Let me say immediately that not all
cyclists behave illegally and are vile in their temper and conduct. Such
behaviour only characterizes a minority. What I do say however is that it is
not entirely exclusive to a minority but, like some psychological disease of
the mind, break out at any time inflicting
itself on just about anyone who
rides a bike in the form of some random act of bad temper, illegality or
violence. Such psychotic or paranoid behaviour is not a general attribute. Something that occurs all the time. It is a
thing that may be best described as potential,
always lurking below the surface and likely to erupt as an impetuous act of illegality
such as going through a red traffic light, turning without signalling, jumping
a curb or riding at speed along a pavement crowded with pedestrians.
The question is not whether such things are
done but why cyclists do them. For one thing riding a bike on a pavement is
illegal and dangerous to others while making a turn without signalling can have
serious consequences. Worse still, jumping a red light against fast moving
traffic in the vicinity can be potentially fatal, not only for the transgressor
but for others forced to slap on emergency brakes. As said not all bike riders
behave like this but many undoubtedly do. They take dangerous risks. Do things
that are wrong and mostly with the knowledge that what they are doing is wrong
yet still do it. The reason perhaps is not because they simply don’t care or
are wilfully neglectful. Not at all. A more plausible explanation is that they
adopt a certain degree of flexibility in their conduct in knowing what is right
and what is or wrong. What they can do and can’t.
Right or wrong become bendable concepts, according
to circumstances or mood or maybe both. Conduct then become a matter of
judgement. Not what should or should not be done but what they can do safely or
judge to have the least risk or element of danger. Ultimately such loose or
flexible judgement becomes a habit, a kind of game. Playing dice if you will
with their lives or those of others only they don’t see it like that. The game
is theirs. They play it. It becomes who they are and the game therefore cannot
be criticized. To criticize their conduct on road or pavement becomes a
criticism of themselves because they and their conduct have become one and the
same thing. If to others it seems they take risks and do crazy things it’s
because they’ve become chancers. People who don’t give a damn.
Theirs is an exercise in freedom to do
their own thing and their bike is the vehicle on which they ride their own
psychic spontaneity. It becomes a means to create a new and unchecked Them. An
agglomeration of judgements based on their control of a moving machine. Each
rider is literally in their own individual saddle and if the bicycle is a
means, the ‘ride’ they gain from it is either a confirmation of what they already
are or a vehicle helping them to become something else. Riding a bicycle for
many is liberating. True, it may only take them to work and back on the cheap
or into the countryside along a canal or river towpath or give them a ride through
town. Whatever the case such mobility can provide an innervating solitary
freedom. A feeling of control and empowerment, especially facing a world of
work within which they have no power and are personally visible as part of a
team. In this sense time on a bike is a precious individuation they have to
sacrifice the moment they go through the door. A preparation in the form of a
psychological enhancement before they give up the wholeness of self. That
journey into work each morning is a big deal and the ride home at the end even
bigger.
While they’re on their bike though they can
if they wish indulge in acts of spontaneity. Play occasional ‘tricks’. Take
little liberties or short cuts deviating from sensibility. No harm doing this
or that if it’s safe so they think! Throughout it all alas there’s always a big
fly in the ointment. The existence of others! Those they must share the street
or towpath with! Pedestrians on the pavement, bad enough, but then those
dreaded swine on the road. Motorists! As said, all bike riders are hard wired
for pathology, much the same as all human beings, yet on their bikes they can
become potential problems, in conduct, temper and temperament. This is only
logical as there is no real check or force to control it.
There are two fundamental differences
between cyclists and other road users. Cyclists have no protection around them
in the form of a metal structure and are therefore far more vulnerable to
injury, added to which two wheels are a less balanced structure than four.
Their often dangerous behaviour is then all the more surprising and foolhardy given
the element of risk compounded by this lack of protection. Equally important
however is the fact that cyclists are anonymous. Their vehicles carry no
identification such as a number plate or any other official mark of
registration. All other road using vehicles carry such registration, except electric
mobility scooters that is. Their users are identifiable, cyclists are not. This
gives the cyclist an unlimited license to behave in any manner they choose.
They can indeed behave illegally without any fear of identification and
apprehension. A privilege each has over all other road users. And while
pedestrians carry no license they are nonetheless vulnerable because if hit or
knocked over they are incapable of apprehending such a mobile assailant if the
cyclist continues on their way at speed.
Cyclists on the other hand are able to
identify and therefore complain about the conduct of other road users if they
wish and increasing numbers are doing so it seems. Motorists however don’t have
that luxury. Cyclists are thus empowered to complain and act against other road
users and given the febrile climate in the national psychology which in the
last decade has seen a sharp increase of false allegation and complaint made to
the police, such an imbalance between cyclist and motorist has become one of
the greatest dangers existing on British roads today. Cyclists, either by
design or default, have been empowered to commit all forms of negative and
dangerous conduct without question or check and many are only too well aware of
their empowerment.
There is then what seems to be a genuine
war taking place on the roads and pavements of our country. On one side is an
anonymous brigade of what may best be described as two wheel vigilantes with
neo-fascist tendencies who think they can behave as they please on our streets
and roads without apprehension. On the other is the car or truck driver sick to
death of the plastic helmeted lizard lickers regularly giving them two fingers
for every slick and tricky in and out of moving vehicles that gives them
regular palpitation close under the wheels only to see them emerge again giving
them yet another big finger.
Let’s call it for what it is. The problem
is men on bikes, not women. Women cyclists, research shows, reveal a far more
equitable temperament both in relation to their machine and to the circumstances
surrounding its use. This is primarily functional, centered around transport
and pleasure. Both uses eminently practical. For men however the story is different.
The main group of users fall between the age range thirty to fifty and fit
neatly in the lower middle class. While those below this age range, mainly
students, tend to speed they are less inclined to bother pedestrians on
pavements. Those at the upper end of the larger group are more problematic and
have entered popular culture as The
Menopause Mob and not without reason. Believing themselves to be better
cyclists than most they consider their conduct on our roads above criticism and
can therefore be highly aggressive when taken to task. It is strongly
recommended that they should not be approached
by members of the public if perceived to be acting in a dangerous manner.
This group in particular is visibly
becoming a cult with a strong attachment to designer helmets, clothing and
cycling gadgets. They race around London getting to work not because it’s cheap
but because they like being seen. It’s a kind of Tory, Liberal-Democrat thing.
Toe-rags on wheels if you like. And with Lib-Dems of course it’s doing their bit to save the planet or
any other pathetic shit they can come up with. In recent days however, after an
unusually high number of road accident fatalities involving cyclists, there has
been an extensive police blitz in areas where some of these have occurred. These
checks have resulted in many cyclists being cautioned for red light jumping along
with other careless and unsafe conduct.
If motorists understand anything with respect
to cyclists it’s the absolute need to drive with great care and safety. For
financial reasons as much as anything else. All motor accidents cost. They
result in higher insurance premiums, something that does not affect cyclists who
are not required to insure themselves or their bikes . Quite frankly,
absolving cyclists from insurance is ludicrous, especially in matters of third
party liability. For example, if ever a cyclist is deemed responsible for
causing an accident, they do not have to pay the person they knock over or
injure for the damage they cause. So not only are cyclists and their bikes
allowed anonymity, they are financially removed from insurance against accident
liability. Wait, it gets even better! All motor vehicles are required to carry current
certification of roadworthiness. Failure to do so while in use is deemed a
criminal offence. Bikes however, while using the road, are not required to be
roadworthy! Such as possessing adequately functioning brakes for example.
Furthermore, in law, there is no requirement for any check on such
roadworthiness! It’s quite okay to ride on a road surrounded by moving traffic
without having any adequate means to suddenly stop! And what joy, the same
applies on pavements, never mind babies in prams.
Talk about arses in the jam! No identification
or vehicle registration… No requirement for insurance… No safety requirement
for roadworthiness… Now all of this wouldn’t be too bad if they were just
having fun whizzing up and down mountain tracks only we’re not talking weekend
leisure here but daily use on public highways often full of large fast moving
trucks and often in dangerous wet weather conditions to say nothing of ice.
Consider the above factors then consider the circumstances within which
cyclists operate, particularly without personal protection, and you’ll realise
that there’s a strange lack of connectivity here. It’s like there’s a strict
legal framework for one set of road users and absolutely none for another, both
of whom share the same common ground.
Another thing abundantly clear is that
there’s absolutely no love lost between cyclist and motorist. Drivers of
commercial vehicles such as delivery trucks use them for their work. They make
up part of their job. Cyclists use their bikes as a preferred means of
transportation. More often than not they don’t have to. There may be other
options so using a bike is a matter of choice. It’s a luxury most motorists
don’t have. Riding a bike then, in almost every way, is a luxury. On for which
cyclists should be grateful. Yet there they go, hurtling along pavements giving
the finger to people they only just miss and doing likewise to car owners and
truck drivers before whizzing away thinking they’ve got one over on you. It all
begs the question. Who the hell are these people who think they can do this?
Well we know who some of them are. There’s
David Cameron and Boris Johnson for starters. Two Tory-boys who spend time
posing on bikes because they think it makes them look popular. Well I have a
message for you. If you think you’re being populist and blokey, think again.
Your fellow cyclist electorate is detested by most British motorists for what
they are allowed to get away with.
The solution to the whole cycling conundrum
is simple. All owners of bicycles should be legally required to register them
on a national database and carry such registration as a non-detachable number
plate fixed to their vehicle. Such a registration would contain full personal
details of ownership such as name, address and occupation of the owner. It
would also include details of a compulsory annual check for roadworthiness to
be paid for by the owner along with a fee for registration. Furthermore, all
owners of bikes would be required to insure their vehicles against third party
liability for accident. These requirements would provide a serious boost to the
British economy both in revenue raised by the Treasury and in the growth of the
insurance industry. And most important, it would give serious pdrotection both
to cyclists and other road users along with pedestrians. Cyclists might even be
compelled to pay some form of road tax to help maintain roads that they use
just like everyone else. Such measures would
certainly make Britain a more prosperous place.
David Cameron and George Osborne please
note. Here is a way of raising billions for the Exchequer. It would help the
country get over its financial crisis and part of the money raised could be
used to fund apprenticeships and scholarships for young people. License and tax
cyclists, and insist they’re insured. It will make you popular with millions!
No comments:
Post a Comment