Cyclist scratching car and jumping red lights

[Berberis]

So back in September of 2007 im cycling in the Peak District one Sunday Afternoon, a car pulls up at a junction unfront of me now im guessing they saw me coming as they didnt pull out. Then just as im approaching the junction they for some reason decided they can no longer wait and pull out, leaving me with no option but to slam the brakes on and go plowing straight into them.

 

Bang and my £3k carbon fiber frame is snapped, said driver has a quick look around no doubt notices that nobody eles is around and does one.

 

So why do car drivers think its ok the leave the scene of an accident.

 

So its the same old same old anti cycling rant again, if your not happy about cyclists not having to pay as you call it road tax and dont have to have any insurance no good ranting about it on here, why not write a letter to say someone like your MP if you feel so strongly about it.

 

I don’t think anyone would argue against your point but the fact still remains that cyclists have relative impunity by default because they have no way of being identified.

 

Cyclists regularly ignore the laws of the roads but get away with it because it’s a soft crime and the cyclists is almost impossible to trace even with all the CCTV we have.

[splodgeyAl]

Is there a different set of rules for cyclists that there is for motorists?

 

There are a few, such as riding not more than two abreast, and filtering through queues of traffic

[robS35]

I don’t think anyone would argue against your point but the fact still remains that cyclists have relative impunity by default because they have no way of being identified.

 

Cyclists regularly ignore the laws of the roads but get away with it because it’s a soft crime and the cyclists is almost impossible to trace even with all the CCTV we have.

 

 

I agree there are some real t**spots that cycle on our roads and have a total disregard to the rules of the road, but personally i think its a very small minority.

 

Now as ive already said if some people feel so strongly about it, ranting on here is going to achive nothing, put pen to paper and try and do something about it.

 

God if i started a thread everytime i saw a car driver useing their mobile phone while driving, jumping red lights, speeding or just acting like a total numpty on the road i think 99% of the threads on here would be on that subject.

[splodgeyAl]

I agree there are some real t**spots that cycle on our roads and have a total disregard to the rules of the road, but personally i think its a very small minority.

 

Now as ive already said if some people feel so strongly about it, ranting on here is going to achive nothing, put pen to paper and try and do something about it.

 

God if i started a thread everytime i saw a car driver useing their mobile phone while driving, jumping red lights, speeding or just acting like a total numpty on the road i think 99% of the threads on here would be on that subject.

 

You'd have a similar post count to Mr Benn's

[Yog Sothoth]

Cycling is great. Everyone should cycle. The wear on the roads would be negligible, and people wouldn't be such lard-arses.

[Bonjon]

Cycling is great. Everyone should cycle. The wear on the roads would be negligible, and people wouldn't be such lard-arses.

 

No thanks, I prefer to get to work still clean from my morning shower, and get there in a timley manner.

[Ouija]

I won't have a bike because you have to use the road (rather than the path) with one and I think it's way too dangerous driving on the road. If there were more cycle paths then there would be no argument between vehicle drivers and cyclists, and perhaps some people would be more inclined to use bikes, as I would.

 

By the way, Benny, don't you qualify to road tax exemption?

[olorin]

i said tax and insurance -the latter being the more important . this thread is about a cyclist causing damage to a friends car -and asking the question as to why ,seeing as cyclists as well as motorists cause damage on the roads ,are they not required by law to have an insurance policy ?

 

The answer is because a cyclist is unlikley to place an excessive burden on the state as a result of his accident.

 

In an accident people are likely to end up severly injured, and also to be unable to earn income, perhaps for life. A responsible state has to be able to provide for them and thier dependants to subsist. The money to do this comes from taxation.

 

Now the State can either raise thie through general taxation, which is unfair as not everyone drives. Why should they pay for others?

 

It could be raised through a taxation levied on the licence plates for vehicles for example. However this does not take into account differing peoples liklehood of having an accident.

 

Instead, the State simply farms it out to private enterprise and says "We will tax you to ensure that we the State have an income to pay for you the public to have accidents. We will charge you based on your likely cost, we will allow companies to collect it and we will call this tax insurance"

 

Those who are very unlikley to hurt or kill people dont bother paying insurance because there is no point. The cost of collecting it outweighs the benefits, so the State says that they won't tax (ie require insurance) from cyclists.

[Yog Sothoth]

No thanks, I prefer to get to work still clean from my morning shower, and get there in a timley manner.

 

I can get to work far quicker than any driver from the same area. And if I so want, I can shower at work, though rarely do.

[Yog Sothoth]

I won't have a bike because you have to use the road (rather than the path) with one and I think it's way too dangerous driving on the road. If there were more cycle paths then there would be no argument between vehicle drivers and cyclists, and perhaps some people would be more inclined to use bikes, as I would.

 

By the way, Benny, don't you qualify to road tax exemption?

 

You can ride on the path if you prefer. My partner is way too scared of the traffic on busy roads so always rides on the pavement. It's fine as long as you're sensible and considerate.