The main problem isn’t bikes or other vehicles or their users. The problem is what the situation has evolved to.
By the way, the problem also isn’t seatbelts, or roll bars, or airbags, or even bicycle helmets. Anyone who thinks we were safer prior to safety measures isn’t actually thinking.
If we started again (or made a brand new town) and built our roads from scratch to be safer, and suitable for today’s purpose (vehicle type and volume), we wouldn’t have shared roads for bicycles and trucks and other motor vehicles. Why would we? We wouldn’t introduce risk unnecessarily.
But we’re not starting again. So have to deal with the hand we have been dealt.
We can’t go back in time.
(By contrast through, when we look ahead in time to fully computerised vehicles, there may be a time when road accidents will be almost a thing of the past. All vehicles will be able to utilise technology to keep them apart from each other.)
It’s too easy to stigmatise cyclists. Or blame bad car drivers. There’s good and bad in both. So let’s leave the blame game to one side as that achieves nothing.
Generally, bicycles and motor vehicles don’t mix well. There’s not enough room. There’s not enough separation. Cars have accidents with cars all the time. So it follows that cars and other motor vehicles will have accidents with pedestrians and bicycles.
There’s different types of cycle use. Commuting for example or dotting about a busy city centre to visit another office. This type of cycle use has been encouraged by Government and businesses. They’ve provided schemes to buy a bike through their employer. There’s the bikes you can hire in London etc. This type to use is green, healthier for individuals, helps reduce air pollution in towns and cities, and reduces motor vehicles journeys to keep the essential traffic flowing better. It should be seen in a positive light.
London and other cities have banned delivery trucks during daytime hours. This has helped cut down on accidents. But such measures are patchwork and inconsistent across boroughs.
Local authorities have differing approaches to the issue.
Some introduce so called cycling lanes to meet government targets. There’s loads in Cleveleys, eg all the way along Cleveleys Avenue. All they are is a white dotted line, which is often obscured with parked cars, rendering the cycle lane redundant. It’s a waste of paint. There’s no parking restriction so the car owners park on the cycle lane. So what’s the point other than hitting some ridiculous council target?
Holland has wonderful cycling lanes, often separated from the roads. The ones we see in our towns,on our shared road space, are pathetic and unfit for purpose.
Then other main use of bicycles is the dedicated fit and healthy cycling buffs who have the expensive speedy bikes and love to hit the country lanes. I can appreciate the attraction. But again it’s not very safe and again there’s often not enough space. I wouldn’t suggest banning this type of cycling but it’s probably safer in numbers. A group of cyclists are easier to spot.
As an individual I would never ride a bike again in the UK unless it was away from the roads. Eg across Bispham cycle path, or on holiday at centre parcs.
Until technology provides a solution it will remain unsafe.
It’s become even more dangerous now we see these bikes which are power assisted. They go too fast and with increased speed comes increased risk and greater consequences should there be an accident.
Should bikes be banned? No. But is the current situation sufficiently safe? No.
The easy answer would be to ban them. But there’s risk in everything. The risk with bikes needs to be reduced as much as possible by councils introducing safer spaces and better cycle lanes and other safety measures. Technology needs to be fast tracked and all vehicle users need to be more careful and respectful.
The only thing I’d ban is men from wearing Lycra when they come into Costa after their Sunday morning cycle. It’s disgusting.
