Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Live blog: Netherlands to ban cyclists from using phones while riding; 12 hours, 100 miles, 12 years old! LEJOG in a recumbent bathtub + more

All the cycling news from this site and beyond…

Please give the live blog a good few seconds to load. Try refreshing the page when your patience expires.

 

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

12 comments

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet | 5 years ago
7 likes

BTBS, just because cars cause more carnage than bicycles doesn't give cyclists licence to do any old daft shit they want. Cyclists on mobiles are dicks. If you use the road, pay attention. 

Avatar
davel replied to Yorkshire wallet | 5 years ago
2 likes
Yorkshire wallet wrote:

BTBS, just because cars cause more carnage than bicycles doesn't give cyclists licence to do any old daft shit they want. Cyclists on mobiles are dicks. If you use the road, pay attention. 

But it does justify calls for proportionality; for the enforcement and punishment to correspond to the risk.

Avatar
fukawitribe replied to davel | 5 years ago
1 like

davel wrote:
Yorkshire wallet wrote:

BTBS, just because cars cause more carnage than bicycles doesn't give cyclists licence to do any old daft shit they want. Cyclists on mobiles are dicks. If you use the road, pay attention. 

But it does justify calls for proportionality; for the enforcement and punishment to correspond to the risk.

I've not seen anything yet in this change to suggest a lack of proportionality in either - but i've also not seen the associated guidance for the legislation.

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet replied to davel | 5 years ago
1 like
davel wrote:
Yorkshire wallet wrote:

BTBS, just because cars cause more carnage than bicycles doesn't give cyclists licence to do any old daft shit they want. Cyclists on mobiles are dicks. If you use the road, pay attention. 

But it does justify calls for proportionality; for the enforcement and punishment to correspond to the risk.

The risk is you ride one hand on bars, not paying attention and die? Remember that drunk woman who died, not in full control?

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds replied to Yorkshire wallet | 5 years ago
0 likes

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

BTBS, just because cars cause more carnage than bicycles doesn't give cyclists licence to do any old daft shit they want. Cyclists on mobiles are dicks. If you use the road, pay attention. 

More people die because of head phone wearing phone using pedestrians than same on bikes, if we are to have a ban for one group then surely if the reasoning is to make that safer (for whom??) then we must apply that to all persons especially those that do the most harm to others and to themselves. people on bikes are the bottom of the list when it comes to harming oneself and others whilst doing their activity and indeed also whilst listening to music and/or using a phone or in some cases in the wilds of Kingston upon Hull, rolling a woodbine, whilst on the phone riding no handed and still avoding weverything.one. 

More than any of the other groups cyclists are aware of their vulnerability (well the helmetless ones at least), thus even with these other 'distractions' they are still safer to themselves and others are without.

A ban is discriminatory, bias, illogical and without factual merit.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to BehindTheBikesheds | 5 years ago
2 likes

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

More people die because of head phone wearing phone using pedestrians than same on bikes

Where do you get that from?

I'd suggest motorcyclists are also pretty aware of their vulnerability based on comments I have seen them make.

Avatar
hairyderriere replied to BehindTheBikesheds | 5 years ago
1 like

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

BTBS, just because cars cause more carnage than bicycles doesn't give cyclists licence to do any old daft shit they want. Cyclists on mobiles are dicks. If you use the road, pay attention. 

More people die because of head phone wearing phone using pedestrians than same on bikes, if we are to have a ban for one group then surely if the reasoning is to make that safer (for whom??) then we must apply that to all persons especially those that do the most harm to others and to themselves. people on bikes are the bottom of the list when it comes to harming oneself and others whilst doing their activity and indeed also whilst listening to music and/or using a phone or in some cases in the wilds of Kingston upon Hull, rolling a woodbine, whilst on the phone riding no handed and still avoding weverything.one. 

More than any of the other groups cyclists are aware of their vulnerability (well the helmetless ones at least), thus even with these other 'distractions' they are still safer to themselves and others are without.

A ban is discriminatory, bias, illogical and without factual merit.

 

Figures and statistics please.

Avatar
Miller | 5 years ago
4 likes

Enjoy your freedom, cute Morning Commute infant, in a year or two when you're cycling to school the fun police will on your case and demanding you wear a helmet and have a number plate.

Avatar
Hirsute | 5 years ago
2 likes

Well Hector Rees-Davies , no point having a helmet on if you don't wear it properly.

Avatar
vonhelmet replied to Hirsute | 5 years ago
1 like

hirsute wrote:

Well Hector Rees-Davies , no point having a helmet on if you don't wear it properly.

At least it’s buckled on. People riding round with them undone never cease to bewilder me.

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds | 5 years ago
2 likes

The Dutch already ban cyclists from using headphones, why not ban motorists from having music and using phones, oh wait, they already do yet deaths increased again last year with 60+ deaths at junctions/crossways between cycling infra and roads. The Dutch are going backwards in their thinking if they believe this will do anything, a few anecdotal incidents and one death equals a ban. Why stop there, let's ban pedestrians from walking and using a mobile phone, surely cycling is simply an extension of walking, well that's what it's supposed to be promoted as, a basic every day activity.

I bet more people on foot have died due to using mobile phones, oh and policing it, that will be hot compared to motorists no doubt, just like in Australia where helmetless or bell free cyclists are hauled over the coals for a fine the same as a speeding motorist.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to BehindTheBikesheds | 5 years ago
0 likes

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Why stop there, let's ban pedestrians from walking and using a mobile phone, surely cycling is simply an extension of walking, well that's what it's supposed to be promoted as, a basic every day activity.

Not a bad shout if we have got to the point where consideration is being given to pavements being installed with warnings!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/03/glue-road-signs-floor-zombie...

Latest Comments