing patrol officer
Failure to stop at a zebra crossing
Ignoring direction given by a traffic warden

However to a minority of motorists all of the above are fair game and seem to constitute part of the "fun" of driving which seems for some to be the ability to see how much they can wind other road users up with their incosiderate use of the road....

Like the motorists that stay so far into the side of the road on the cycle lane just it seems to block cyclists from getting past, caring not a jot that the person on the bike has a machine which can travel immesaurably faster than their "petrol power" during rush hour.

Motorists do need a licence, pay insurance, but don't pay 'road tax' cos it's called VED and I have a car and pay that.

Therefore if this initative makes some of these idiots on four wheels adhere to the same rules as the rest of us then it is to be applauded and welcomed.

I do understand its a minority of motorists that drag the rest
144

Local Lass,

South Queensferry 06/11/2008 16:11:04
#142 Too right. I'll be leaving my office in the city centre at 5.15pm and I'll be home in South Queensferry by 5.40pm, whereas the poor car driver.......
145

hibbyspurs,

06/11/2008 16:16:12
#148

Very good, you've learned how to use copy & paste (clap clap clap).....

I'm not saying for a second that motorists are any better than those on two wheels, just pointing out that there are some cyclists out there who are utter idiots as well.

Some of you other remarks a little churlish also.... Pass a test on a given day? What day did you pass you push bike test may I ask? & please dont give me a cycling profiency from when you were a bairn, even I passed that one....

As for Road Tax/ VED.... I think 100% of readers will know what I meant by using the "slang" term for VED wont they?

Other than that carry on........
146

hibbyspurs,

06/11/2008 16:16:57
#147

PMSL
147

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:23:10
That's the point I was making hibbyspurs, both have a minority as bad as others (which I've said all along) but your post didn't say that, it simply said that cyclists are bad (though I'm grateful for it being mentioned it's only a minority).

And yes, pass on a given day. I passed my driving test at 17 - I'm now 32. At no point have I been required to make sure I'm STILL a safe and competent driver, nor show that I've kept up to date on changes in road laws (though I've got to do that as a cycling journalist/lawyer...)

Is passing a driving test at 17 any more relevant than cycling proficiency at 11? If the legal driving age was 11 then there would be a test at that and still nothing. Unless you're suggesting a cycling test at a specific age and you're not allowed to cycle before that?
148

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 16:27:32
#153

A lawyer? You're not billing us for this, I hope? ;-)
149

Anth,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:30:22
Billed per 6 minute unit Skip - if I could be bothered. Truth be told I'm rubbish at being a lawyer. I don't play golf for a start.
150

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 16:32:10
#155

Yes, and you seem to speak in plain, easy to understand English. Which would clearly be a disadvantage.
151

gorgeousgorgieboy,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:34:55
PMSL ?? Is this good or bad??

Not up in these things.

BOAOF
152

Plodjfriss, Hammer of the Numpties,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 16:35:57
A note about the "No Cycling" signs on Portobello promenade: I'm pretty sure that these have no legal force, so it's not a question of the police turning a blind eye. (I'm not condoning anything here, just pointing out a fact.)
153

Local Lass,

South Queensferry 06/11/2008 16:37:26
I've been driving cars/motorcycles for 23 years now and I know very well the reasons why people driving sports cars and 4x4's are called pr!cks......
154

tumshie heid,

06/11/2008 16:44:46
#145 I find that generally cyclists are trying to avoid numptie car drivers opening car doors as they cycle past. This explains them riding in the middle of a lane. (Not all the time of course)
155

Artemis,

06/11/2008 16:47:39
#145 - I cycle as far out as I need to to ensure my safety - that means making sure I'm avoiding car doors, holes, sunken grates etc, or to prevent someone trying to overtake me where it is not safe to do so. I will move back left as soon as I can, I don't get any pleasure out of holding up motorised traffic, but reszt assured, if I'm further to the right, it's because I need to be there to protect my own life.
156

keit011,

06/11/2008 16:55:34
i think the police officer is putting this over a bit strong after all these are minor traffic offences ie cycling on a pavement or sort of jumping lights a bit early i see cars parked on pavements all the time. i think the police get of with a few murders as well what about the Scottish guy killed in England for carrying a table leg shot dead the Brazilian guy last year shot on a train for looking a little like a suicide bomber. if the police put a lot more police on the streets and cut the wages of these higher rankers then there wouldn't be as many guys on 2 wheels or 4 getting off with nothing and would be a bit more hessitant before doing it
157

Artemis,

06/11/2008 17:09:40
Gorgie_Tony, can you explain to me how I get from my flat in the southside to Princes Street or to Ocean Terminal by bike by using off-road tracks?
158

,

06/11/2008 17:11:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
159

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 17:22:12
#165 Woops! You've really done it now. G-Tone will be like an enraged bull :-)
160

Frankly Mister Shankly,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 17:35:41
163. Just jail? Can we not have them killed as well?

Calm down.
161

calum,

06/11/2008 17:36:08
#163 - Oh dear, you're being very inconsistent on this compared with motorists. I thought you would want the police to knock cyclists off their bikes, beat them senseless, drag them through the broken spokes of their front wheel, thrash them with a leather strap, spray them with "mustard gas", melt down their bikes and throw them into jail for a minumum of 10 years. And a good thrashing didn't harm you when you were young, oh no, not at all.....
162

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 17:44:44
#168 - Nice one - I'm still laughing.
163

calum,

06/11/2008 17:50:23
#170- Careful, he'll report us. Funny how he never gets moderated in spite of his outrageous comments and insults........could it be that he is, in fact, the cover shift EN News Desk reporter so can't moderate himself .......think about it.
164

calum,

06/11/2008 18:05:58
#165 - Moderated in a record time ....see, #170. And #171 you frequently insult people and are never moderated, I think you've just answered the doubts. Happy reporting.
165

calum,

06/11/2008 18:09:03
and #171, you never ever did confirm why you didn't complain to the police about their alleged inactivity over your "chip throwing" assault. Nor did you ever answer the challenge about your "serving King and country claim" and your age ......mmmmm?
166

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 18:12:12
#175 ...or if he has ever held a full driving licence.
167

calum,

06/11/2008 18:27:22
#177 - So you spew your personal life all over these pages and then when any attempt is made to check whether your claims are true to verify your credibility they are suddenly none of anyone's business ....how strange.
168

calum,

06/11/2008 18:28:38
#176 - Abuse is abuse, it doesn't matter who starts it.
169

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 18:40:28
#179 Indeed I don't know you. If I did there would be no need to ask.
170

Incandescent,

06/11/2008 19:04:07
#184 I have a full licence with no points.
171

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 06/11/2008 19:12:48
Most motorists adopt a 'holier than thou' attitude towards cyclist and other road users. They rant that cyclist's don't follow the rules of the road, well neither do 90% of motorists.
They moan about cyclists going through red lights, well I saw 2 cars drive through red lights today.
And as for cyclists on pavements, well look at the number of cars that park on the pavement.


172

calum,

06/11/2008 19:13:53
#183 - How old?
You're beginning to rave a bit, time for other tasks to do. +TL
173

is it me?,

Edinburgh 06/11/2008 19:59:51
I understand that it's quite legal for a dog to foul the road.(As opposed to the footpath). Something to do with old laws relating to horses and horse-drawn transport and the fact that you couldn't really stop animals doing it.
Any of you dog owning motorists see where I'm going with this...?
174

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 20:35:06
186 Road Raga

"Most motorists adopt a 'holier than thou' attitude towards cyclist and other road users. They rant that cyclist's don't follow the rules of the road, well neither do 90% of motorists.
They moan about cyclists going through red lights, well I saw 2 cars drive through red lights today.
And as for cyclists on pavements, well look at the number of cars that park on the pavement."

- Really? 90% of motorists don't follow the rules of the road? You couldn't be making stuff up, now could you.

That's like me saying that it's a fact that 107.4% of all your posts make no sense.

And the old "other people break the law, so I should be allowed to break the law too" argument is mince.

Other people steal, avoid paying their taxes, and beat up old ladies for fun. Does that mean it's OK for me to do it too?
175

FRAM,

edinburgh 06/11/2008 20:41:30
Cyclists only care about themselves and CONTINUALLY clyle on pavements ,sometimes at great speed with earphones in so they can't hear what is going on around them.
They should be severely fined when caught and their cycles conficated. Many accidents are caused by on our cyclists on our pavements. WHY DO THEY HAVE TO CYCLE ON PAVEMENTS????
176

THE BPRENTICE,

06/11/2008 20:42:23
#123 I WASN'T talking about legitimate filtering:

In places where it is permitted, lane splitting, also known as filtering, allows motorcycles to use the space between vehicles to move through stationary or slow traffic. Fine.

Listen Nimrod, I'm talking about bikes travelling at 45m mph plus where there is barely any space between me and the oncomming traffic on a slight bend at traffic lights - yes I've seen it and monitored it AND had to brake because of it. NOT stationary or slow traffic ... I was just making the point that some bikers take 'filtering' too far.

Nobody wants to hurt a biker (depite being called an utter pr!ck for having an opinion) showed your schemie credentials there?!

oooh I get home from the city centre sooo quickly ... oooohhh! I'm just sooo super-duper! Grow up DUMASS! Better late in this world than early in the next!
177

The real dracula,

06/11/2008 21:03:14
here we go again t1t for tat .
From the cyclists ,,,drivers are worse.
From the drivers,,,,,cyclists are worse.

Let me tell you something both are as bad as each other.
It is a positive move that the polis are targeting cyclists it may one day save THEIR lives. A cyclist versus car is always gonna come off worse.

And a cyclist versus pedestrian usually ends up with the pedestrian coming off worst.

Cyclist arent being picked on they are being made to mind the rules of the road> car drivers are reprimanded every day esp by traffic polis.

Cyclists get a grip and stop whining , use the road how its supposed to be used
178

Pond Hall,

06/11/2008 21:41:14
Road Raga Good Point

"And as for cyclists on pavements, well look at the number of cars that park on the pavement"

Road Raga raises some good points

Yip car passed me the other day, promptly drove up onto the wheels. Blocking the pavement for any pedestrian wanting past.

Plenty of space on the road.

So gave him a wide berth as I passed.

Yip, you've guessed it. He swung his door, as it was a three door hatch it swung out.

"Jeesy Peeps" as i screamed at him.

Of course he couldn't look in his wing mirror as he didn't have one!!!.

People complain about the state of our pavements, parking on pavements is what causes half of the broken slabs and cracked tarmac.
179

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 22:06:46
#195

So what does that prove? That some drivers are selfish gits? We all know that. Doesn't alter the fact that cyclists shouldn't run red lights, or ride on the pavement, does it?

We can all come up with similar examples, depending on our point of view. Yesterday, I came round a corner and had to jump out of the way of a pavement cyclist hurtly down a hill at high speed. He gave no thought to braking, and carried on his merry way. A couple of days before, I was crossing at the green man near Haymarket, as were many other people, when a cyclist passed the cars sitting waiting at the red light and weaved his way through the crossing pedestrians, giving them dirty looks for daring to get in "his way" as he ran the red light.

There are many examples of bad driving, and many examples of bad cycling. Both should be illegal, but currently only one seems to be enforced. That is the point of this article and this debate. Both should be treated equally severely, to make the streets safer for everyone.
180

tumshie heid,

06/11/2008 22:26:18
#193 Thats some feat isn't it? 45mph squeezing between oncoming cars and traffic lights too. I think you might be exxagerating your little tale a bit!
181

T.J.F,

06/11/2008 22:42:04
Inspector Gilhooly, fill your boots mate and fix the lot. As a responsible cyclists, it really gets me down when I see other cyclists violating the law. The biggest offenders are your city cyclist couriers. Your other biggest offenders are the students riding their bikes during the hours of darkness with no lights. I am all for the initiative. If you use the road whether it be by car, motorcycle,cycle, zimmer or whatever you have to abide by the Road Traffic Act, simple as that.
182

Skip McClendon,

06/11/2008 22:54:36
#198

Well said.
183

THE BPRENTICE,

06/11/2008 23:19:13
not a bit, tattie heid, traffic lights at the kings blds a few days ago - I was describing the dufuss to my wife as he/she was driving up behind us. No exageration - in fact it had been raining, so, I was even more on edge about the biker. They think they're invincible - jus twait until they have their first crash ... it might be their last.

I wish cyclists and bikers didn't think they were roy of the rovers when they HIT the road.

This isn't new to me, years ago I remember arguing with mates that thought they were bigshots because they ramjetted about. To quote one of them "man I just drive fast, I can't help it."

Yeah, that's all good until something unusual happens like a car moving differently to what you had anticipated or a child runs onto the street or anything elsoe you hadn't banked on.

You know fine what the ramjets reaction with be - man its not my fault, I didn't expect it. ... survey says WWWAAAahhhhh!! incorrect MR Ramjet. Due care and attention is expected from motorists, cyclists and bikers. So, this article is spot on.

As I say, better late in this world than early in the next.
184

THE BPRENTICE,

06/11/2008 23:22:03
best comment of the day (surprisingly NOT Local Lass,South Queensferry ) is 194 The real dracula - nuff said.
185

Decent,

07/11/2008 01:16:25
The real dracula talks a lot of sense. Sorry I haven't read all the posts I got bored but I nearly witnessed a cyclist being killed in Hamilton Place this morning. He crossed to the wrong side of the road to go on pavement right in front of a legal right turning van. These guys need to be stopped for their own safety.
186

Decent,

07/11/2008 01:27:57
168- Calum very well done - I'm clapping you now.
187

Al Pacino,

07/11/2008 08:41:09
Will somebody punch Allknowing in the head please. It's "you're", not "your" in the context you were trying to use (post 71) Additionally, don't try quoting the law if you don't know it. It is NOT illegal to cycle 2 abreast. That part of the HW code is advisory not statutory, but you knew that right?
188

Local Lass,

South Queensferry 07/11/2008 09:10:28
I heard that a cyclist got wiped out last night on Corstorphone Road ........by a woman driving a 4x4......apparently just cut him off without looking......
189

Artemis,

07/11/2008 09:16:18
Gorgie Tony still hasn't told me how I'm supposed to cycle round the centre of town using off-road tracks.
190

Skip McClendon,

07/11/2008 09:20:30
Selfish git update:

Happened AGAIN this morning. Gets off train at Haymarket, waits with many other pedestrians to cross road. Green man comes in, cars all stop and pedestrians start to cross road. Selfish git on bike weaves past static cars, runs red light and weaves way through crossing pedestrians without a care in the world. Almost knocks down lovely (and very tall), public transport-using, non-car driving young lady who gets on at same station as me. She gives him look of death, but he wobbles on oblivious, headphones in. Git.
191

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 07/11/2008 10:37:51
#206 Artemis

"how I'm supposed to cycle round the centre of town using off-road tracks"

True Artemis, there aren't many (if any) cycle tracks in the Town Centre.

The answer to your question is therefore very simple:-

1. You cycle on the roads where you find conditions to be relatively safe and to uour satisfaction.

2. When you feel conditions are unsafe and/or the traffic is exceptionally heavy, you dismount your bike and push it along the pavements in company of what will now be your fellow pedestrians.

I agree that cycling conditions in most towns and cities are not satisfactory, but is it too much to ask the selfish and impatient proportion of the cycling population who illegally cycle on pavements to dismount and push their bikes to areas which are more favourable.

At this point, may I pose a question:

How many of you have been aware or the numbers of pavement cyclists who are really just neds/yobs deliberately trying to provoke fights/arguments?

I hope a large number of law breaking cyclist are prosecuted and heavily fined during this operation and may it be continued indefinitely.





192

Teej,

Edinburgh 07/11/2008 10:59:42
Well - its the usual anti cycle rants from Scotsman publications and its readers.

I have no problem with a crackdown on bad cyclists - I just wish they would do the same to car drivers

Cyclists are on the roads by right - not under licence as are car drivers.

VED does not pay for local roads such as in the city. They are paid for from council funds. VED does not cover the cost of motoring or anywhere near. Cyclists do not damage roads, require parking attendants and so on. VED for cyclists is an utter nonsense.

How many cyclists kill or main car drivers? How many car drivers kill and maim cyclists.

I obey virtually all rules of the road when out on my bike. Every week I have to take avoiding action when cycling legally to avoid being knocked off by careless drivers or from drivers deliberately trying to run me off the road.

A few points on the law - cycling two abreast is perfectly legal - if daft a fair amount of the time in cities.

Pushing your bike on the pavement is still illegal.

Riding out from the curb to prevent cars from passing is legal and often the only safe way to ride. As cycles are faster around town than cars doing this does not hold up car drivers AT ALL.

Highway code states that you should give cyclists plenty of room - as much room as you would a car - ie if it would not be safe to overtake a car than it is not safe to overtake a bike.

One example of how idiots in cars endanger bikes. Last night I was riding down Picardy Place to leith walk - there was a line of virtually stationary cars in the outside lane. I was carefully going down the inside lane in the middle of the lane - as allowed and recommended in the highway code. A car pulled out from the line of traffic into the inside lane while I was alongside it - I shouted to alert the car that I was there - I do have powerful lights but these were not seen. The car driver then saw me but continued his manoeuvre forcing me against the kerb. As I was going
193

Skip McClendon,

07/11/2008 11:12:34
#209

So, you answer alleged anti-bike rants with an anti-car rant.

What about all the concerns raised above by pedestrians? Who comes off worse in a bike / pedestrian collision on the pavement?

Once again, you argue that because there is bad driving, we should somehow let cyclist away with their own selfish behaviour. The truth is that both are equally bad, and should be equally punished.

Cars get stopped and booked for running red lights. I've never seen a car being driven on the pavement. Yet cyclists continue to commit these crimes with impunity. Why should we accept this?
194

Teej,

Edinburgh 07/11/2008 11:12:57
Hmmm - I lost the last part of my post - basically the car driver then followed me down the road beeping his horn and gesticulating. There was a give way line 30 yds infront and no safe place to over take. Over the next few blocks I got well away from him as cycles are faster than cars thru traffic.

So
"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
195

Teej,

07/11/2008 11:16:21
Skip - that is no rant - I do not argue that cyclist should be let off with anything. I merely point out a few truths. I agree with you that ileagal or dangerous driving or riding should be met with the full force of the law.

Have another read at what I wrote.
196

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 07/11/2008 11:26:21
I think, that to some extent we are all missing the point here. The real problem lies in the fact that more and more people are being encouraged to cycle (nothing wrong with that) with no effort being made to ensure that cycling in towns is 'safe'.

Local Authoriteies and politicians are supposedly 'supporting' green issues and in their eyes the more cyclists the better, illegal cycling is being ignored in order (I guess) not to 'discourage' cycling.

Surely it is time for cyclists to organise a national protest to force local authorities to introduce safe cycle tracks which would hopefully remove cyclists from pavements/main roads. I believe the protest should take the form of nobody cycling for say, a month, that would cause problems of overload on public transport and/or increase car use. This might put pressure on 'management' to take appropriate action.

One thing is for sure, pavement and dangerous cycling must be stopped.
197

Local Lass,

South Queensferry 07/11/2008 11:29:25
#201 BP Prentice

I love you....
198

Artemis,

07/11/2008 12:32:54
Cyclists should not be on the pavements, ever. They are traffic and they should be on the roads, or on designated cycle paths or shared use paths like the Innocent or Water of Leith paths, where cyclists and pedestrians interact quite happily and safely. The answer to inmproving safety is not to campaign for off-road cycle paths, it is to campaign for better driver behaviour, more police action against *anyone* using the roads unsafely or illegally, and for more people to cycle.

On that note, a big thank you to the driver of the TP Niven lorry who was very patient behind me this morning when he had no space to overtake me safely, waited until it was safe, passed giving me plenty of room and pulled in once he was well ahead of me and it was safe to do so. It was a perfect example of how to do it properly.
199

Pond Hall,

07/11/2008 12:53:37
215 Artemis,07/11/2008 12:32:54
Cyclists should not be on the pavements, ever. They are traffic and they should be on the roads,

and just to add

Car/Vans should not be on the pavements either, ever. They are traffic and they should be on the roads.

Take a look at many residential side streets, CARS parked tail to tail on THE PAVEMENT (footpath)

making it almost impossible to walk on the footpath and often FORCING pedestrians/wheelchair users etc onto the ROAD, which is meant for TRAFFIC.

Funny old thing its alright for cars to mount the pavement, but if a poor pedestrian steps off the pavement, they get a sharp toot of the horn.

Yip RED LIGHT CYCLIST should get their bikes crushed, in fact to make it equal, apply the same to cars.

That would soon stop people who go through red lights !!

good post though

as we all no there is no perfect road user!
200

A Leither,

07/11/2008 12:54:24
As a daily cycle commuter, I'd agree that it's time that EVERYONE breaking the law on the roads (or pavements in some cases) was prosecuted.

And like #215, I'd like to pass my thanks on to the ADM Milling artic lorry drivers on Ferry Road / Telford Road for always giving cyclists plenty of room, overtaking only when it's safe to do so and not pulling in whilst still alongside the cyclist. True gents (and possibly ladies) of the road. If only every other driver / cyclist / motorcyclist could behave in the same exemplary manner. I've already emailed the company and passed on my thanks, which they were very pleased to hear.
201

Pond Hall,

07/11/2008 12:58:46
210 Skip McClendon,07/11/2008 11:12:34

I've never seen a car being driven on the pavement.

- there are plenty of occasions as a pedestrian that I've seen cars mount the pavement, usually to PARK on it.

OR when people try to get into a parking space, gone are the days that people reveresed into spaces.
NOW its nose in, mount the pavement and then back onto the road...tough to the pedestrian.

Best one down my way was local road was shut, so instead of taking the diversion, this local driver during the night cut through a local park, driving on the footpath.... through sheer laziness


Yet cyclists continue to commit these crimes with impunity. Why should we accept this?

They shouldn't.
202

Bob 2,

07/11/2008 13:22:44
cycle couriers are amongst the worst?
203

Alberto.,

07/11/2008 14:23:54
# ‘Cyclists get away with murder says police chief’

***********************
So - what’s new?
Check it out fellas!
Nowadays, under the current ‘modus operandi’ of the Justice dispensers, it seems that Murderers, Muggers and many other sorts of ‘criminal’ offenders are allowed to ‘walk freely amongst us - to do as they will!’ - probably completely without any hope of Police interference - simply because of the ‘difficulties’ they can bring forth to the Courts! Whereas a ‘seriously offending and dangerous cyclist’ is I suppose, in to-days dealings in the Court system can be considered as ‘Easy, very easy meat’ to deal with - whereas the ‘real criminal offenders have a tendency to get a ‘bit stroppy’ - if ever arrested - which seems rarely!!!

This is not to say that ‘offending’ against rhe Law by cyclists should not be punished - but surely the Police and the Justice system should get their priorities in order - or is that asking for a job too far!!

Or has crime eliminetion / offending become 'selective'
like so many things today, depending on 'the Bonus' or targets set?
204

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 07/11/2008 14:24:37
#215 Artemis

"The answer to inmproving safety is not to campaign for off-road cycle paths, it is to campaign for better driver behaviour"

Yes, Artemis I agree with that theory, unfortuately in practice it will never happen which is why some sort of segreggation is required.

In repeat my hope that we shall see a significant number of pavement/'illegal' cyclist prosecutions from here on. Perhaps the idea of patrolling the pavements should be added to the remit of the Town's traffic wardens, or perhaps special 'heavies' should be employed.

205

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburghj 07/11/2008 15:50:06
It will be interesting to see if the EEN publishes details of any arrests/charges made against 'illegal' cyclists in the coming weeks.

206

radge dug,

07/11/2008 17:18:12
Murder???!!! How many fatalities has there been due to careless cycling? Aye, some cyclist do break the law but irresponsible car use is much more widespread.

Lets see the cops cracking down on 4x4 red light jumpers and the morons who use the greenways lanes. LRT bus drivers too tend to be obnoxous.
207

radge dug,

07/11/2008 17:19:41
How about proper cycle lanes then? LIke almost ALL major european cities? That would please cyclists, pedestrians and car drivers.
208

The real dracula,

07/11/2008 21:48:57
There are cases of pedestrians eing seriously injured by cyclists I dont know about deaths would need to look into that but it will happen one day.

Of course there are serious injuries to cyclists but its not alaways the person who isnt hurts fault.

It should be made law that cyclists wear a helmet (their skull can crack like an eggshell on hitting a hard surface and their brain will be shaken from the impact) and banned from using mp3 or ipods.
209

Bob 2,

10/11/2008 12:23:45
given the "conditions", these 2 should have lights on?


tut tut

yes they are watching us but who is watching them?
210

Taxidave,

Edinburgh 19/11/2008 03:17:11
Every night as a Taxi driver I see cyclists going about invisible to the naked eye with no lights on and wearing personal stereos-this is madness.I missed one by inches the other week as he was wearing dark clothes with no lights on.

Dave
211

Kipling,

21/11/2008 14:04:19
CYCLISTS ARE A DANGER TO OTHER CYCLISTS.

Nobody mention this?? The only thing that's saved me on turning right is sticking my hand out to find some lycra dressed individual about to overtake on a narrow cycle route. Undertaking, overtaking cyclists. Competitive rush-hour cyclists riding alongside you because they don't have the speed to overtake or the patience to stay behind. Cyclists coming out of minor roads straight in front of the cycle, to cause braking.

TRUCKS ARE A DANGER TO CYCLISTS.
In some cases moving ahead of the red lights to ensure a left-turning vehicle (especially if large) has seen you, I think is SAFER than waiting to go ahead at the lights change. AS LONG AS the crossroad traffic has cleared or stopped. A few cycle fatalities have occurred because the cyclist has been crushed following the correct rules, assuming the trucks will see them & pause to let them go ahead.
212

The Trooper,

edinburgh 28/11/2008 15:04:20
Due to us living in a society where to sue someone for whatever reason has become acceptable,Its about time that cyclists stand up and be counted.
The bikes that they use should be roadworthy and also should go through an annual safedy test which would help save lives as well as create jobs.These bikes should be fitted with lights it should be an offence not to use them,as would having a light on a jacket or rucksack instead of on the bike.
Cyclists should be made to go through a compulsory road driving test to prove they are competent on the road.They should also pay road tax and have third party insurance cover.
If they want to use the roads they should be subject to laws and costs associated with it.
213

Pond Hall,

29/11/2008 10:49:36
231 The trooper

think someone above has already commented on road tax (VED)

VED is based on your co2 emissions, so a big petrol guzzler pays more than a small car.

Based on that, a Cycle is carbon neutral, in fact maybe cyclists should be getting money from the VED for being carbon neutral.

Many cyclists pay TAX through various taxes so they are already contributing to the road maintenance.

Agree that there should be some sort insurance and something done about cyclist who go about in the "dark", maybe taking there bikes off them and impounding them could be one solution.

And having a registration plate..to trace the red light runners!
214

Munkey,

On yer back 19/12/2008 17:01:39
Operation Appetite

I am in receipt of your recent letter on the above, and if you are agreeable I would like to discuss this matter with you in an effort to reassure you that Lothian and Borders Police is in no way seeking to demonise cyclists. As you may understand I spoke to Inspector Gilhooly immediately this matter was raised in the press and the officer is adamant that he did not make the comment as reported and was most disappointed that his attempt to convey the message about a reckless minority was taken totally out of context.

On the day in question the police operation referred to in the Edinburgh Evening News was conducted by officers on bikes. We do most of our business in the City Centre (sic) on foot and on bikes, primarily because the environment lends itself to this type of policing, giving us greater community integration and a swifter response through the busy city streets. It also helps with officer fitness and lowers our carbon footprint.

It is important to be aware that reckless cycling was only one piece of business being addressed during the initiative with a focus also being given to tackling anti-social behaviour and the disruption of individuals involved in criminal activity. Two people were arrested for theft of bikes, whilst several others were issued with anti-social behaviour tickets for disorderly conduct, a number of warnings were issued to motorists and over 300 crime prevention leaflets were distributed.

This type of work is clearly part of our core business and very much the kind of policing that the vast majority of the public wish to see. Whilst I can in no way defend the headline that "cyclists are getting away with murder", I would be keen to talk through the concerns raised in your correspondence and hopefully resolve this matter to your satisfaction.
215

A.A.,

Midlothian 22/01/2009 15:06:16
#39

You're not very bright either. "Your" isn't short for "you are not very bright". "You're" is short for you are. "Your" is used when you say "your name", your jacket, your pen" etc...get it?
Probably not.
Anyway, I don't mind cyclists as long as they stay on the road. My elderly mother was almost knocked down by a cyclist speeding along on the pavement.
216

lhamal,

edinburgh west 18/02/2009 13:20:16
i drive in and around edinburgh every single day, and albeit it i dont claim to the best driver in the world, i get my eyes opened by some of the antics that cyclists get up to, but beleive me, TAXIS are a lot worse, they break every rule in the highway-code book, yet i have yet to see even one stopped or charged. these morons seem to think the road belongs to them and everybody else should make way for them,they run red lights, abandon there cars wherever they like, constantly flaunt the speed limits, and apart from anything else they should all get ther taxis recalled for a brake health check, because nono of them seem capable of stopping behind a white stop line

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.