Young cyclists dicing with death, says sergeant (From York Press)

This is well meant and is clearly good advice.

However having adequate lights and being very visible is not the whole story on children's cycle safety.

With proper lights, being properly visible, riding safely and with due courtesy to other road users my children are regularly put in danger by vehicle drivers breaking the speed limit, using mobile phones and driving without due care for their safety.

A good example is Advance Stop Lines at traffic lights...designed to put cyclists in the most visible position at junctions where most cycling accidents occur. It's illegal for vehicles to cross their stop line at red and enter the cycle box. This is a clear safety measure, clearly illegally abused by a hard core of motorists. Have you ever heard of a driver being fined for this?

Speed is another issue and you don't have to look far to see drivers driving criminally too fast putting children, cyclists and pedestrians at risk.

Of course children (and their parents) need to be responsible but whether or not a child does so does not remove the responsibility of adult motorists to drive carefully with their safety in mind.

A reminder to child cyclists of their responsibilities and to drivers of theirs would have been a more balanced point to make here.

Acording to the law if a motor vehicle has no tax,mot,insurance and is in a dangerouse state of repair then it is removed from the roads and crushed. So why don't the police do the same for cycles if they don't have lights front and back,brakes front and back and some sort of mud guard on them why carn't they be took of them and crushed that way people may educate their children more on road safety.

I have no idea why 'mudguards' have been popped on your list of necessities, but it's stupid.

I'm a driver, as it goes but I cycle outside of work hours and I agree that drivers in the pushbike boxes are a common problem that needs to be addressed; ironically Taxi drivers are among the worst doing it.

Perhaps Sgt. Rogers should also tell pedestrians not to venture out at night as well.....unless of course they are wearing something white!

Seriously, legal standard cycle lighting in lit urban streets should be adequate. No need to light up like an Xmas tree unless venturing onto unlit rural roads, where some conspicuity clothing may help.

I have some gloves with hi vis backs and fingers. These enable me to make thank you gestures to courteous drivers at night.

Why does the good policeman not say the one thing that would save lives (during the day as well as at night): if you are driving, then whenever bicycles or pedestrians are nearby, you should SLOW DOWN, preferably to 20 mph max. I

I see this a lot and it's adults and children riding along in low light conditions, dressed in dark clothing, sometimes with a pathetic little light on the back that you can't see until your a few metres away and other times they have no lights on at all.

I think if these people had experience of driving a car at night then they would make themselves a lot more visible because its very hard to see them at night unless they wear high visibility clothing and they use good quality back lights. They simply don't appreciate how hard they are to spot and ultimately they are putting themselves at serious risk.

I have had two close calls with cyclists not using lights at night and luckily thanks to having good eyesight and good reactions I've managed to avoid incident at the last minute. I was turning into sainsburys on beckfield lane in the dark and as I was half way through the turn my beam was on a stupid woman cycling along on the opposite side of the road with no lights, dressed in black, I slammed on and avoided the accident and I gave her a piece of my mind.

On another occasion I was on a motorbike and I was turning right out of beckfield lane onto boroughbridge road, the lights give a slight advantage to vehicles coming out of Low Poppleton lane, as far as I was concerned it was clear for me to turn right but again as soon as I turned my beam light up a chav with no lights and I slammed on (in the wet) and it caused the bike to slip underneath me but I at least avoided hitting him. As I picked my motorbike up he shouted as though it was my fault! Needless to say I told him what I thought about him riding with no lights on. I've been lucky really but I take nothing for granted with people as stupid as this on the roads.

"York police criticise dangerous cyclists" - this must be a first....

I'm only suprised he didn't tell them to ride on the pavement.

So...

Mud guards not really needed for cycle safety.

Yes most cyclists could do with driving at night and trying to spot a bike from 50 yards with poor/no lights dressed in dark clothes.

You don't really need to slow down to pass a cyclist just do it safely, I've been passed at 40mph number of times and it was safe.

As a driver I've had 2 young lads run red lights in black clothes making me slam my brakes on. As a cyclist I've seen very dangerous overtakes, turns and other 'events' while out on the road.

We are both as bad as each other and both sides need to sort out their behavior on the road. If we look after each other we will all be fine.

Much Love.

Don't cycles in the UK have to have front/rear reflectors as well as on on the wheel spokes and pedals? Even if not required by law like they are here (Germany), they should be a minimum standard all the same.

I am a brightly-lit cyclist and a car driver, and I am very glad to hear of a policeman taking some action (at long last) about this matter of unlit cyclists.

Personally I shout at them "turn on your lights" even if we are on an off-road cycle track. It is as much a legal requirement there as it is on the roads, and there is more chance of my being heard and understood.

What these bicycle users (I will not demean the word "cyclist") don't realise is that drivers may be looking through various layers of glass (maybe spectacles as well as a perhaps wet windscreen). Or their eyes may not have the same acuity as they once did.

When there is a background of dipped headlights behind the bicycle, only the best flashing lights become visible, and cars may turn right, colliding with an invisible cyclist.

As car lights have become brighter, the old minimum standards for cycle lights are no longer good enough, in my view. Yet, with modern flashing LED technology, cyclists HAVE got the means to compete, quite economically.

So I would like to see the police giving advice to cyclists with dim, inadequate lights, as well as throwing the book at idiots without any.

Whenever I see encroachment in the advance box for cycles at lights I simply treat it as if the box extends in front on the poor driver who is encroaching. It is much safer to be directly in front of the car rather than get squeezed to the kerb by someone drifting left.

Worst junction for poorly positioned bikes is Queen Street. Times I've seen bikes on the left turning right when cars are going straight on to Nunnery Lane.

When cycling hold your position in the road; you have a right to be there. And always wear something fluorescent and use lights at night.

was york now rotherham wrote:
Acording to the law if a motor vehicle has no tax,mot,insurance and is in a dangerouse state of repair then it is removed from the roads and crushed. So why don't the police do the same for cycles if they don't have lights front and back,brakes front and back and some sort of mud guard on them why carn't they be took of them and crushed that way people may educate their children more on road safety.

They would only go and steal another instead.

I have never been a member of the motorists lobby or the cyclists lobby, but I drive my works van, car when I need to and cycle.
It is common sense to be seen at night, it would also seem that the police do not treat cyclists that break the law equally to the motorist, FACT
This squabbling over the motorist and cyclist bores me to death, but the fact remains, Get some lights on your bike or face a needless accident that your relatives may suffer for years to come.
Genuine cyclists do comply with the law and think of their safety it would just appear that the commuter minority don’t give a dam.
I would like to see the police take the bikes from offenders and fine them, charge for storage or scrap the cycle. Basically the same rules of the motorist.
We all have to share the road network and should be treated equally regardless of transport.

Paul Meoff wrote:
Whenever I see encroachment in the advance box for cycles at lights I simply treat it as if the box extends in front on the poor driver who is encroaching. It is much safer to be directly in front of the car rather than get squeezed to the kerb by someone drifting left.

Worst junction for poorly positioned bikes is Queen Street. Times I've seen bikes on the left turning right when cars are going straight on to Nunnery Lane.

When cycling hold your position in the road; you have a right to be there. And always wear something fluorescent and use lights at night.

I agree with you 100% on all these points.

Like the Queen St junction into Blossom St (which now has an early green light for cyclists to mitigate the danger of which you write), there is a similarly dangerous place when cyclists are southbound on the Fishergate Gyratory, opposite the Bingo establishment. The left lane can either go straight on, South to Fulford, or sweep round the bend to go North on Fishergate. A wise cyclist who is intending to do the latter will take the lane and signal right to make sure he/she is not going to get cut up by a motorist heading towards Fulford.

I saw three youths one night in Foxwood last week, riding bikes in dark clothing, no lights - no hand signals not even a single digit, but fair enough the bikes were probably stolen and they were probably on bail and should have been in on curfew, but give them their due, at least they were getting exercise, or practicing escape routes!

bob the builder wrote:
I saw three youths one night in Foxwood last week, riding bikes in dark clothing, no lights - no hand signals not even a single digit, but fair enough the bikes were probably stolen and they were probably on bail and should have been in on curfew, but give them their due, at least they were getting exercise, or practicing escape routes!

Sadly, Bob's suspicions may be correct. Those with little respect for the law or other people are not likely to obey the rules with regard to cycling. Just as motorists with a bad driving record may well have convictions for other offences.
But there is another aspect to this where children are concerned. Parents know whether their children's bikes are equipped with lights, and will often know whether they are out on them after dark. We cannot always control, or protect, our children but parents cannot deny responsibility for ensuring that they know the rules and trying to enforce them.

CHILDREN are dicing with death by cycling at night in dark clothes and without lights, police have said.

As are large numbers of fully grown adults. To that risk you can also add cycling, and crossing the road as a pedestrian, while listening to music (and/or making phone calls) through earphones, thereby reducing your ability to hear approaching traffic.

I got caught without lights when i was younger and forced to buy some. I was stupid enough to think they offered some protection and nearly got wiped off my bike turning onto holgate road.

You're better off thinking no one can see you.

Torkie wrote:
I got caught without lights when i was younger and forced to buy some. I was stupid enough to think they offered some protection and nearly got wiped off my bike turning onto holgate road.

You're better off thinking no one can see you.

Looks like it was natural selection in action if you thought lights alone would protect you and you're better off not being seen.

Some good sensible advice both from the cops and in the discussion (and some madness; it's only safe to overtake a cyclist at 20mph!? Really?).

I am both a cyclist and a driver and I must recommend that all cyclists consider wearing a hi-vis jacket at all times, especially at night or in low light and in the rain. In such conditions lights are the legal minimum, but are not really adequate on their own. As a cyclist you have to make sure that the percentages favour you and that means making it easy for drivers to see you, not just when approaching you from behind in perfect visibility but in their mirrors, in the rain, in a quick glance left and right when approaching a junction, when you are sliding up beside them just as the lights turn green etc, etc..

The only argument I've ever heard against this is a spurious one. Supposedly, wearing a hi vis jacket makes drivers assume you are an experienced cyclist and pass too close. Firstly, I can see no reason why drivers would pass closer to what they perceive to be an experienced cyclist (is it too much to ask for evidence of this odd assertion?), but secondly it's certainly not true that only experienced cyclists wear hi-vis. It is obvious to any driver on the roads that hi-vis is worn by a massive cross ssection of abilities, from proverbial little old ladies to road racing MAMILs. The only common factor is that most of the drivers involved silently respect and thank the cyclists for making themselves easy to see.

The only true protection for a cyclist is a suit of armour..
Or one of those reflective jackets with the word "POLITE" on it, which remarkably resembles "POLICE" at a distance, Amazing how many other road users suddenly stop risk taking when they see it,
As for road positioning,always use this as a supplement to clear hand signals and checks back over the right shoulder, to prevent being "left hooked" at junctions,

its not just the kids, the majority of adults are just the same. you can guarantee if you hit one of these many idiots in your car it WILL be the drivers fault regardless. As for the implementation of the fine, when has that ever been used? If the police were to clamp down on these thoughtless fools they could make thousands of pounds per day and then they would be able to to fund more bobby's on the streets. Throw the book at the lot of them regardless of age, as they do to other paying road users.

I cycle every day around York at all hours of the day, despite having very, very good bike lights and always wearing a reflective vest I am often cut up by motorists.

Whilst pedalling down University Road the other morning a white van was so impatient to get by it almost clipped me then promptly bounced over the raised traffic island in the road. The fact its tyre burst seemed fair payback for the drivers stupidity.

My point is even if you do go out dressed like a Christmas Tree many motorists still have little regard for cyclists. I just make sure I am visible and always hold my position on the road, if a motorist arrrives at the office 30 seconds later because they have had to slow down to overtake me then so be it.

“He said he recently witnessed a near-accident and said officers often saw children ill-equipped to be cycling in the dark” . . .it’s a pity he didn’t say “apprehended” rather than “saw” . . policing obviously isn’t what it used to be.

Over the years, like many adults, I've had to take evasive action to avoid other people being stupid or making errors on many occasions.

The last was a few days ago in York, near the university when my I was in a car that my wife was driving. A young woman pedestrian was texting on her phone, with earphones on, and suddenly crossed the road without looking. My wife slammed on the anchors, avoided her and gave all of us a hell of a fright.

The woman was saved by my wife's braking action but also by the fact that she was (honestly!) within the 30 speed limit.

I could reflect on fault, rant on about Darwin as if we were animals and show how dim I am by saying we'll finish her off next time.

But in reality, that was somebody's daughter, perhaps somebody's sister, somebody's girlfriend. She made a mistake and got a serious fright. We were just thankful that no-one was hurt or worse.

We are all human. We all make momentary errors - perhaps more so when we were young. We all have a responsibility to make sure we drive in a way that mitigates the effect of the momentary human errors of ourselves or others.

We had a massive lesson in urban speed limits and why we should all obey them however slow they feel from inside our cars.

Paul Meoff wrote:
Whenever I see encroachment in the advance box for cycles at lights I simply treat it as if the box extends in front on the poor driver who is encroaching. It is much safer to be directly in front of the car rather than get squeezed to the kerb by someone drifting left. Worst junction for poorly positioned bikes is Queen Street. Times I've seen bikes on the left turning right when cars are going straight on to Nunnery Lane. When cycling hold your position in the road; you have a right to be there. And always wear something fluorescent and use lights at night.

Some sound advice here. Queen Street is very tricky to use on a bike if turning right to Blossom St. You either have to gamble on using the cycle lane to reach the front before the lights change or take up position in the traffic lane, riding uphill and risk holding up traffic that might be going right or straight on. Best option is to use Micklegate instead, even though it has cobbles!
On the question of lights and dark clothing it is a no brainer, get some lights! However even with lights and yellow tabard Ive had drivers cut in front of me who obviously were only looking for car lights to see if it was safe to turn.

The advice is good, but the story doesn't say what the police officer actually did about the teenage rider who almost got himself injured by riding without lights in the dark?

I seem to remember being taught some kind of basic cycling proficiency at my primary school, is this something that is no longer taught - or was only available at my school? Maybe this could be something that could be resurrected to our schools to make our children more road aware (it could be that the child simply doesn't know)

I am a cyclist and have been so for the last 5 years, as mentioned in the numerous comments above there does appear to be a problem with motorists stopping in the green cyclist area at traffic lights. I was unaware this was illeagal though. I, like others, simply stop in front of the car to remain visible to the motorist.

Visit http://www.itravelyo
rk.info/cycling/road
-safety-and-skills-c
ycling/safe-cycling for useful practical safety advice for cyclists.
The former Cycling Proficiency scheme is now called Bikeability. http://www.dft.gov.u
k/bikeability/
Schools accross the UK can purchase this training from local Providers, including very often one's own Local Authority.

As far as I understand it, the offence is jumping the red lights if they cross the vehicle stop line at red and enter the cycle box.

We do see some cyclists jumping red lights, but how many compared to motorists entering the green box at red - technically the same offence?

What I find interesting is the psychology...what possesses people to block this box when they are designed as a safety feature? Even more interesting...what's the psychology of half blocking them?

How encouraging to read many sensible comments on here without the bickering that may ensue between rival factions!

As a road user in cars, vans, on bikes or on foot, it's obvious to me that there are bad apples across the board. Nevertheless, in any collision the worst off will invariably the cyclist or pedestrian and I drive with this in mind.

Whilst I have encountered many cyclists without lights or reflectives in town, I have had no near misses - perhaps as I am looking out for them and assume they might do something daft - just as certain types of motor vehicle set off the alarm bells!

Cyclists with no lights then think they have the god-given right to ride on pathways and force pedestrians out of their way. if you say anything, you get abuse back!

This is on par with cars parking on pathways too. I saw an elderly lady with walking sticks having to walk on the road, around a car parked on the path. Then cars are actually beeping at her to move!

The worst junction in York for cyclists is outbound at Walmgate Bar. I need to turn right out of there through the wall and cannot begin to tell you how many vehicles jump those lights. Taxis (I've complained to the council - stern warning issues), vans, cars and even city buses! The worst bit is that everyone speeds up through the red light.

Roads are a shared space. Manners and courtesy from all, to all. Well maintained vehicles. Easy after sorting that.

sounds weird but wrote:
Cyclists with no lights then think they have the god-given right to ride on pathways and force pedestrians out of their way. if you say anything, you get abuse back!

This is on par with cars parking on pathways too. I saw an elderly lady with walking sticks having to walk on the road, around a car parked on the path. Then cars are actually beeping at her to move!

There should be no argy bargy here. If I spot cyclists coming down the pavement (slowly!) with no lights on, then I assume they were caught out by the lessening daylight hours and automatically move to allow them to get past me slowly and safely for all parties. It can happen to anyone and where there are no cycle lanes they can use, I'll give allowances.

Poundland frequently sells hi viz vests and they offer more 'visibility' than the lights they sell in there for sure! But what people must also realise when they get decent lights (and maybe the reason a lot of kids don't have decent lights is the sheer cost of them!) they oughtn't to use them in flashing mode, because they dazzle other road users and create a health hazard for epileptic and light sensitive people. Our local police force once stated they don't mind people using flashing lights, as long as they have lights. I wish they would clarify this now to mean the low intensity secondary lighting (non-BS standard ones) because people are using high intesity ones on flashing possibly creating incidents with impunity.

Car drivers need to be aware that they must keep their windscreens clean during night driving and low visibility. With stained/misted windscreens you're going to fail to see cyclists with low strength lights on. Additionally, those high intensity, flashing bike lights can really blind car drivers with dirty windscreens (starring effect) so even though I'm against them (see above) car drivers who maintain dirty vehicles have their own share of the blame here.

Each year the same discussion. Each year few learn on any side of the fence. Those that do, good on you. We have to learn to be more laid back so we don't burst a blood vessel. The police may also want to target males on female shopper bikes and male bikes with stickers removed and poor resprays. This has the potential to remove a lot of 'bad' cyclists from our roads pretty quickly.

Paul Meoff wrote:

Torkie wrote:
I got caught without lights when i was younger and forced to buy some. I was stupid enough to think they offered some protection and nearly got wiped off my bike turning onto holgate road.

You're better off thinking no one can see you.

Looks like it was natural selection in action if you thought lights alone would protect you and you're better off not being seen.

I was just a kid who thought he could be seen. And i said you're better of THINKING you can't be seen.

I wore a dynamo after but it's sole purpose was to keep the police off my back.

Lighting! As a very keen cyclist I am amazed by the number of people who do not have adequate lighting, front and rear. Simple things to do 1) Wipe them down weekly or more often, 2) Replace the batteries as required. 3) Make sure your long winter coat isn't hanging over the saddle thereby blocking your rear light! 4) Don't use the 'flash' mode unless you also have a steady light turned on.

Just nick all cyclists who break the law and who dont give a t-ss .AND yes im a cyclist and a CAR driver

Stay safe - go by car. Or if you have half a day to spare and a bucket of coins then take the bus.

fixedfanatic wrote:
I cycle every day around York at all hours of the day, despite having very, very good bike lights and always wearing a reflective vest I am often cut up by motorists.

Whilst pedalling down University Road the other morning a white van was so impatient to get by it almost clipped me then promptly bounced over the raised traffic island in the road. The fact its tyre burst seemed fair payback for the drivers stupidity.

My point is even if you do go out dressed like a Christmas Tree many motorists still have little regard for cyclists. I just make sure I am visible and always hold my position on the road, if a motorist arrrives at the office 30 seconds later because they have had to slow down to overtake me then so be it.

You really should have had a helmet camera at the time.

White van man hitting the island and bursting a tyre through his incompetence would have been a massive hit on you tube.

mortandindi wrote:
its not just the kids, the majority of adults are just the same. you can guarantee if you hit one of these many idiots in your car it WILL be the drivers fault regardless. As for the implementation of the fine, when has that ever been used? If the police were to clamp down on these thoughtless fools they could make thousands of pounds per day and then they would be able to to fund more bobby's on the streets. Throw the book at the lot of them regardless of age, as they do to other paying road users.

'You can guarantee if you hit one of these many idiots in your car it WILL be the drivers fault regardless'. This is exactly why may Cyclists ride defensively as some motorists only concern is who's fault it is, WAKE UP You can kill people with a half ton car..!

again wrote:
How encouraging to read many sensible comments on here without the bickering that may ensue between rival factions! As a road user in cars, vans, on bikes or on foot, it's obvious to me that there are bad apples across the board. Nevertheless, in any collision the worst off will invariably the cyclist or pedestrian and I drive with this in mind. Whilst I have encountered many cyclists without lights or reflectives in town, I have had no near misses - perhaps as I am looking out for them and assume they might do something daft - just as certain types of motor vehicle set off the alarm bells!

Well said.

pedalling paul wrote:
Perhaps Sgt. Rogers should also tell pedestrians not to venture out at night as well.....unless of course they are wearing something white! Seriously, legal standard cycle lighting in lit urban streets should be adequate. No need to light up like an Xmas tree unless venturing onto unlit rural roads, where some conspicuity clothing may help. I have some gloves with hi vis backs and fingers. These enable me to make thank you gestures to courteous drivers at night.

meddling paul speaks again!

"Poundland frequently sells hi viz vests and they offer more 'visibility' than the lights they sell in there for sure! But what people must also realise when they get decent lights (and maybe the reason a lot of kids don't have decent lights is the sheer cost of them!) they oughtn't to use them in flashing mode, because they dazzle other road users and create a health hazard for epileptic and light sensitive people. Our local police force once stated they don't mind people using flashing lights, as long as they have lights. I wish they would clarify this now to mean the low intensity secondary lighting (non-BS standard ones) because people are using high intesity ones on flashing possibly creating incidents with impunity."

Really? Any evidence of either health hazard for epilepsy or light sensitive people from flashing cycle lights? As a cyclist and a motorist, I've never been dazzled by a flashing high intensity light - the angles are usually completely wrong - and I've never heard of anyone with photo-flash type sensitive epilepsy having an attack triggered by cycle lights either. Not saying it can't happen, I'd just be interested in the frequency (no pun intended!).

And actually, the high vehicle headlights on most 4x4/SUVs are probably more of a dazzle problem. Even when they are correctly adjusted!

MouseHouse wrote:
Lighting! As a very keen cyclist I am amazed by the number of people who do not have adequate lighting, front and rear. Simple things to do 1) Wipe them down weekly or more often, 2) Replace the batteries as required. 3) Make sure your long winter coat isn't hanging over the saddle thereby blocking your rear light! 4) Don't use the 'flash' mode unless you also have a steady light turned on.

Good sound advice.

Just for interest, flashing bike lights have been legal since 2005 providing they flash between 60 and 240 times per minute.

Paul Meoff wrote:

Torkie wrote:
I got caught without lights when i was younger and forced to buy some. I was stupid enough to think they offered some protection and nearly got wiped off my bike turning onto holgate road.

You're better off thinking no one can see you.

Looks like it was natural selection in action if you thought lights alone would protect you and you're better off not being seen.

Torkie's not far wrong, legally a cyclist's obligations end at putting lights on the bike.

The 'driver' of the roads (whatever the vehicle) is obligated to be paying attention to their surroundings and be able to stop or act accordingly should they perceive a hazard. I ride my pushbike and motorbike both with the caution that nobody has seen me, that way when some div does pull out on me I have space and time to react.

Every car driver should do a CBT to make them alert of the view of bikes/cycles, anyone that's using a pushbike uses it already aware of the inherent dangers.

yorkshirelad wrote:
This is well meant and is clearly good advice.

However having adequate lights and being very visible is not the whole story on children's cycle safety.

With proper lights, being properly visible, riding safely and with due courtesy to other road users my children are regularly put in danger by vehicle drivers breaking the speed limit, using mobile phones and driving without due care for their safety.

A good example is Advance Stop Lines at traffic lights...designed to put cyclists in the most visible position at junctions where most cycling accidents occur. It's illegal for vehicles to cross their stop line at red and enter the cycle box. This is a clear safety measure, clearly illegally abused by a hard core of motorists. Have you ever heard of a driver being fined for this?

Speed is another issue and you don't have to look far to see drivers driving criminally too fast putting children, cyclists and pedestrians at risk.

Of course children (and their parents) need to be responsible but whether or not a child does so does not remove the responsibility of adult motorists to drive carefully with their safety in mind.

A reminder to child cyclists of their responsibilities and to drivers of theirs would have been a more balanced point to make here.

A well balanced comment.

I nearly collided into another cyclist this evening as he was going up Stonebow from Layerthorpe direction and had no lights and dark clothes on - and I was on a bike! so what must it be like for motorists travelling faster than me....

In other countries it is legally required for bikes to be manufactured with lights already fitted and working. Induction dynamo's are available which use magnets fitted to the wheel and so there is zero friction from the dynamo when travelling, so these could be used when manufacturers build a bike to provide lighting whilst riding without batteries.

I'm currently looking to see how viable it is to build a Tesla Generator for my bike, but that's another matter completely!!

When I was at a train station the other day I picked up a Northern Rail guide to cycling leaflet, which has soom good pointers in there including legal standpoints such as cycles should ride 1m from the kerb edge (obviously on roads like Huntington Road and York Road Haxby where the cycle lane is 40-60cm wide this presents an issue).

Magicman! wrote:

yorkshirelad wrote:
This is well meant and is clearly good advice.

However having adequate lights and being very visible is not the whole story on children's cycle safety.

With proper lights, being properly visible, riding safely and with due courtesy to other road users my children are regularly put in danger by vehicle drivers breaking the speed limit, using mobile phones and driving without due care for their safety.

A good example is Advance Stop Lines at traffic lights...designed to put cyclists in the most visible position at junctions where most cycling accidents occur. It's illegal for vehicles to cross their stop line at red and enter the cycle box. This is a clear safety measure, clearly illegally abused by a hard core of motorists. Have you ever heard of a driver being fined for this?

Speed is another issue and you don't have to look far to see drivers driving criminally too fast putting children, cyclists and pedestrians at risk.

Of course children (and their parents) need to be responsible but whether or not a child does so does not remove the responsibility of adult motorists to drive carefully with their safety in mind.

A reminder to child cyclists of their responsibilities and to drivers of theirs would have been a more balanced point to make here.

A well balanced comment.

I nearly collided into another cyclist this evening as he was going up Stonebow from Layerthorpe direction and had no lights and dark clothes on - and I was on a bike! so what must it be like for motorists travelling faster than me....

In other countries it is legally required for bikes to be manufactured with lights already fitted and working. Induction dynamo's are available which use magnets fitted to the wheel and so there is zero friction from the dynamo when travelling, so these could be used when manufacturers build a bike to provide lighting whilst riding without batteries.

I'm currently looking to see how viable it is to build a Tesla Generator for my bike, but that's another matter completely!!

When I was at a train station the other day I picked up a Northern Rail guide to cycling leaflet, which has soom good pointers in there including legal standpoints such as cycles should ride 1m from the kerb edge (obviously on roads like Huntington Road and York Road Haxby where the cycle lane is 40-60cm wide this presents an issue).

Just because the marked lane is inadequate does not mean you have to stay within it. You should ride at a safe distance from the kerb avoiding the drain covers, potholes and general debris.

Continue with your investigations and you will be even safer. When a few kVs arcs across to the car passing too close they will soon give you room.

Is there anything legally printed about cyclist distances from kerbs etc? I can't find any and would quite like to show someone it and educate them...

Paul Meoff wrote:

Magicman! wrote:

yorkshirelad wrote: This is well meant and is clearly good advice. However having adequate lights and being very visible is not the whole story on children's cycle safety. With proper lights, being properly visible, riding safely and with due courtesy to other road users my children are regularly put in danger by vehicle drivers breaking the speed limit, using mobile phones and driving without due care for their safety. A good example is Advance Stop Lines at traffic lights...designed to put cyclists in the most visible position at junctions where most cycling accidents occur. It's illegal for vehicles to cross their stop line at red and enter the cycle box. This is a clear safety measure, clearly illegally abused by a hard core of motorists. Have you ever heard of a driver being fined for this? Speed is another issue and you don't have to look far to see drivers driving criminally too fast putting children, cyclists and pedestrians at risk. Of course children (and their parents) need to be responsible but whether or not a child does so does not remove the responsibility of adult motorists to drive carefully with their safety in mind. A reminder to child cyclists of their responsibilities and to drivers of theirs would have been a more balanced point to make here.

A well balanced comment. I nearly collided into another cyclist this evening as he was going up Stonebow from Layerthorpe direction and had no lights and dark clothes on - and I was on a bike! so what must it be like for motorists travelling faster than me.... In other countries it is legally required for bikes to be manufactured with lights already fitted and working. Induction dynamo's are available which use magnets fitted to the wheel and so there is zero friction from the dynamo when travelling, so these could be used when manufacturers build a bike to provide lighting whilst riding without batteries. I'm currently looking to see how viable it is to build a Tesla Generator for my bike, but that's another matter completely!! When I was at a train station the other day I picked up a Northern Rail guide to cycling leaflet, which has soom good pointers in there including legal standpoints such as cycles should ride 1m from the kerb edge (obviously on roads like Huntington Road and York Road Haxby where the cycle lane is 40-60cm wide this presents an issue).

Just because the marked lane is inadequate does not mean you have to stay within it. You should ride at a safe distance from the kerb avoiding the drain covers, potholes and general debris. Continue with your investigations and you will be even safer. When a few kVs arcs across to the car passing too close they will soon give you room.

kV arcs are for softies; a good EM pulse would really do the trick.

pedalling paul wrote:
Perhaps Sgt. Rogers should also tell pedestrians not to venture out at night as well.....unless of course they are wearing something white!

Seriously, legal standard cycle lighting in lit urban streets should be adequate. No need to light up like an Xmas tree unless venturing onto unlit rural roads, where some conspicuity clothing may help.

I have some gloves with hi vis backs and fingers. These enable me to make thank you gestures to courteous drivers at night.

Ha ha ha...brilliant! I often gesture to drivers too :)

aa42john wrote:
Why does the good policeman not say the one thing that would save lives (during the day as well as at night): if you are driving, then whenever bicycles or pedestrians are nearby, you should SLOW DOWN, preferably to 20 mph max. I

I think his point was that it's often difficult to tell when cyclists are nearby when it's dark and they've got no lights.

And as for those drivers using mobile phones, I often see young people on bikes holding their phones with one hand and texting with the other. The fact is that in any given population there will be a proportion of morons. Cyclists are not excluded.

A previous contributor mentioned that if the cycle lanes are not wide enough to let a cyclist position themselves one metre from the kerb then not to stay in them.
I have no problem with this, however this action could mean a less enlightened motorist might be confused as to why a cycle isn't in the lane and become agitated by this action. If the cycle lanes are indequate why are the there? My view, as I've mentioned prevoiusly is they are there to improve the stats. on how many miles of tracks/lane this Cycling City of ours has provided. The truth is there is no consistency to how they are laid out, for instance Magicman mentioned the narrow lanes on Haxby Rd/Huntington Road where as on Tadcaster Rd / The Mount there is a stretch with two lanes, one on the road and one on the footpath. This reinforces my opinion that the another motive for painting of these lanes is to "traffic calm" as motorists we are alleged to travel slower when the road is narrower (as if that works!)
Painting a narrow unusable lane is more dangerous than not having one.I suspect most motorists would expect cyclists to stay in the lane provided and as a part time cyclist I would expect toi feel safe in that lane. We have many situations where a vehicle cannot physically fit between the edge of the cycle lane and the central road markings. Now, I believe that a lane bordered with a broken line is classed as advisory whereas a lane with a solid border is compulsory, so where the road is not wide enough there is no legal obligation for the motorist to stay out of the lane. I wonder how many cyclists are aware of this. Cyclists need to be aware that just because there is some green tarmac it doesnt mean that bit off road belongs them. I'm not ant- bike and believe we should have proper tracks and as much segregation as possible with seperate traffic controls if neccessary, but its cheaper to chuck down a bit of Tarmac and paint around it.

All cyclists should have some type of insurance and the law come down on them heavy when they brake the law.you see cyclists of all ages riding on paths and roads with no lights or bell.you see them weaving in and out of cars going through red traffic lights.they wear headphones not a care in the world.they do something stupid have an accident with a car or lorry their fault and the motorists gets hammered by their insurance.it's all wrong.but bike manufactures and sellers don't help selling bikes without mud guards, bells, or lights.at least third party insurance should be law for all cyclists.