Re: Dangerous cycling law.

Thanks for showing that fender! It seems to suggest that all cyclists should be forced to have a brain scan before they are allowed to cycle........ you know, just to make sure they have a brain

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

I cycle and I know a lot about it
Cyclists are allowed to "jump" red lights if they are turning left

I agree wholeheartedly that high visibility clothing and helmets and bells...and lights...and working brakes...and a knowledge of the highway code... should all be made compulsory if cyclists use roads though

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

Knowledge of the highway code isn't good enough Rhian darlin' all road users need to know that if they break any of these codes (rules???) they will (a) be caught, (b) arrested and charged, (c) If Guilty heavily fined (including cyclists) and even banned from road use.

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

It works both ways UJ
I have been handlebar clipped twice by motorists not giving me a wide enough berth..
I was knocked to the floor on both occasions and was therefore not able to read their plates in order to report them for their dangerous driving

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

Which is why I said "all road users" in my previous comment Rhian darlin.

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

Oh yes..
Quite right UJ








But those motorists are still at large...

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

Question still stands, if a cyclist dismounts, jumps a red light on foot, or, pushes the bike the wrong way up a one way street, is he/she a cyclist or a pedestrian????

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

I think a person ceases to become a cyclist when they get off the bike and start walking it along. A cyclist walking a bike doesn't have the characteristics of a cyclist. For example, they aren't travelling on wheels lots faster than a pedestrian can walk.

Then I would say this makes sense to me because I'll quite often avoid a dangerous bit of road by getting off the bike and pushing it along the footpath.

The 2nd paragraph in the page linked to below seems to back this opinion up and the site is all about the law and cycling. Having said that, see the note at the foot of the page:

http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-ar...g-and-the-law/

Edit: There was a Court ruling on this point years ago. See the paragraph in the page headed 'CARRY THAT BIKE!'

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

Read it Mart, so, that being the case, a cycle being pushed is a pedestrian, and is no worse when walking across a pedestrian crossing, before the green man appears, as an un-encumbered person.

Re: Dangerous cycling law.

That's the way I'd view and treat the situation. Then again, a pedestrian not pushing a bike who crossed before the green man appeared could be seen as taking a risk. I've seen Mums and pushchairs do it. It's just that someone doing the same while pushing a bicycle will possibly be thought sillier purely because they are obviously a cyclist who has turned pedestrian pushing a bike.