A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 21st 20, 06:36 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 21/09/2020 17:40, colwyn wrote:
On 21/09/2020 15:20, JNugent wrote:
On 20/09/2020 20:23, colwyn wrote:
On 19/09/2020 14:35, JNugent wrote:
On 19/09/2020 07:51, colwyn wrote:
On 18/09/2020 23:26, JNugent wrote:
On 18/09/2020 20:59, colwyn wrote:

https://daily.jstor.org/are-cyclists...s-lawbreakers/


COVID-19 has hugely increased the numbers of cyclists,
particularly in cities, where biking has become the safest means
of transportation. In New York, for example, the Regional
Planning Association, a not-for-profit pillar of the planning
establishment, recently shared a master plan for 425 miles of
interconnected, high-capacity, protected bike lanes.

Yet despite their growing numbers, cyclists continue to suffer
from a negative image: supposedly reckless, rude, and
lawbreaking. It’s safe to say that nearly everyone has jaywalked,
rolled through a stop sign, or driven a few miles per hour over
the speed limit, but these infractions are often dismissed as
normal. Noting that unlawful driving behaviours have been studied
extensively, researchers Wesley E. Marshall, Daniel Piatkowski,
and Aaron Johnson turned to cyclists’ decisions about breaking
the rules of the road. Are bicyclists making rational, albeit
illegal, choices—similar to most drivers and pedestrians—or are
they reckless and dangerous?

While drivers and pedestrians mostly break the rules of the road
to save time, for cyclists the most common reason is personal
safety.
Marshall, Piatkowski, and Johnson asked bicyclists as well as
drivers and pedestrians to analyse the factors associated with
such behaviours. They used snowball sampling—meaning that
respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey
that presented hypothetical cycling scenarios along with
multiple-choice questions about what the respondent would choose
to do in each scenario. Survey takers, numbering nearly 18,000,
were able to explain their rationales.

It turns out that 100 percent of the sample population admitted
to some form of lawbreaking. But the rationales differed by mode
of transportation: while drivers and pedestrians mostly break the
rules of the road to save time, for cyclists the most common
reason is personal safety, followed by saving energy, saving
time, and increasing one’s visibility. The overwhelming majority
of bicyclists are not reckless: they mostly break laws in
situations where little harm would come to themselves or others.

Additionally, they are often motivated by concerns for their own
safety, because they feel like an afterthought in a
transportation system dominated by cars. Our infrastructure
simply was not designed with bicycles in mind, so most bicyclists
seem focused on surviving. The study concludes that lawbreaking
while riding a bicycle has less to do with who you are than where
you live: the overall context, norms, and social processes of a
city play a meaningful role in bicycling behaviours.


The authors conclude that “most bicyclists can…be described as
scofflaws.” They note that the word originated in 1924 with a
newspaper competition “to coin a word to describe those that
disobeyed Prohibition laws for rational reasons that did not
necessarily break social norms.” They continue, “scofflaw
bicyclists tend to be rational individuals trying to function
safely and efficiently, even if it means they are doing so
illegally, given the social norms of where they live and the
transportation system put in front of them.”

One rare benefit of the COVID-19 crisis could be a change in
attitudes about biking and improved conditions for doing so.
Then, perhaps, fewer laws would need to be broken.

Who would have thought it?

Laws *need* to be broken?

Says who (apart from criminals)?

Emmeline Pankhurst comes to mind as many,many others !
I didn't expect you to display such lack of knowledge.

The United Kingdom is not some banana republic or fascist state. No
laws need to be broken.

It's the exact opposite: civil society needs laws to be obeyed.

Changes of the law are a matter for the operation of persuasion and
democracy, not violent riot, bullying or criminality.

Democracy ? Yeah, I've heard about it, especially the silent one!
Child labour, Housing, Climate, Health, Human rights
etc........................


All of those things were brought to their current state before I was
born.

Only you are old enough to remember child labour (unless you mean
newspaper rounds).

and you are ****ed off, because you have seen a person on a bike
using the footway?


Everyone should be. It is a clear deliberate and selfish breach of a
law designed to keep pedestrians safe. In fact, the law keeping
pedestrians safe on footways and in other pedestrian-only areas is
directly comparable to the law banning child labour, as well as other
public health and safety matters.

As with TMS320, it isn't up to you (or anyone like you) to decide that
it's alright to break that law. That's not your decision.


Just to pick you up on Child Labour, it is not about you getting the
Daily Gossip.


Whatever that means, eh?

Next time you go into department store and look at the label showing the
country of origin, you may remind yourself, that the textile and
agricultural industries in some countries only exists, because of your
support for child labour.


I am principally concerned with compliance with the law of this country.
Other countries may, or may not, be able to afford the relative luxury
of First World attitudes and approaches. That's their choice, not mine
and *certainly* not yours.

Just as scandalous is the reliance on unpaid "carer children" looking
after siblings or parents in our society today.


Whatever that means, eh?

You clearly think it somehow justifies bowling along a footway on a bike.

Why don't you find something productive to do, instead of carping and
sniping in literally every posting you make.


Finally, I have never advocated a violation of any law, so I resent your
inference that I do.


If you don't condone illegal activity, you are free to say so (but as
far as I can see, have not done so). You might even support those who
condemn it. Such choices, in general, say a lot about one.

"Ye shall know them by their fruits".
Ads
  #22  
Old September 21st 20, 07:41 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 21/09/2020 15:16, JNugent wrote:
On 20/09/2020 20:55, TMS320 wrote:
On 19/09/2020 14:36, JNugent wrote:
On 19/09/2020 11:52, TMS320 wrote:
On 19/09/2020 07:51, colwyn wrote:
On 18/09/2020 23:26, JNugent wrote:
On 18/09/2020 20:59, colwyn wrote:

https://daily.jstor.org/are-cyclists...s-lawbreakers/

Laws *need* to be broken?

Says who (apart from criminals)?

Emmeline Pankhurst comes to mind as many,many others ! I didn't
expect you to display such lack of knowledge.

Remember B&Q? Perhaps Nugent was one of the many thousands of
accessories.

TMS320 excels himself in the production of gibberish.

*
He's getting better at it all the time.

Then you did go shopping before the law was changed but don't want to
admit it.


That's not an improvement on the previous attempt at gibberish. You ned
to try harder.


It looks as though your last sentence hasn't been translated from Scouse.
  #23  
Old September 21st 20, 07:58 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 21/09/2020 15:20, JNugent wrote:
On 20/09/2020 20:23, colwyn wrote:
On 19/09/2020 14:35, JNugent wrote:
On 19/09/2020 07:51, colwyn wrote:
On 18/09/2020 23:26, JNugent wrote:
On 18/09/2020 20:59, colwyn wrote:

https://daily.jstor.org/are-cyclists...s-lawbreakers/


COVID-19 has hugely increased the numbers of cyclists,
particularly in cities, where biking has become the safest means
of transportation. In New York, for example, the Regional Planning
Association, a not-for-profit pillar of the planning
establishment, recently shared a master plan for 425 miles of
interconnected, high-capacity, protected bike lanes.

Yet despite their growing numbers, cyclists continue to suffer
from a negative image: supposedly reckless, rude, and lawbreaking.
It’s safe to say that nearly everyone has jaywalked, rolled
through a stop sign, or driven a few miles per hour over the speed
limit, but these infractions are often dismissed as normal. Noting
that unlawful driving behaviours have been studied extensively,
researchers Wesley E. Marshall, Daniel Piatkowski, and Aaron
Johnson turned to cyclists’ decisions about breaking the rules of
the road. Are bicyclists making rational, albeit illegal,
choices—similar to most drivers and pedestrians—or are they
reckless and dangerous?

While drivers and pedestrians mostly break the rules of the road
to save time, for cyclists the most common reason is personal safety.
Marshall, Piatkowski, and Johnson asked bicyclists as well as
drivers and pedestrians to analyse the factors associated with
such behaviours. They used snowball sampling—meaning that
respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey that
presented hypothetical cycling scenarios along with
multiple-choice questions about what the respondent would choose
to do in each scenario. Survey takers, numbering nearly 18,000,
were able to explain their rationales.

It turns out that 100 percent of the sample population admitted to
some form of lawbreaking. But the rationales differed by mode of
transportation: while drivers and pedestrians mostly break the
rules of the road to save time, for cyclists the most common
reason is personal safety, followed by saving energy, saving time,
and increasing one’s visibility. The overwhelming majority of
bicyclists are not reckless: they mostly break laws in situations
where little harm would come to themselves or others.

Additionally, they are often motivated by concerns for their own
safety, because they feel like an afterthought in a transportation
system dominated by cars. Our infrastructure simply was not
designed with bicycles in mind, so most bicyclists seem focused on
surviving. The study concludes that lawbreaking while riding a
bicycle has less to do with who you are than where you live: the
overall context, norms, and social processes of a city play a
meaningful role in bicycling behaviours.


The authors conclude that “most bicyclists can…be described as
scofflaws.” They note that the word originated in 1924 with a
newspaper competition “to coin a word to describe those that
disobeyed Prohibition laws for rational reasons that did not
necessarily break social norms.” They continue, “scofflaw
bicyclists tend to be rational individuals trying to function
safely and efficiently, even if it means they are doing so
illegally, given the social norms of where they live and the
transportation system put in front of them.”

One rare benefit of the COVID-19 crisis could be a change in
attitudes about biking and improved conditions for doing so. Then,
perhaps, fewer laws would need to be broken.

Who would have thought it?

Laws *need* to be broken?

Says who (apart from criminals)?

Emmeline Pankhurst comes to mind as many,many others !
I didn't expect you to display such lack of knowledge.

The United Kingdom is not some banana republic or fascist state. No
laws need to be broken.

It's the exact opposite: civil society needs laws to be obeyed.

Changes of the law are a matter for the operation of persuasion and
democracy, not violent riot, bullying or criminality.

Democracy ? Yeah, I've heard about it, especially the silent one!
Child labour, Housing, Climate, Health, Human rights
etc........................


All of those things were brought to their current state before I was born.

Only you are old enough to remember child labour (unless you mean
newspaper rounds).

and you are ****ed off, because you have seen a person on a bike using
the footway?


Everyone should be. It is a clear deliberate and selfish breach of a law
designed to keep pedestrians safe.


You say that it's no up to cyclists to assume the purpose of the rules
but that is what you keep doing. Please provide the statistics to
support your theory.

As with TMS320, it isn't up to you (or anyone like you) to decide that
it's alright to break that law. That's not your decision.


You also say that only a court can decide if a law is broken. Please
tell us how many cyclists break the law.
  #24  
Old September 21st 20, 08:11 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,244
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On Monday, September 21, 2020 at 7:58:31 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:

You also say that only a court can decide if a law is broken. Please
tell us how many cyclists break the law.


QUOTE:
Just one cyclist was fined for riding on the pavement in the West Midlands last year.

Shocking figures, obtained under Freedom of Information laws, show police have virtually stopped handing out fixed penalties for the offence over the last decade.
ENDS
Bigger problem than drunken and speeding drivers?

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/new...umber-15815580
  #25  
Old September 21st 20, 08:14 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 21/09/2020 19:58, TMS320 wrote:
On 21/09/2020 15:20, JNugent wrote:
On 20/09/2020 20:23, colwyn wrote:
On 19/09/2020 14:35, JNugent wrote:
On 19/09/2020 07:51, colwyn wrote:
On 18/09/2020 23:26, JNugent wrote:
On 18/09/2020 20:59, colwyn wrote:

https://daily.jstor.org/are-cyclists...s-lawbreakers/


COVID-19 has hugely increased the numbers of cyclists,
particularly in cities, where biking has become the safest means
of transportation. In New York, for example, the Regional
Planning Association, a not-for-profit pillar of the planning
establishment, recently shared a master plan for 425 miles of
interconnected, high-capacity, protected bike lanes.

Yet despite their growing numbers, cyclists continue to suffer
from a negative image: supposedly reckless, rude, and
lawbreaking. It’s safe to say that nearly everyone has jaywalked,
rolled through a stop sign, or driven a few miles per hour over
the speed limit, but these infractions are often dismissed as
normal. Noting that unlawful driving behaviours have been studied
extensively, researchers Wesley E. Marshall, Daniel Piatkowski,
and Aaron Johnson turned to cyclists’ decisions about breaking
the rules of the road. Are bicyclists making rational, albeit
illegal, choices—similar to most drivers and pedestrians—or are
they reckless and dangerous?

While drivers and pedestrians mostly break the rules of the road
to save time, for cyclists the most common reason is personal
safety.
Marshall, Piatkowski, and Johnson asked bicyclists as well as
drivers and pedestrians to analyse the factors associated with
such behaviours. They used snowball sampling—meaning that
respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey
that presented hypothetical cycling scenarios along with
multiple-choice questions about what the respondent would choose
to do in each scenario. Survey takers, numbering nearly 18,000,
were able to explain their rationales.

It turns out that 100 percent of the sample population admitted
to some form of lawbreaking. But the rationales differed by mode
of transportation: while drivers and pedestrians mostly break the
rules of the road to save time, for cyclists the most common
reason is personal safety, followed by saving energy, saving
time, and increasing one’s visibility. The overwhelming majority
of bicyclists are not reckless: they mostly break laws in
situations where little harm would come to themselves or others.

Additionally, they are often motivated by concerns for their own
safety, because they feel like an afterthought in a
transportation system dominated by cars. Our infrastructure
simply was not designed with bicycles in mind, so most bicyclists
seem focused on surviving. The study concludes that lawbreaking
while riding a bicycle has less to do with who you are than where
you live: the overall context, norms, and social processes of a
city play a meaningful role in bicycling behaviours.


The authors conclude that “most bicyclists can…be described as
scofflaws.” They note that the word originated in 1924 with a
newspaper competition “to coin a word to describe those that
disobeyed Prohibition laws for rational reasons that did not
necessarily break social norms.” They continue, “scofflaw
bicyclists tend to be rational individuals trying to function
safely and efficiently, even if it means they are doing so
illegally, given the social norms of where they live and the
transportation system put in front of them.”

One rare benefit of the COVID-19 crisis could be a change in
attitudes about biking and improved conditions for doing so.
Then, perhaps, fewer laws would need to be broken.

Who would have thought it?

Laws *need* to be broken?

Says who (apart from criminals)?

Emmeline Pankhurst comes to mind as many,many others !
I didn't expect you to display such lack of knowledge.

The United Kingdom is not some banana republic or fascist state. No
laws need to be broken.

It's the exact opposite: civil society needs laws to be obeyed.

Changes of the law are a matter for the operation of persuasion and
democracy, not violent riot, bullying or criminality.

Democracy ? Yeah, I've heard about it, especially the silent one!
Child labour, Housing, Climate, Health, Human rights
etc........................


All of those things were brought to their current state before I was
born.

Only you are old enough to remember child labour (unless you mean
newspaper rounds).

and you are ****ed off, because you have seen a person on a bike
using the footway?


Everyone should be. It is a clear deliberate and selfish breach of a
law designed to keep pedestrians safe.


You say that it's no up to cyclists to assume the purpose of the rules
but that is what you keep doing. Please provide the statistics to
support your theory.


I say it is up to no cyclists to assume the rationale for the *law* (not
just "the rules") for the purpose of trying to justify breaking it.

There's a huge difference, as normal people readily appreciate.

As with TMS320, it isn't up to you (or anyone like you) to decide that
it's alright to break that law. That's not your decision.


You also say that only a court can decide if a law is broken.


Only a court can decide *whether* [some semi-literate people use the
word "if" there, even though it has a different meaning] a law is broken
in a *specific* case brought before them.

Ask the police how it works. They know.

Please tell us how many cyclists break the law.


That would be an estimate and could in any event only be given in
percantage terms. But taking all the usual breaches into account
(failing to comply with traffic lights, abuse of one-way systems,
cycling along footways and in other pedestrian-only areas), a fair
estimate would certainly be more than 50%. In London, the proportion is
higher than that by quite a margin. You know that.
  #26  
Old September 21st 20, 08:40 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mike Collins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 817
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 20:12:53 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 21/09/2020 19:58, TMS320 wrote:


Please tell us how many cyclists break the law.

That would be an estimate


So no evidence as usual.
  #27  
Old September 22nd 20, 01:07 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 21/09/2020 20:40, Mike Collins wrote:
On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 20:12:53 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 21/09/2020 19:58, TMS320 wrote:


Please tell us how many cyclists break the law.

That would be an estimate


So no evidence as usual.


Well, of course, relative to the annual mileage driven, hardly any
drivers of motor vehicles ever break the speed limit.
  #28  
Old September 22nd 20, 08:26 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 21/09/2020 20:14, JNugent wrote:
On 21/09/2020 19:58, TMS320 wrote:
On 21/09/2020 15:20, JNugent wrote:
On 20/09/2020 20:23, colwyn wrote:


and you are ****ed off, because you have seen a person on a bike
using the footway?

Everyone should be. It is a clear deliberate and selfish breach of a
law designed to keep pedestrians safe.


You say that it's no up to cyclists to assume the purpose of the rules
but that is what you keep doing. Please provide the statistics to
support your theory.


I say it is up to no cyclists to assume the rationale for the *law* (not
just "the rules") for the purpose of trying to justify breaking it.

There's a huge difference, as normal people readily appreciate.


You said the rules are about safety. You are less qualified than a
cyclist making an on the spot decision.

As with TMS320, it isn't up to you (or anyone like you) to decide
that it's alright to break that law. That's not your decision.


You also say that only a court can decide if a law is broken.


Only a court can decide whether a law is broken
in a *specific* case brought before them.


Wriggle wriggle.
  #29  
Old September 22nd 20, 12:46 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On 22/09/2020 08:26, TMS320 wrote:
On 21/09/2020 20:14, JNugent wrote:
On 21/09/2020 19:58, TMS320 wrote:
On 21/09/2020 15:20, JNugent wrote:
On 20/09/2020 20:23, colwyn wrote:


and you are ****ed off, because you have seen a person on a bike
using the footway?

Everyone should be. It is a clear deliberate and selfish breach of a
law designed to keep pedestrians safe.

You say that it's no up to cyclists to assume the purpose of the
rules but that is what you keep doing. Please provide the statistics
to support your theory.


I say it is up to no cyclists to assume the rationale for the *law*
(not just "the rules") for the purpose of trying to justify breaking it.

There's a huge difference, as normal people readily appreciate.


You said the rules are about safety. You are less qualified than a
cyclist making an on the spot decision.


I am equally as qualified as a cyclist - that is, neither of us are at
all qualified to authorise ourselves to break the law (I am well aware
that you are of the opinion that you are entitled to waive the effects
of any law which prevents you from doing as you like).

See whether you can work out why that is (I suspect that you either
cannot or will not admit that you can).

As with TMS320, it isn't up to you (or anyone like you) to decide
that it's alright to break that law. That's not your decision.

You also say that only a court can decide if a law is broken.


Only a court can decide whether a law is broken in a *specific* case
brought before them.


Wriggle wriggle.


Even a FPN is not "proof" that an offence has been committed. Only a
court can properly decide the matter to the effect that a disputed
"offence" has been committed.

That is the situation in a democratic state with a regard for human
rights, subject to the concept of the absolute offence, where mere
observation and testimony is all that is needed.
  #30  
Old September 22nd 20, 08:49 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mike Collins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 817
Default Are Cyclists Reckless Lawbreakers?

On Tuesday, 22 September 2020 at 01:05:35 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 21/09/2020 20:40, Mike Collins wrote:
On Monday, 21 September 2020 at 20:12:53 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 21/09/2020 19:58, TMS320 wrote:


Please tell us how many cyclists break the law.
That would be an estimate


So no evidence as usual.

Well, of course, relative to the annual mileage driven, hardly any
drivers of motor vehicles ever break the speed limit.


I think you need to sort out which Nugents is replying to a given post because that makes no sense.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
It beggars belief just how stupid and reckless cyclists are MrCheerful UK 8 January 4th 19 09:58 PM
Footway lawbreakers punished [email protected] UK 1 June 21st 18 12:02 PM
Law must change to tackle reckless cyclists, says widower of KimBriggs killed in crash with illegal bike Bod[_5_] UK 27 August 27th 17 10:20 AM
Laura Trott - reckless cyclists give us all a bad name Mentalguy2k8[_2_] UK 16 October 25th 13 11:30 PM
Reckless cyclists causing trouble in Catford Mr Benn[_5_] UK 6 March 10th 12 05:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.