On Mar 5, 12:48 pm, "Jeremy Parker" <
[email protected]>
wrote:
> "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> [snip]
>
> > Here in London UK it's bike friendly now. We have 8500 miles of
> > bike
> > routes - we call them "streets".
>
> But aren't you expose to the law of the jungle, like the article on
> London states?
>
> [snip]
>
> Er, what article? Large numbers of articles, and books too, about
> London get written, of varying degrees of sense.
See below.
>
> I suppose you could try to operate by the law of the jungle, but
> generally in Britain it's considered better to operate in a civilized
> manner. Following the rules is especially important if you are the
> most vulnerable vehicle on the road. We have a book here, John
> Franklin's "Cyclecraft", to tell you how to do it. Besides, if you
> break the rules, you might get a ticket. The risk's low, I grant
> you, but occasionally they do have a crackdown.
The UK has one of the best road safety records. Still few cyclists
seem to be comfortable among the big predators (not because they are
bad, but because they are big).
>
> The laws in Britain are much the same as the laws anywhere else,
> except that there's no nonsense about having to use bike facilities.
> A "mandatory" bike lane is mandatory for cars to stay out, not
> mandatory for you to stay in. Do remember, though, that we drive on
> the left.
I agree with that concept: no mandatory bike lanes, but bike lanes in
places where it would increase ridership.
>
> If it's any comfort to you, cycling in Britain is safer than walking.
>
> Jeremy Parker
I'm glad it works for you, but ridership seems to be ridiculously low
in the UK. This article states its dangers...
Cyclists are Victims of the Law of the Jungle
And in reference to the above article about London, this reader states
that cyclists should not have equal rights as automobiles, but
actually MORE rights.
Again, before there's war, it's better to separate.
Velorution in the mind The Financial Times has a worthy but dull
article on the resurgence of urban cycling in the UK, with a focus on
London. It cannot escape from the cliche' of the number of people
riding through red lights; it is like if every article about digital
photography mentioned people taking illegal pictures at museums. Of
course figures of injuries caused by riding through red lights are
never offered.
The torpor in the journalist's mind is evident in the last few
paragraphs:
There's no doubt that car drivers need to clean up their act. Taking
speed limits down to 20mph in built-up areas will make the roads safer
for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians alike. Enforcing the ban on
mobile phone use will help drivers become more attentive. And applying
the Highway Code more strictly will make many people think twice about
engaging in the current bully-boy hierarchy of bigger is better.
...
Now, saying that motor vehicles should have the same rights as
pedestrians or cyclists is like saying that water skiers should be
allowed on all waters in front of a popular beach. The Highway Code by
instigating this non-sensical equality status, that inevitably leads
to the law of the jungle, is bunk. It has the same moral standing as
the South African Pbutt Law.
It is not abiding to rules that we should exhort, but consideration to
all other people and especially to those who are more vulnerable than
ourselves. Yes there are definitely inconsiderate bicycle riders in
London, and it is absolutely no excuse to say, 'It is a jungle out
there, I need to defend my self'. We need to raise the level of social
responsibility, starting by ourselves. The roads are a commons to be
enjoyed by everyone, starting by people on foot. Then the greater or
more dangerous the vehicle one chooses to use, the fewer rights one
has and the more consideration one needs to give to more vulnerable
people.
(
http://www.ugroups.com/driver/Cyclists-are-Victims-of-the-Law-of-the-
Jungle-4890.html)
