|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Irresponsible cyclists criticised for not using lights at night
ROAD users in Gloucester have criticised cyclists who don't use lights.
As The Citizen reported on Wednesday, the city's MP Richard Graham has called for manufacturers to install lights on bicycles. His stance was backed by Graham Foot, who runs the Slam69 bicycle shop at the Gloucester Business Park. Both of them are concerned too many cyclists drive in the dark with no lights or reflectors. On our website www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk, reader Sheba2010: "I believe lights are a must both back and front - some cyclists seem to feel that because they are on the correct side of the road they only need rear lights as the traffic comes from behind." Others told of their personal experiences battling with space for cyclists. Zinger1 said: "As a professional driver you can imagine I see a lot of strange things on our roads. "Probably one of the most disturbing is the lack of visibility where cyclists are concerned. "One incident in December still makes me shudder, when I think of the possible outcome if I had not seen the cyclist in time. "It was dark and raining heavily as I drove up Frogfurlong Lane, and I missed one by two or three inches." Some online readers wanted police to come down on the culprits harder. Lazy Comsic added: "In Weston Road just recently, I saw two PCSOs step into the road to allow a cyclist to pass on the pavement. "What sort of message does that send out." Lescalier wrote: "I agree with this, bikes should be fitted with non removable lights that are always on via a dynamo by the manufacturers. Make it law. While we are at it, why not do the same for all vehicles." Ladybugs added: "All cyclists should have to take some kind of test the same as car owners, as some cyclists are lethal on the roads. "They should have insurance and I don't mean just to cover the cost of replacing their bikes. "If they are found to be flouting the rules of the road they should have their cycles confiscated until they pass another test. "Perhaps this way we would get rid of some of the loonies that currently cycle." A fellow reader called Merrcat Manor said: "I would say it's mostly older people that don't use lights. "In general, the lycra clad helmet wearers use lights, it's the others, and they are mostly middle aged, lazy and stupid. As said, it's only when they have an accident that they will come up against it." SarahJones78 wrote: "This is a real problem - especially in Bristol Road. http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co....ail/story.html |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Irresponsible cyclists criticised for not using lights at night
On 02/03/2012 17:04, Mr Benn wrote:
ROAD users in Gloucester have criticised cyclists who don't use lights. As The Citizen reported on Wednesday, the city's MP Richard Graham has called for manufacturers to install lights on bicycles. His stance was backed by Graham Foot, who runs the Slam69 bicycle shop at the Gloucester Business Park. I wonder if he sells lights? Both of them are concerned too many cyclists drive in the dark with no lights or reflectors. On our website www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk, reader Sheba2010: "I believe lights are a must both back and front - some cyclists seem to feel that because they are on the correct side of the road they only need rear lights as the traffic comes from behind." Others told of their personal experiences battling with space for cyclists. Zinger1 said: "As a professional driver you can imagine I see a lot of strange things on our roads. "Probably one of the most disturbing is the lack of visibility where cyclists are concerned. "One incident in December still makes me shudder, when I think of the possible outcome if I had not seen the cyclist in time. "It was dark and raining heavily as I drove up Frogfurlong Lane, and I missed one by two or three inches." Some online readers wanted police to come down on the culprits harder. Lazy Comsic added: "In Weston Road just recently, I saw two PCSOs step into the road to allow a cyclist to pass on the pavement. "What sort of message does that send out." Someone should dob them in to their gaffers. Lescalier wrote: "I agree with this, bikes should be fitted with non removable lights that are always on via a dynamo by the manufacturers. Make it law. While we are at it, why not do the same for all vehicles." Ladybugs added: "All cyclists should have to take some kind of test the same as car owners, as some cyclists are lethal on the roads. Good idea. "They should have insurance and I don't mean just to cover the cost of replacing their bikes. Unless they have a fridge freezer. "If they are found to be flouting the rules of the road they should have their cycles confiscated until they pass another test. Gets better all the time. "Perhaps this way we would get rid of some of the loonies that currently cycle." I've suggested hunting them down with packs of dogs. -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster University |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a third in last year
But will upping the fine to £100 a pop make any difference?
QUOTE: Motorists are adopting a devil-may-care attitude towards illegally using their mobile phones at the wheel, with the number of drivers fined for doing so rising by a third over the past year to more than 171,000. What’s more, when the figures are viewed against research into motorists’ self-reported use of mobiles while driving, it’s clear that the vast majority of those breaking the law and putting lives at risk are going unpunished. According to a Freedom of Information request conducted by the insurer Swiftcover, to which 41 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales responded, over 171,000 motorists were fined £60 and had their driving licences endorsed with three penalty points over the last 12 months, reports Mail Online. That compares to 115,900 in 2008. Swiftcover added that it had conducted research among drivers which suggested that less than 3 per cent of those admitting using their mobile phone while driving are actually getting caught and fined. Younger drivers accessing social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter was also highlighted as an area of particular concern, which was also a key finding of the 2011 edition of the RAC’s annual Report on Motoring. According to road safety campaigners, the rise in the number of motorists being fined – a reversal of a dip observed in 2008 after stiffer penalties were introduced – is due to many drivers feeling that they can get away with it because of relatively low levels of enforcement and the fact that the punishment provides an insufficient deterrent. Katie Shephard, director of Brake, told the Mail: “If 171,000 drivers have been caught, perhaps the penalties aren’t high enough. “There is no call important enough to risk your life or that or another road user. Our message to all drivers is switch off your mobile when behind the wheel.” Robin Reames, chief claims officer at Swiftcover, pointed out that drivers who caused a collision while using their mobile phones risked their insurance being rendered void, and could also face more serious sanctions than a fixed penalty notice depending on the charges brought. “Not only do you face fines, disqualification or even the possibility of a jail sentence, but anyone who crashes their vehicle while on the phone will be unable to make a claim with their insurer,” he explained. Road Safety Minister Mike Penning, quoted by the Mail, said: “To make sure drivers take this seriously we are increasing the fine for the offence from £60 to between £80 and £100 next year.” http://road.cc/content/news/49673-nu...hird-last-year -- Simon Mason |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a third inlast year
On Mar 3, 5:32*am, Simon Mason wrote:
But will upping the fine to £100 a pop make any difference? QUOTE: Motorists are adopting a devil-may-care attitude towards illegally using their mobile phones at the wheel, with the number of drivers fined for doing so rising by a third over the past year to more than 171,000. What’s more, when the figures are viewed against research into motorists’ self-reported use of mobiles while driving, it’s clear that the vast majority of those breaking the law and putting lives at risk are going unpunished. According to a Freedom of Information request conducted by the insurer Swiftcover, to which 41 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales responded, over 171,000 motorists were fined £60 and had their driving licences endorsed with three penalty points over the last 12 months, reports Mail Online. That compares to 115,900 in 2008. Swiftcover added that it had conducted research among drivers which suggested that less than 3 per cent of those admitting using their mobile phone while driving are actually getting caught and fined. Younger drivers accessing social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter was also highlighted as an area of particular concern, which was also a key finding of the 2011 edition of the RAC’s annual Report on Motoring. According to road safety campaigners, the rise in the number of motorists being fined – a reversal of a dip observed in 2008 after stiffer penalties were introduced – is due to many drivers feeling that they can get away with it because of relatively low levels of enforcement and the fact that the punishment provides an insufficient deterrent. Katie Shephard, director of Brake, told the Mail: “If 171,000 drivers have been caught, perhaps the penalties aren’t high enough. “There is no call important enough to risk your life or that or another road user. Our message to all drivers is switch off your mobile when behind the wheel.” Robin Reames, chief claims officer at Swiftcover, pointed out that drivers who caused a collision while using their mobile phones risked their insurance being rendered void, and could also face more serious sanctions than a fixed penalty notice depending on the charges brought. “Not only do you face fines, disqualification or even the possibility of a jail sentence, but anyone who crashes their vehicle while on the phone will be unable to make a claim with their insurer,” he explained. Road Safety Minister Mike Penning, quoted by the Mail, said: “To make sure drivers take this seriously we are increasing the fine for the offence from £60 to between £80 and £100 next year.” http://road.cc/content/news/49673-nu...d-using-mobile... This is appalling and putting lives at even more risk on our roads. If a driver crashes and kills someone while on the phone with no witnesses they will probably be allowed to get away with it. Phone use has become such an integral part of everyday life that I doubt that £100 fine will act as any sort of a deterrent. Only a lifetime driving ban and several years imprisonment for killing someone would suffice. -- . A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a third in last year
"Doug" wrote in message ... On Mar 3, 5:32 am, Simon Mason wrote: But will upping the fine to £100 a pop make any difference? QUOTE: Motorists are adopting a devil-may-care attitude towards illegally using their mobile phones at the wheel, with the number of drivers fined for doing so rising by a third over the past year to more than 171,000. What’s more, when the figures are viewed against research into motorists’ self-reported use of mobiles while driving, it’s clear that the vast majority of those breaking the law and putting lives at risk are going unpunished. According to a Freedom of Information request conducted by the insurer Swiftcover, to which 41 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales responded, over 171,000 motorists were fined £60 and had their driving licences endorsed with three penalty points over the last 12 months, reports Mail Online. That compares to 115,900 in 2008. Swiftcover added that it had conducted research among drivers which suggested that less than 3 per cent of those admitting using their mobile phone while driving are actually getting caught and fined. Younger drivers accessing social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter was also highlighted as an area of particular concern, which was also a key finding of the 2011 edition of the RAC’s annual Report on Motoring. According to road safety campaigners, the rise in the number of motorists being fined – a reversal of a dip observed in 2008 after stiffer penalties were introduced – is due to many drivers feeling that they can get away with it because of relatively low levels of enforcement and the fact that the punishment provides an insufficient deterrent. Katie Shephard, director of Brake, told the Mail: “If 171,000 drivers have been caught, perhaps the penalties aren’t high enough. “There is no call important enough to risk your life or that or another road user. Our message to all drivers is switch off your mobile when behind the wheel.” Robin Reames, chief claims officer at Swiftcover, pointed out that drivers who caused a collision while using their mobile phones risked their insurance being rendered void, and could also face more serious sanctions than a fixed penalty notice depending on the charges brought. “Not only do you face fines, disqualification or even the possibility of a jail sentence, but anyone who crashes their vehicle while on the phone will be unable to make a claim with their insurer,” he explained. Road Safety Minister Mike Penning, quoted by the Mail, said: “To make sure drivers take this seriously we are increasing the fine for the offence from £60 to between £80 and £100 next year.” http://road.cc/content/news/49673-nu...d-using-mobile... This is appalling and putting lives at even more risk on our roads. If a driver crashes and kills someone while on the phone with no witnesses they will probably be allowed to get away with it. Phone use has become such an integral part of everyday life that I doubt that £100 fine will act as any sort of a deterrent. Only a lifetime driving ban and several years imprisonment for killing someone would suffice. -- . A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill. What about when a cyclist kills a pedestrian, will they also get several years inside and a ban from the road? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a third inlast year
On Mar 3, 8:31*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message ... On Mar 3, 5:32 am, Simon Mason wrote: But will upping the fine to £100 a pop make any difference? QUOTE: Motorists are adopting a devil-may-care attitude towards illegally using their mobile phones at the wheel, with the number of drivers fined for doing so rising by a third over the past year to more than 171,000. What’s more, when the figures are viewed against research into motorists’ self-reported use of mobiles while driving, it’s clear that the vast majority of those breaking the law and putting lives at risk are going unpunished. According to a Freedom of Information request conducted by the insurer Swiftcover, to which 41 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales responded, over 171,000 motorists were fined £60 and had their driving licences endorsed with three penalty points over the last 12 months, reports Mail Online. That compares to 115,900 in 2008. Swiftcover added that it had conducted research among drivers which suggested that less than 3 per cent of those admitting using their mobile phone while driving are actually getting caught and fined. Younger drivers accessing social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter was also highlighted as an area of particular concern, which was also a key finding of the 2011 edition of the RAC’s annual Report on Motoring. According to road safety campaigners, the rise in the number of motorists being fined – a reversal of a dip observed in 2008 after stiffer penalties were introduced – is due to many drivers feeling that they can get away with it because of relatively low levels of enforcement and the fact that the punishment provides an insufficient deterrent. Katie Shephard, director of Brake, told the Mail: “If 171,000 drivers have been caught, perhaps the penalties aren’t high enough. “There is no call important enough to risk your life or that or another road user. Our message to all drivers is switch off your mobile when behind the wheel.” Robin Reames, chief claims officer at Swiftcover, pointed out that drivers who caused a collision while using their mobile phones risked their insurance being rendered void, and could also face more serious sanctions than a fixed penalty notice depending on the charges brought. “Not only do you face fines, disqualification or even the possibility of a jail sentence, but anyone who crashes their vehicle while on the phone will be unable to make a claim with their insurer,” he explained. Road Safety Minister Mike Penning, quoted by the Mail, said: “To make sure drivers take this seriously we are increasing the fine for the offence from £60 to between £80 and £100 next year.” http://road.cc/content/news/49673-nu...d-using-mobile... This is appalling and putting lives at even more risk on our roads. If a driver crashes and kills someone while on the phone with no witnesses they will probably be allowed to get away with it. Phone use has become such an integral part of everyday life that I doubt that £100 fine will act as any sort of a deterrent. Only a lifetime driving ban and several years imprisonment for killing someone would suffice. What about when a cyclist kills a pedestrian, will they also get several years inside and a ban from the road? .. I would hope so and similarly when a pedestrian kills a cyclist during a collision. Fortunately though, and unlike with drivers, such occurrences are rare. -- . A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a thirdin last year
On 04/03/2012 20:05, Tris wrote:
In Phil W Lee wrote: (Tris) considered Sun, 04 Mar 2012 12:10:43 GMT the perfect time to write: In Phil W Lee wrote: (Tris) considered Sat, 03 Mar 2012 09:48:05 GMT the perfect time to write: In post Simon wrote: QUOTE: Robin Reames, chief claims officer at Swiftcover, pointed out that drivers who caused a collision while using their mobile phones risked their insurance being rendered void... http://road.cc/content/news/49673-nu...hird-last-year Presumably, though, an insurance company couldn't really totally void your insurance, under such circumstances, because that would make you the equivalent of an uninsured driver. Wouldn't the insurance company still settle any damages claim made against you but not pay-up for any of your own costs - that is, treat your comprehensive policy like a third party one, is that how it would work? As I understand it, yes. I've never seen a certificate of motor insurance that is conditional on obeying any (never mind all) applicable law. Any other sections of the insurance policy could be invalidated though, as could other policies for health cover, earnings protection, life, etc. Thanks for your reply. Usually, when you need to use your insurance policy you have already been traumatised (and penalised if you have broken the law). Then along come your insurance company, all set and only too ready to traumatise you further. Yet, you're told insurance is there for your peace of mind - yeah, right. I couldn't help but notice, incidentally, that it is not illegal to use a mobile phone while cycling - the advantages of cycling over motoring just keep on adding up. The absence of a specific ban doesn't mean it is necessarily legal. Motorists were convicted of careless driving because of phone use even before the specific offence was brought in. To my mind, the biggest benefit cycling confers over motoring if you need to be able to use a phone is that I've never yet found anywhere that you can't pull over to use the phone safely when I'm on a bike, but the same is not true of a car. I would regard that as one of the most minor benefits though - cost, fitness, relative ease of parking, and not causing congestion but being able to cope with it are all much greater benefits. Yes, all good points - and I must stop being flippant, when I want to be taken seriously. Those much greater benefits you mention, they are all very good reasons to really get into cycling. There are no good reasons to get into cycling at all. Unless you want to be regarded as a total bell end. -- Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster University |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a third inlast year
On Mar 4, 8:05 pm, (Tris) wrote:
In post Phil W Lee I couldn't help but notice, incidentally, that it is not illegal to use a mobile phone while cycling - the advantages of cycling over motoring just keep on adding up. I have never owned a mobile phone - there is never anything so important that can't wait until I either get home or reach work where the call will be free. I must admit that they seem to be so popular that I see many drivers staring at their tiny screens while they are supposed to be driving, I suppose they are sending texts to ****ter or summat I reckon. Still, if they do it often enough the idiots will get fined banned. -- Simon Mason |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Number of motorists fined for using mobiles jumps by a third in last year
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cyclists still stupidly not using lights at night | Mr Benn[_5_] | UK | 25 | March 2nd 12 03:07 PM |
Gloucestershi Cyclists stopped by police for not using lights at night | Mr. Benn[_9_] | UK | 1 | February 26th 12 04:13 PM |
More pavement cyclists with no lights at night | Derek C | UK | 0 | February 22nd 11 09:13 AM |
why do cyclists think that they don't need lights at night? | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 49 | December 16th 10 01:19 PM |
use lights and wear bright clothes at night, how dim are these cyclists? | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 24 | September 12th 10 06:28 AM |