Motoring Groups Angered by Plans to Make Drivers Legally Responsible for Any Accident Involving Cyclists or Pedestrians
UK: Motoring groups have slammed plans reportedly being put forward by government advisers that would make the driver automatically liable in a collision between a motor vehicle and a pedestrian or cyclist.
The plan is supposedly meant to boost green transport but according to AA president Edmund King making someone liable for the purposes of compensation and insurance based on what vehicle they were driving "will not help harmony on the roads."
"If a cyclist passed a red light, collided with a car and someone was killed it would be the driver's fault. The proposal is totally and utterly unacceptable," said the Association of British Motorists' Brian Gregory.
alongside some other proposals to make it ok to cyclists to ignore road signs like one-way streets and stop signs. It's just going to end in utter chaos if it gets implemented, we'll have cyclists doing whatever they feel like, cars going over them and smashing into each other to avoid them and court cases everywhere prosecuting people who were doing nothing wrong.
On the up-side, it would be easy to protest, just get a bike and ride into the side of government and state-owned vehicles, then sue, because naturally, it's their fault. A few cuts and bruises would be worth a nice big settlement or two.
But we Americans eat a lot of bull**** laws too. That does sound pretty bad though, but what kind of convincing power do lawyers have over there? I know here the right lawyer could make Hitler and Barney the dinosaur look like friends.
Somehow I don't see idiots getting away with breaking the law. Cars don't have infinite power to avoid all incidents caused or initiated by someone else.
I am a motorcyclist in the U.S. and many people disregard us, BUT I also see irresponsible peds who will step in front of a vehicle moving down the street. I think 'Right-of-way' laws are the answer, where the vehicle or bike or person already in the road has the right. But do not jump in front of me and say it is my responsiblity to stop. Whatever happened to "Look both ways before crossing the street?
I couldn't imagine that where I live. It's already insane with cyclists and pedestrians. For the most part it is already like that for pedestrians. Cyclists are generally thought to be moving too fast, so they can be to blame. I was told in driving school that if you hit a pedestrian, it's your fault. Not sure if that's true. I've had pedestrians run out from in between cars parked parallel on the road, at night, wearing all black. You can't see them until they're in your way. I think if they get hit, they should have to pay for damages to the car.
I'm not used to such fanfare about my comments and honestly, I worried this one might be a bit over the line.
It's true though, this proposed legislation flies in the face of common sense.
I try not to walk any more than I must these days but from a young age I was always a fan of two wheeled transport. I raced BMX and rode a 12 speed touring bike to work, school and virtually everywhere I went on the weekends all the way up to and even after the time I got my first car. (For those of you older bicycle geeks.. I raced a P.K. Ripper and rode a 12 speed Bianca)
Nowdays, the only thing that has changed is the fact that I tend to prefer an internal combustion engine on my two wheeled transportation. ;)
So yeah, this proposal really pisses me off. Not so much that attacks cyclists as the fact it removes personal responsibility from one group and burdens another with it.
This sort of bullshit, pandering legislation is what is tearing apart the true moral framework of both the US and the UK and it needs to be stopped.
...I drove trucks in NYC I used to wish we were allowed to plow down moron pedestrians who crossed against the light/jay walked and made no effort to gtfo the way once they saw us coming. wishful thinking, I know. Having had more than one bike pop out from nowhere almost causing an accident through no fault of my own, I can say without question....this is friggin' ridiculous!!
some law maker, a member of their family or friends were walking or cycling and got hit by a motor vehicle. so, the idiot talked the other idiots into writting that law.
Sadly we already have this in our islands, just ask any motorcyclist that has faced prosecution and had to battle dishonest and bigoted people who only hear what the press and politicians, say about their responsibility, on our roads, ( Ted Herath inm particular was only too ready to massage the truth whenever the matter of motorcycling was raised, even calling for them to be banned although all actual statistics show that the majority of accidents that involve bike riders was actually caused by the four wheelers "I never saw him gov", is the normal response, to any police officer attending any bike /car acciodent. Or the lawyers who say that a cycle rider was not wearing a helmet and the compensation should be reduced because they contributed to their own injuries, all of this is against the facts that a cycle helmet is proven to be ineffective on any adult, when an impact exceeds 10 miles an hour, this is the evidence not opinionm, but you try to get any jury to understand that this is the case, after all, "everyone knows that helmets save lives" NO they dont, so we face an assumption thaty we are at fault, in practise, but I do not hear any car driver saying this assumption should be challenged, wonder why not ? So forgive me if I do not cry when they are asked to drive with more care for other users after all they must unmderstand that they are driving a one ton vehicle, and that will cause far more damage to their opposite number in any accident, and that they are the cause, of this vehicle being there.
Idf this were Egypt the law would say that if they were tourists, and involved in any accident, they were at fault, because the accident could not have happened, if they were not in their country to begin with, it is the same logic that says if they were not in a car then the damage would be lessened substantially, which is perfectly correct, and the same logic that the great unwashed have applied to motorcyclists and cyclists for decades, about time that car drivers faced the same standard of responsibility, that other road users have for decades... So no sympathy from me, as a driver and rider. accept it, your responsibility... or do not drive anymore. All car driving damages people who are walkers, and the environment, from emmissions, even when they are not hit, kills more than smoking, or drinking ever has, ( sometimes even by drunk driving ).
But nobody has ever suggested that they be banned, but it is time they faced their weight in damages from the fact that they elect to transport themselves with what is an antisocial tasnk, that will have consequences, for any who are in collission, with them, whether that collission is caused by the drivers or by the cyclists, the balance of safety is skewed in favour of the car driver, and against the other road user, this is no more than a fair rebalancing of the weight of damages to the drivers of these one or two ton, mankillers.
Any honest judgement should balance the responsibility of minimising the damages, done to other road users, and those who think that they bear no responsibility, while driving these metal, motorised hammers, around streets that are used by unprotected pedestrians or cyclists, they are the ones most likely to cause damages to others when they are in any accident and they are the ones who should take every opportunity to minimise the risk of damages to others less well protected than they themselves are, or take the responsibility that they by virtue of their choosing to drive, will cause more damages and face this fact that they should not have any more of the law in their favour, but less, and more responsibuility for redressing this imbalance in injuries to others....
