Cyclists ?

Question

Am I missing something or what?

Cyclists

Pay no road tax

Pay no insurance

Have no compulsory training

Do not have to wear helmet

No age limit for going on the road and endangering other trained road users

They have designated roads built for them

Motor cyclists have to (and car drivers)

Pay Road Tax

Pay insurance

Wear Helmet (not car drivers)

Again motorist pays the bill

Let’s have a bit more equality

Another reason I now live abroad

The country is upside down

Answer 1

Yes we are upside down and yes they should pay taxes the same as we do to use the roads..............

Answer 2

did you just notice that.

Answer 3

where i live its all narrow winding roads and you often see large groups of cyclists in their stupid power ranger outfits hogging the road and causing long tailbacks , and they dont give a toss. ban the lot of them.

Answer 4

You're just jealous.

.

.

.

You could say the same stuff about pedestrians (in place of cyclists).

.

.

.

.

Answer 5

The basic problem is the few very arrogant cyclists who think they own the road when in fact they do not, who flout traffic laws even though they are subject to them, and who mow down pedestrians because they think they also own the footpaths.

The majority of cyclists are not in these categories so do not tar them all with a very jaundiced view.

Answer 6

Yep!

And if you hit a 17 year old girl while cycling and cause them fatal head injuries you get................a fine of £2200

If you hit someone while driving and caused them similar injuries you could get up to 14 years imprisonment

The whole country is on the p*ss

edit - lord darklaw - have you not seen the news in the past week?!

Answer 7

some of you need to take anger management 101.

A few bad apples can spoil the whole bunch.

I'm a avid cyclist and don't do any of the things mentioned. I obey the rules of the road and share the road as well. Cars share the road with motorcycles and they weave through traffic all the time. Do you get pissed at that as well. Cyclists use the road and enjoy the ride for health reasons, pleasure, as well as saving the environment. Maybe a few of you should get off you butts and try it. You may like it.

Answer 8

Another reason I ride a bike !!

Dave. May be if the 17year old was not drunk, was not on the road, or moved out of they way when shouted out then she would not have died

Answer 9

Biking is a lot easier and less dangerous than driving an automobile.

Answer 10

i hate cyclists they think they own the roads in there tight ugly looking suits

to the people who gave me the thumbs down its obvious you love there tacky tight showing it all suits

Answer 11

its good and bad, but some cyclists are crazy

Answer 12

You are indeed missing several points, the basic one being inaccurately equating moter vehicles with road use.

The points you complain of (but do not suggest solutions for) arose as sensible responses to developments as and when they occurred.

Remember - for hundreds of years, road users were pedestrians, horse riders, carters and herders. The basis of UK highway law developed accordingly.

When bicycles were invented and became common, they mingled with pedestrians, horses, carts, etc with no major problems, so no new legislation was made which was specific to them. The existing rules that all vehicles (carts) must carry lights at night and not be in a dangerous mechanical state were applied to them, leading to the requirement for brakes.

Because cycles are light, heavy carts were powered by horses (which out of self-preservation usually avoided crashing into things even if their drivers were totally incompentent or drunk) and both were slow, serious accidents were rare.

When motor vehicles became common, this gave rise to several new problems, including a major rise in serious road accidents, and criminals (robbers, etc) escaping in cars.

The requirements for training and insurence for drivers and registration of motor vehicles were brought in as a response. They were not applied to cyclists or pedestrians (or horses) because these did not cause the same problems.

The so-called 'road tax' is not really a road tax at all. A road tax, as exists in some countries, is a tax upon road use which is used to raise funds for road maintainence. This does not happen in the UK at all.  Highway maintainence is paid for mainly by local authorities (from council tax, etc) while motorways and trunk roads are maintained by the central government (from general funds).

Motor Vehicle Excise Duty (often called 'road tax') is simply a tax like any other. It is not used for road maintainence any more than Alcohol Excise Duty is used for maintaining pubs. Both just go into the government's general revenue.

Cyclists, just like other non-motorised road users e.g. pedestrians & horse-riders,  have never had to pay it because they are not using motor vehicles. (Just as lemonade drinkers do not pay alcohol tax).

Re: insurence, you miss the point that many cyclists are insured. They are simply not compelled to be. Most serious high-mileage cyclists are members of cycling associations such as the Cyclists Touring Club, London Cycling Campaign, racing groups, etc, which provide third-party cover as a membership benefit. This costs very little as claims are rare. Making it complusory would cost the taxpayer much more (in parlimentary and police time) than would be justified by the small benefits.

Re: helmets the oddity there is that car occupants are not even advised to wear them, although their risk of head injury is apparently greater than that of adult road cyclists. (Most serious cycling head injuries occur off roads, especially to children, mainly due to risky mountain biking and stunts).

Since most other contries have situations pretty similar to the one you seem to dislike here re. tax and insurence for cyclists, I wonder how moving abroad helped?

Answer 13

Cyclists

Pay no road tax: Bicycles cause no congestion, no pollution and no damage to road surfaces.

Pay no insurance: Bikes are not capable of causing damage or injury in the same way cars are.

Have no compulsory training: None should be needed, you can't make a child carry a license.

Do not have to wear helmet: It's a bicycle not a motorcycle.

No age limit for going on the road and endangering other trained road users

They have designated roads built for them: It is for motorists to look out for the safety of pedestrians; driving is a privilege not a right.

Edit* Dave, injuries caused by cyclists are treated in the same way as injuries caused by pedestrians, of which there are many.

Drivers causing serious injury commonly get away with token fines, it's not favoritism to cyclists.

Answer 14

I honestly belive Cyclists shouldnt be on the road, For everybodys saftey, When i was younger i used to bike 2miles to school, One day riding down a busy road (On the cycle track) a lorry almost flung me off the bike, Luckily i managed to swerve on the the pavement.

Another time, I was crossing a road, It was a red light, But a young bloke in a car, Carried on through the lights hit my back tire throwing me over the handle bars, I wasnt badly injured luckily, But had banged my head nastily and was bleeding, only one bloke from about 20cars backed up got

out of his car to help me up, I was 14 at the time.

Since then i refuse to go on the roads. I do think that they should have some responsibilty for road tax & should have to have insurance but only if they are cycling everyday.

Its not fair on people, Like me who only use their bike occasionally.