‘Cyclists who kill could face life sentence’

[Falcon1200]

Why is it anti cyclist to expect the same level of punishment for effectively the same crime?

Because the same level of punishment is not being demanded, or delivered! As per the title of this topic, 'cyclists who kill could face life sentence'. whereas, as per my Post #13, a motorist who did kill did not go to prison - at all.

 

[JamesT]

Because the same level of punishment is not being demanded, or delivered! As per the title of this topic, 'cyclists who kill could face life sentence'. whereas, as per my Post #13, a motorist who did kill did not go to prison - at all.

Of course it is. Just because a crime has life as a maximum sentence doesn’t mean that every case will result in that sentence. It’s only two years since dangerous driving has had life as the maximum instead of 14 years. The legislation for death by dangerous cycling is explicitly that it should be dealt with identically to driving.

 

[Falcon1200]

The legislation for death by dangerous cycling is explicitly that it should be dealt with identically to driving.

The full wording of the BBC article quoted in Post #1 is 'Cyclists who kill pedestrians by acting dangerously on the road could face life imprisonment'.

The motorist in the BBC article I quoted in Post #13 was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving- dangerous, not careless, driving - Yet was not sentenced to even a single day in prison. If such leniency can be applied to motorists, under what circumstances would a cyclist actually be imprisoned for life?

 

[Robin Edwards]

Perhaps we should makle it illegal to cycle on the pavement?

Or park in cycle lanes or pavements too?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Apr 2025 ==

Government numbers report from last year's 1600 road deaths, that only 4 were caused by cyclists. Of the remaining 1596, how many will have received a custodial sentence? Guess

 

[GB]

Or park in cycle lanes or pavements too?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Apr 2025 ==

Government numbers report from last year's 1600 road deaths, that only 4 were caused by cyclists. Of the remaining 1596, how many will have received a custodial sentence? Guess

The 1600 figure includes all road deaths, including those where the at fault person has died and pedestrian vs motor vehicle accidents where the motor vehicle is not always at fault. A better question would be how many, who were at fault and survived, received a custodial sentence...and the answer is more likely not nearly enough.

 

[dangie]

Of course without targeting all of these posts, all negative answers are aimed at the irresponsible cyclists & motorists & pedestrians of which comprise but an extremely small minority of the road users. Unfortunately it is these tossers you remember.

 

[3rd rail land]

I ride an ebike as my main mode of transport and I do agree that there are some irresponsible riders out there that do things such riding on pavements, riding illegal ebikes, jumping red lights etc... In fact I was once knocked down by a cyclist who jumped a red light whilst I was crossing a road at a crossing with a green pedestrian light. Luckily all I suffered was a bruise and a few grazes which was a bit sore but nothing more.

That said I have faced pedestrians and other motorists that do stupid things that they would all certainly not do if it were a car coming there way. Things like pedestrians crossing roads when the light for road traffic is green and I am the only vehicle coming their way, pedestrians stepping out in cycle lanes as I am approaching, pedestrians just about to step into a cycle lane as I approach only to step back at the last moment, cars turning left/right as I approach and there is absolutely not enough time to make the turn safely. In many of these cases I've had to slow down or brake hard to avoid a collision, all while having right of way.

So yes, cyclists do need to be more considerate and follow the rules of the road but equally other road traffic and pedestrians need to pay more attention to cyclists as well. If you kill or injure a pedestrian whilst cycling you should face the same consequences as any other road user. Sadly I doubt it would change the attitude of the majority of cyclists.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

What I hate is people who press the button before looking, look, see no traffic and then walk across anyway. The traffic gets stopped after they have completed their crossing and then the vehicles chuck out pollution getting going again for no purpose.

The problem there is with crossing design and setup. I used to live near Wigan Road in Ormskirk, one of the main routes into the town. There was a pelican crossing on Wigan Road that would stop the road traffic the moment you pressed the button, so you never got the situation you describe.
Contrast that with a crossing near my current home, on Bradford Road in Batley, which only turns green for pedestrians when sensors 100yds either side detect no movement. Anyone able-bodied will have had opportunity to cross long before the crossing holds the road traffic, so drivers will inevitably end up stopping for nobody. I used to joke that the crossing was so poorly programmed that it should have a published timetable instead of a button!

 

[renegademaster]

What I hate is people who press the button before looking, look, see no traffic and then walk across anyway

Their's traffic lights that make you stand near the button or else have the hold cancelled. Croydon has quite a few of theese types.

 

[Bikeman78]

Or park in cycle lanes or pavements too?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Apr 2025 ==

Government numbers report from last year's 1600 road deaths, that only 4 were caused by cyclists. Of the remaining 1596, how many will have received a custodial sentence? Guess

Recently, I have watched a lot of Ashley Neal's Youtube channel. There is plenty of footage on the videos of people driving or parking on the pavement. See Clips 5 and 17 on this video. The level of stupidity by the bus driver in the latter is astonishing.

Video clip showing various acts of stupidity by different road users.

 

[bramling]

Recently, I have watched a lot of Ashley Neal's Youtube channel. There is plenty of footage on the videos of people driving or parking on the pavement. See Ccips 5 and 17 on this video. The level of stupidity by the bus driver in the latter is astonishing.

Video clip showing various acts of stupidity by different road users.

And this is the problem - the problem is people, not the mode of transport they happen to be using. Add in personal preferences and it’s impossible for society as a whole to have a sensible discussion about all this.

As ever, the grid goes low intelligence/high confidence, and high intelligence/low confidence, which is the cause of a lot of society’s problems.

 

[Bikeman78]

And this is the problem - the problem is people, not the mode of transport they happen to be using. Add in personal preferences and it’s impossible for society as a whole to have a sensible discussion about all this.

As ever, the grid goes low intelligence/high confidence, and high intelligence/low confidence, which is the cause of a lot of society’s problems.

I agree. Fortunately, I rarely have any altercations with other people when out on my bike, so I must be doing something right.

 

[bramling]

I agree. Fortunately, I rarely have any altercations with other people when out on my bike, so I must be doing something right.

There’s a certain irony that a lot of the “cyclists” people moan about on pavements tend not to be the more serious cyclists. Indeed, the ones doing silly things on shared paths (which unfortunately is quite an issue on some of the more rural ones) are very likely to have arrived by car with the bike on the back.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I ride an ebike as my main mode of transport and I do agree that there are some irresponsible riders out there that do things such riding on pavements, riding illegal ebikes, jumping red lights etc... In fact I was once knocked down by a cyclist who jumped a red light whilst I was crossing a road at a crossing with a green pedestrian light. Luckily all I suffered was a bruise and a few grazes which was a bit sore but nothing more.

That said I have faced pedestrians and other motorists that do stupid things that they would all certainly not do if it were a car coming there way. Things like pedestrians crossing roads when the light for road traffic is green and I am the only vehicle coming their way, pedestrians stepping out in cycle lanes as I am approaching, pedestrians just about to step into a cycle lane as I approach only to step back at the last moment, cars turning left/right as I approach and there is absolutely not enough time to make the turn safely. In many of these cases I've had to slow down or brake hard to avoid a collision, all while having right of way.

So yes, cyclists do need to be more considerate and follow the rules of the road but equally other road traffic and pedestrians need to pay more attention to cyclists as well. If you kill or injure a pedestrian whilst cycling you should face the same consequences as any other road user. Sadly I doubt it would change the attitude of the majority of cyclists.

There is one thing that has always worried me. Turning left should always be from the left most lane.

But nowadays we have a cycle lane there. If a car has just overtaken a cycle then they really should know the cycle is there. BUT if the cycle is going faster than the left turning vehicle it is tricky. If the vehicle is not even indicating left then naughty naughty. If I am in my car undertaking vehicles (passing on their left) I am always very wary and I might blow my horn especially if they seem to be dithering (about to change direction) In my opinion there is a kind of blind spot there on the left for most vehicles - particularly if the vehicle is a lorry. On the other side of the coin- I really worry my mirrors are not good enough to cover the left side properly. I have driven the company van where I could hear a taxi and I knew it should be there but no matter how much I looked I could not see it. My front passenger had to lean round to see it.

So I am always wary of vehicles turning left if I am catching up with them (so really overtaking on what was traditionally the wrong side).

Of course there are now bus lanes and the buses can often be faster than the rest of the traffic. It is easy to see a bus BUT a car/motorcycle/cycle is a tricky one. The worst accident I saw was two small mopeds taken out by a car turning right across the bus lane. There was a lorry letting the car go and they had no way of seeing them until too late.

Their's traffic lights that make you stand near the button or else have the hold cancelled. Croydon has quite a few of theese types.

Oh. I have not spotted one of those. My nearest main junction (five ways A23) is fun to watch. People pushing the button repeatedly. But the pedestrian lights will go green as part of the phasing of the whole junction. The buttons achieve nothing there except to help pass on Covid maybe !.

And this is the problem - the problem is people, not the mode of transport they happen to be using. Add in personal preferences and it’s impossible for society as a whole to have a sensible discussion about all this.

As ever, the grid goes low intelligence/high confidence, and high intelligence/low confidence, which is the cause of a lot of society’s problems.

Yes. I would say that more then 50% of the time the horn is an angry button and not a warning as it is supposed to be.

 

[yorkie]

....If a car has just overtaken a cycle then they really should know the cycle is there. BUT if the cycle is going faster than the left turning vehicle it is tricky.....

It really isn't "tricky"! There should not be any overtaking in this situation.

When turning left, you also have to anticipate that you may need to give way to anyone crossing the road, so even if a car could just about get away with clearing the junction before the cycle approaches, they still shouldn't be doing it, unless they are prepared to stop in a position that does not obstruct the cyclist.

Using the road - Overtaking (162 to 169)

Before overtaking you should make sure the road is sufficiently clear ahead

www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk

DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example

• approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
  ...
• when you would force another road user to swerve or slow down
  ...
• stay behind if you are following a cyclist approaching a roundabout or junction, and you intend to turn left. Do not cut across cyclists going ahead, including those using cycle lanes and cycle tracks (see Rule H3)

On my way home today (from a forum event), a car overtook me and immediately turned left. I had to brake suddenly to avoid a collision. This has happened to me on numerous occasions at this particular location alone.

There are sometimes a lot of words in your posts without really saying very much; I'm not prepared to read any further, as this really has annoyed me, especially given what happened to me today. Please think before you type.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It really isn't "tricky"! There should not be any overtaking in this situation.

When turning left, you also have to anticipate that you may need to give way to anyone crossing the road, so even if a car could just about get away with clearing the junction before the cycle approaches, they still shouldn't be doing it, unless they are prepared to stop in a position that does not obstruct the cyclist.

Using the road - Overtaking (162 to 169)

Before overtaking you should make sure the road is sufficiently clear ahead

www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk

On my way home today (from a forum event), a car overtook me and immediately turned left. I had to brake suddenly to avoid a collision. This has happened to me on numerous occasions at this particular location alone.

There are sometimes a lot of words in your posts without really saying very much; I'm not prepared to read any further, as this really has annoyed me, especially given what happened to me today. Please think before you type.

What I was talking about is the problem when the vehicle turning left has NOT just overtaken a cycle (or any other vehicle). It seems to be easy to overlook something on the left if it is coming from behind unfortunately and that is something all road users have to bear in mind. As far back as I can recall the highway code (see below) forbids overtaking on the left unless the traffic is moving slowly enough for caution to be workable. Mirrors etc often have a blind spot. It is therefore hard to give way to things coming up from behind on the left.

There are situations where a left turning vehicle is going to be passed on the left. This is usually in slow moving traffic. This crops up where a bus lane is involved but often this is easier as the bus lane usually ends before the junction and so a vehicle not in the left most lane should be indicating left before the junction and moving across to the left lane. Usually the visibility is such that there is time for both parties to sort themselves out.

The difficulty comes when a vehicle cannot get to the left side of the road before the left turn. This typically happens where there is a cycle lane and of course cycles being narrow can get past a queue of cars quite easily even if no cycle lane. That then leads to a risk if the car is turning left. Obviously the car MUST be indicating left btw. A similar problem is if it is a lorry turning left. Often a lorry will be far enough out from the curb for a car to pass on the inside. The lorry being longer will start their turn from a position that would not occur to car drivers. I know that if the lorry is indicating left then I cannot overtake on the inside. To reiterate I am talking about a situation where the traffic on the left is moving faster then a vehicle trying to turn left.

Highway Code :-
"

• stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left. Cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on their right or left and should proceed with caution as the driver may not be able to see you. Be careful about doing so, particularly on the approach to junctions, and especially when deciding whether it is safe to pass lorries or other large vehicles.

"

Back to your near miss today. If the car had just overtaken you such that it did not have time to turn left then it should not have overtaken you and is in the wrong (regardless of indicator use). There is a problem where drivers of cars and lorries forget to consider smaller vehicles (cars and cycles) - that is down to bad-habits/attitude/impatience.

It has happened to me where I was driving straight on and a car on my right made a desperate attempt to overtake and turn left !. Annoying but also risks damage or injury.

 

[yorkie]

What I was talking about is the problem when the vehicle turning left has NOT just overtaken a cycle (or any other vehicle). It seems to be easy to overlook something on the left if it is coming from behind unfortunately and that is something all road users have to bear in mind. As far back as I can recall the highway code forbids overtaking on the left unless the traffic is moving slowly enough for caution to be workable. Mirrors etc often have a blind spot. It is therefore hard to give way to things coming up from behind on the left.

There are situations where a left turning vehicle is going to be passed on the left. This is usually in slow moving traffic. This crops up where a bus lane is involved but often this is easier as the bus lane usually ends before the junction and so a vehicle not in the left most lane should be indicating left before the junction and moving across to the left lane. Usually the visibility is such that there is time for both parties to sort themselves out.

The difficulty comes when a vehicle cannot get to the left side of the road before the left turn. This typically happens where there is a cycle lane and of course cycles being narrow can get past a queue of cars quite easily even if no cycle lane. That then leads to a risk if the car is turning left. Obviously the car MUST be indicating left btw. A similar problem is if it is a lorry turning left. Often a lorry will be far enough out from the curb for a car to pass on the inside. The lorry being longer will start their turn from a position that would not occur to car drivers. I know that if the lorry is indicating left then I cannot overtake on the inside.

Back to your near miss today. If the car had just overtaken you such that it did not have time to turn left then it should not have overtaken you and is in the wrong (regardless of indicator use). There is a problem where drivers of cars and lorries forget to consider smaller vehicles (cars and cycles) - that is down to bad habits/attitude.

I don't really understand how we have got into this really convoluted discussion, but vehicles which are overtaking really need to take care to do so correctly, and vehicles which are turning across other lanes really need to take care to do so correctly too. And anyone driving a car needs to take extra care to look out for more vulnerable users. If a pause or delay to their manoeuvre is required to check any blind spots, then they need to do that.

 

[Jim the Jim]

Why is it anti cyclist to expect the same level of punishment for effectively the same crime? If you kill someone because you are doing something dangerous why should it be treated differently whether its a car or bike? Just because something is rare doesn't mean it should be ignored. Why would you not want those who ride like absolute cretins to face justice?

It is far more reasonably foreseeable that driving a car might kill someone than that riding a bike might kill someone. I think most of us would struggle to kill someone by riding a bike at them even if we tried it on purpose.

 

[Falcon1200]

I think most of us would struggle to kill someone by riding a bike at them even if we tried it on purpose.

Indeed, and the cyclist would be risking injury to themselves as well as the person they struck.

 

[styles]

The legislation isn't horrible or anything, and as somebody who cycles a lot I don't disagree with the principle.

But the media focus on this is wild. 5-6 people die every day in collisions with motor vehicles. 2-4 people per year are killed by cyclists.

This change will make precisely zero difference to cycling habits (and cyclist-causing pedestrian deaths). It appeases a certain group, so it's popular, but this will have no impact whatsoever on pedestrian safety.

 

[bramling]

The legislation isn't horrible or anything, and as somebody who cycles a lot I don't disagree with the principle.

But the media focus on this is wild. 5-6 people die every day in collisions with motor vehicles. 2-4 people per year are killed by cyclists.

This change will make precisely zero difference to cycling habits (and cyclist-causing pedestrian deaths). It appeases a certain group, so it's popular, but this will have no impact whatsoever on pedestrian safety.

Very well put. The whole thing is emotive rather than pragmatic. As you say it will make zero practical difference to anything, besides playing to some personal hobby horses. Meanwhile, whilst legislative time has been wasted on this, Britain continues to fall apart thanks to poor government.

 

[m0ffy]

The legislation isn't horrible or anything, and as somebody who cycles a lot I don't disagree with the principle.

But the media focus on this is wild. 5-6 people die every day in collisions with motor vehicles. 2-4 people per year are killed by cyclists.

This change will make precisely zero difference to cycling habits (and cyclist-causing pedestrian deaths). It appeases a certain group, so it's popular, but this will have no impact whatsoever on pedestrian safety.

100%. It feels like another example of the new government engaging in Culture Wars nonsense rather than doing sensible governance.

I’d much rather see the same effort put into improving cyclist and pedestrian safety through better infrastructure and a culture shift.

 

[renegademaster]

The governments of the last few decades have had a habit of announcing longer and longer maximum sentences for crimes, but these long custodial sentences are rarely ever given because their is no room in the prisons

 

[Mag_seven]

Lets just see if things actually becomes law - if it does then we will reopen the thread.