Jack has been writing about cycling and multisport for over a decade, arriving at road.cc via 220 Triathlon Magazine in 2017. He worked across all areas of the website including tech, news and video, and also contributed to eBikeTips before being named Editor of road.cc in 2021 (much to his surprise). Jack has been hooked on cycling since his student days, and currently has a Trek 1.2 for winter riding, a beloved Bickerton folding bike for getting around town and an extra beloved custom Ridley Helium SLX for fantasising about going fast in his stable. Jack has never won a bike race, but does have a master's degree in print journalism and two Guinness World Records for pogo sticking (it's a long story).
Add new comment
21 comments
In absolutely astounding news, a study in Australia has found that the majority of cyclists injured and killed are men, given that the majority of cyclists are men this should surprise exactly.. nobody.
What was the population growth over the 17 years? What was the cycling participation growth over 17 years? What was the change in car type (sedans to 4WDs, SUVs and dual-cab utes). What was the change in smart phone usage over 17 years? *crickets*
At least the writeup in the Guardian doesn't drag out the MAMIL word, unlike the Age and others on the same story, I thought that trope went out in the late '90s
Illegal for anything not on an emergency. However the fact it went so wide, and was turning down a normally closed off lane and the cyclist was just ahead of the rear indicator excuses him very slightly. However I suspect he was trying to be almost like a car driver and thought he would use the same space the emergency vehicle creates to shoot ahead of any traffic.
Is that fire engine making an illegal left turn?
No.
You sure as the sign next to the junction says no left turn, no wonder the cyclist was confused.
Nice, but panders to the view of cycling as a recreational hobby AFAICS - like all those 4WD vehicles which close pass you while two bikes are clamped to the roof or the back...
Legs, loving the vitriol, I hope that it is not diminished by moving to a country where you may, if not be surrounded by better drivers, have a more accomodating cycling culture.
I can't wait to get out of this shithole, man. I really can't.
Arn’t you moving to a country with a more liberal justice system and a greater belief in education and restorative justice over punitive punishments?
Indeed.
And significantly fewer twats, as well as less of a hysterical obsession with 'immigration', and less in hock to the far right.
Glad you got that off your chest.
I've not seen stats on the effectiveness of driver awareness courses, but I did one for low-grade inadvertant speeding (you only get offered a course for low-grade offences) and thought it was excellent. I expected to be paronised and bullied, but the two instructors did a good job of engaging the class, even the knuckle-draggers, and I think we were mostly safer drivers afterwards. Friends who have been on awareness courses report the same thing.
And the there was also a section on two-wheeled road users, although it could have been deeper.
It's not just £75. You have to organise a morning off work, sit in a dingy hotel on the naughty step, and know that you won't get another chance to get off so lightly for another 3 years.
What was scary was the level of knowledge of most of the participants at the start. I came away thinking that awareness courses like these should be regular and compulsory for keeping your licence. A forklift operator has to get their skills topped up occasionally, why not for driving a car?
Mine was three years ago, and I think I may have been the only lycra clad person on the course ever. It was local enough to cycle to.
Most of the people on my course seemed well aware of the law, if not the risks.
Oh, 'inadvertant speeding'? What's that? Because unless your speedometer was broken (which is an offence in itself), it seems that 'inadvertant speeding' is yet another excuse for a driver who couldn't be arsed monitoring his speed, and so when he's caught, somehow manages to rationalise it away by calling it 'inadvertant'.
So in your second paragraph, you manage to confirm what I in fact wrote previously about drivers generally getting a free pass, and coming to expect it as some sort of 'right'.
Why would you expect to be patronised and bullied? You're a driver. You're one of the anointed. No other category of citizen in this land is coddled, subsidised and given free reign to intimidate, bully, assault and kill like the British driver.
The big problem with 'think[ing]' that you're a better driver, is that most drivers already 'think' that they're good drivers. So your own assessment of your abilities behind the wheel is almost certainly skewed.
Are we bad to you, or what? Poor you.
A driver awareness course is one of the greatest concessions given to drivers. It's essentially a 'get out of jail free card'. Its very existence is predicated on the belief that one can 'educate' someone that driving 2000 kg of metal, glass and plastic into a human being at over 25 metres per second is somehow going to cause them injury or death. You might as well have a 'shooter awareness course' to 'educate' someone that firing a handgun into a crowd of people might hurt or kill one or more of them.
The reason we don't have the latter is because everyone knows that firing a handgun into a crowd of people might hurt or kill one or more of them. By the same token, drivers know that driving into a human being at speed is going to hurt or kill someone. Most don't give a flying fuck. Some do so out of sheer malevolance.
You can educate away ignorance. You cannot educate away malice, or a complete lack of concern for the safety or comfort of others.
Driver awareness courses only exist because we live in a car-centric culture, where 'everyone drives', and where because of this, car ownership and driving are normalised. The dominant culture - in this context, drivers - are treated leniently, even when their actions cause unimaginable damage to people and property.
Driver awareness courses are a complete waste of fucking time, and everyone involved with them knows it.
I mostly agree, though in general this country really doesn't like sending people to prison, its not only for driving offenses. And I'm not, in general, against that. I wouldn't want to end up like the US - a (profit-making) prison system with a country appended to it. Hence, inevitably, 'infrastructure'. For so many things, the only thing that works is changing the material conditions in which people live.
The inconsistencies are aggravating though, the law is always enforced very selectively, it's always political. I wonder how many of those who have gone on 'motoring awareness courses' are among those calling for mandatory lengthy jail sentences for any youth caught carrying a knife?
Edit - oh, and I wonder how many of those demanding the police stop-and-search more (young male and black) pedestrians would be fine with the cops randomly stopping motorists and checking their car's MOT-compliance, their licence and insurance, breathalising them, and maybe giving them a quick quiz on their knowledge of the highway code?
More people are killed every year by people wielding cars than knives [just checked and in 2015 there were 116 murders in total, not just stabbings, and 136 road deaths*], so why not concentrate on the real culprits? How many people are on the roads in possession of a dangerous attitude?
* figures for London - I have an unfortunate tendency to think of London as a country. But I'm sure its much the same across the UK.
There is no new law, at least in england and I've not heard of a new one in scotland either, it is now just being enforced. It's dangerous or inconsiderate driving.
73%, I would of thought it was more like 95%, how many people know that a law was introduced ? how do you find out ?, I was never told of the new law, I found it on a cycling forum such as this, new laws are passed all the time but as far as I'm concerned they are all secret laws as the details are simply not sent out to drivers.
Of course it would be nice if we didn't need a law about close passes, but hey ho.
73% of drivers are 'not aware', since the chances of getting any points are now very slim.
It is now standard practice for the officer who stops a driver - and this for the majority of offences - to make a 'one-time offer' of a 'driver awareness course'. The 'one-time offer' bit makes it sound as if well, we were going to throw the book at you, but I'm prepared to be nice just this once...'
It is, of course, utter bullshit. Strapped for cash, the 'driver awareness course' is a nice little earner for the police forces that offer it, as they get a cut of the fee.
'So we've arrested you for robbery, and we can prosecute you and you'll get sent to jail. Or, you can pay our partner company a couple of hundred quid for a week in the Bahamas, during which you'll get to see a video on why theft is wrong...'
Anywhere else, this racket would be fucking exposed and stopped.
We are being comprehensively fucking lied to, and very few of us seem to give a shit.
I think driver edication is a reasonable step for close-passes as there hasn't been any direct damage/injury caused. Most drivers want to be considerate and careful, but due to the poor quality of driver instruction, they just don't feel confident in knowing how to handle cyclists.
I quite like the idea of self-funding police, but maybe there needs to be some kind of reward/payment for getting convictions as well as sending people for education.
Unless it has changed over the past year or two, the police force in Lancashire run the courses and break even on costs, the cost of the course covers the venue and the officers time. I think this may be an old wives tale perhaps that the courses make profit. there is a simple answer of course, don't break the speed limit, you won't have to pay for an awareness course. Easy really.
OK, so it is the Daily Mail, but …
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3306120/Fury-speed-camera-racke...
Very, very odd to find oneself sort-of agreeing with the Association of Bad Drivers spokesperson. Does sound like it might be a bit of a racket. Of course the ABD and the Daily Mail probably have different ideas than I do about what should be done instead and who is being cheated by this.