Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees
Speaking from my experiences as a 'cager' and also from riding a motorbike.
When riding the motorbike.I ensure that I'm in fully armoured clothing, that could be two piece textiles or leather jacket + armoured kevlar jeans, gloves, helmet etc. I'm acutely aware that if i get hit by or I hit something that there is a very good chance of me becoming an organ donor. and I therefore ride as defensively as possible. I will where possible however filter to make progress etc.
It's the defensive riding that seems to be missing from most cyclists thought patterns. That they have priority over all other traffic
Why isn't there a minimum standard for bikes to be on the road? some of the ones in York resemble death traps!
Why isn't the wearing of armour/protective equipment compulsory on roads?
Why should cyclists who use the road system not have some sort of insurance in place?
|
You know that I too am a motorcyclist and it is true that defensive riding has taught us much about roadcraft, what to wear, where to position, road camber, anticipation etc. These skills are absent in some cyclists but also absent in some motorists. The latter might have no experience of real vulnerability on the roads and this can lead to an unintentionally cavalier attitude to other road users and, for that matter, pedestrians.
As regards minimum standards, this is left to the rider; the check being an unfit machine puts you in obvious danger.
As regards protective clothing, bicycles are self propelled; too much equipment is impractical and would probably discourage use. That would be a disaster health wise and impending gridlock would quickly become imminent. I'm not sure that motorists appreciate that cyclists take pressure off the transport system. If we all take to cars nobody will be going anywhere.
As regards insurance, the third party insurance of motorists covers cyclists. Some might want to take out optional cycling insurance but that's personal choice.