Ban cyclists and e-scooter riders using phones, Tory peer urges.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
What about pedestrians however? The complainant wasn’t driving at the time 🤷‍♀️
And how severe were the complainant's injuries? Mild uncertainty, wasn't it?

I also note that the not-at-all-made-up-for-an-anecdote cyclist was also "on the wrong side of the road" which is a pretty clear-cut offence under the Highways Act 1835 section 78 (as in, it applies to all vehicles and predates the bicycle by a few decades). What point new laws when the old ones aren't enforced?
 

fossyant

Ride It Like You Stole It!
Location
South Manchester
Almost like another distraction, getting people frothing at those bloody cyclists again.

Shaddupa ya face, you two wheeled lycra hooligan ! :whistle:
:tongue:
 

Tenkaykev

Guru
Location
Poole
If the Baroness would like to improve road safety, she could do much more good by challenging the crazy situation of parking on pavements (outside London) or most cycleways not being in itself an offence and not generally being accepted as evidence of pavement driving (which is an offence) or highway obstruction, and only roads policing unit officers usually being allowed to stop motorists. That shoot puts walkers and cyclists on the carriageway unnecessarily every day, including bits that are so farking dodgy that even our sluggish councils built protected refuges in the highway (pavements, cycleways) for non-motorists.
I became more aware of the curse of pavement parking when our granddaughter came along and I'd take her for walks in her buggy. I'd often have to squeeze through a space or go out on the carriageway due the inconsiderate attitude of the vehicle owners. I was pondering the solutions ( and as pointed out in other messages in this thread, the legislation already exists, it is just not being enforced ) and I came up with what I considered a workable and equitable solution.
My solution ( only partially tongue in cheek ) was a smartphone app which i was going to call " Dobber " which word work as follows. The user would download the App and go through a series of identity and location checks and once approved become a " Dobber ". Once verified this would link to their local council and the DVLA. The user would go out and about their business as usual. If they saw a vehicle parked on the pavement / double yellow lines without a Blue Badge etc, they would open the App and take a photo which would automatically be uploaded to the DVLA with date, time and location. The owner of the vehicle would be issued with a fixed penalty charge, A percentage of which would go to the reporting persons local council to be offset against their personal council tax. Should the amount build up to exceed the amount of Council Tax owed, any excess would go into the local councils infrastructure improvements fund.
There would be a strong competitive element to the app, with local and regional awards to the top " Dobbers" and an annual presentation dinner for the prestigious " Dobber of the Year " award. While there may well be some " pushback " from vested interests, the oft repeated saying of one particular politician " If you can't do the time, don't do the crime " could be quoted.
 

Aravis

Putrid Donut
Location
Gloucester
It's even illegal to stop on the carriageway here - the A82, as it's a clearway:
View attachment 638936
So the only legal way for me to get that photo was to take it while moving!

Completely OT, but I hadn't realised how lucky I was to get this striking (and legal) image:

638956


Less fortunately I was soon heading back and round via Connel Ferry.
 

SpokeyDokey

67, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator
Spiced red cabbage and hasselback potatoes, but what's that got to do with mobile phones or this idiot Baroness?

I will de-obtuse it for you and also thank you for the gastronomic tips - very enlightening. 🙂

If one set of road users should not use mobile phones then that should apply to other sets of road users too.

Irrespective of the scale of potential harm by different road user groups eg car drivers and cyclists, all are capable of causing some harm.

For sure two tons of metal can wield a lot of havoc when piloted by a distracted driver but so can the far less massive cyclist/bike combo with eg an inadvertent swerve into the path of another road user with possible knock-on effects.

In my book, cyclists have a duty to be as vigilant as possible re their potential to cause accidents and, therefore, should concentrate fully on cycling safely instead of being distracted by yabbering to their mates etc or scrolling through their Insta feed via a mobile phone.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
I will de-obtuse it for you and also thank you for the gastronomic tips - very enlightening. 🙂

If one set of road users should not use mobile phones then that should apply to other sets of road users too.

Irrespective of the scale of potential harm by different road user groups eg car drivers and cyclists, all are capable of causing some harm.

For sure two tons of metal can wield a lot of havoc when piloted by a distracted driver but so can the far less massive cyclist/bike combo with eg an inadvertent swerve into the path of another road user with possible knock-on effects.

In my book, cyclists have a duty to be as vigilant as possible re their potential to cause accidents and, therefore, should concentrate fully on cycling safely instead of being distracted by yabbering to their mates etc or scrolling through their Insta feed via a mobile phone.
I don't think anyone here is putting the case that talkingon the phone/texting while cycling is in any way a good idea.

Just that this would be a waste of legislators' time, especially when it's already covered by existing legislation. The justification for a change in the law, with all that that entails, without any substantiating evidence is rather weak. Oh, I'm sorry, there is evidence - the substantiating evidence is a story that the Baroness McIntosh made up off the top of her head. Where no harm was caused.

I personally wouldn't care a jot if it were made illegal as it wouldn't affect me. I'm way too clumsy to handle a phone while riding. But surely they have better things to do with their time.
 
Last edited:

PK99

Legendary Member
Location
SW19
Irrespective of the scale of potential harm by different road user groups eg car drivers and cyclists, all are capable of causing some harm.

Well said Spokey!

I have:
Ruptured shoulder tendons, another dislocation would most likely precipitate a shoulder joint replacement
A troublesome ACL knee.
Daily anticoagulant - wounds or head trauma are serious threats

An inattentive cyclist using his or her phone could cause me VERY serious harm in a collision that might seem innocuous.

There is nothing special about me.
The same applies to many other pedestrians who are Vulnerable for a variety of reasons.

So to those cyclists bleating the usual cyclist bleat "Cars are more dangerous than bikes".

Just STFU!
 

SpokeyDokey

67, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator
I don't think anyone here is putting the case that talkingon the phone/texting while cycling is in any way a good idea.

Just that this would be a waste of legislators' time, especially when it's already covered by existing legislation. The justification for a change in the law, with all that that entails, without any substantiating evidence is rather weak. Oh, I'm sorry, there is evidence - the substantiating evidence is a story that the Baroness McIntosh made up off the top of her head. Where no harm was caused.

I personally wouldn't care a jot if it were made illegal as it wouldn't affect me. I'm way too clumsy to handle a phone while riding. But surely they have better things to do with their time.


Road users as a collective should, imo, be subject to the same juristiction.

How can it not be illegal for a cyclist to use a phone whilst cycling and the reverse being applicable to motorists?

As I understand the current two separate sets of legislation it appears that a motorist using a mobile phone may be deemed as carrying out an illegal activity even if they are not causing, or being likely to cause, any harm; whereas it is not illegal for a cyclist to use a phone until they are in a situation where they are likely to cause some harm.

I am all for parity for all road users in all aspects of road use and that should apply to prevailing laws too.
 

Ming the Merciless

There is no mercy
Location
Inside my skull
Road users as a collective should, imo, be subject to the same juristiction.

Disagree, I would not expect to be subject to the same jurisdictions when walking along a road as when I’m driving or cycling etc. jurisdiction needs to be proportionate.

Just as I would not expect the same jurisdiction when swimming in the sea as a captain managing a ferry.

The legislation quite rightly recognises this.
 

newfhouse

Resolutely on topic
So to those cyclists bleating the usual cyclist bleat "Cars are more dangerous than bikes".

Just STFU!
Your medical vulnerability doesn’t alter the fact that cars drivers are more dangerous to you than bikes cyclists. It should go without saying that nobody should ride in such a way that they knock you or anyone else flying, but if they are already speeding past you on the pavement I’m not convinced that a new law about phones will modify their behaviour one iota.
 

Cycleops

Legendary Member
Location
Accra, Ghana
So what's the penalty going to be? It's a pretty serious matter for your wallet and driving license in a car but what will it be on a bike? Fixed penalty I should think. How much? £50? £75 £100? Maybe a lot more if it's going to be a deterrent.
 
Top Bottom