20mph Did you know, FACT!

[Pinhead]

The 20mph limits do NOT apply to cyclists

Just call your local police force to confirm this

[Mike Sales]

I think that is well known to cyclists, at least those who read this site.
Don't take the police as an authoritive source on road traffic law though. Many seem to believe the motorists' Alternative Highway Code.

[TrevA]

It’s not just 20mph speed limits, no speed limits apply to cyclists, they only apply to motor vehicles or to be more accurate mechanically propelled vehicles.

[rareposter]

The 20mph limits do NOT apply to cyclists

Just call your local police force to confirm this

I'm fairly certain my local police force wouldn't have a clue and they're renowned as being fairly anti-cyclist anyway (very low score on following up helmet-cam submissions of dangerous driving).

But yes, speed limits (in general, not just 20mph) do not apply to cyclists because there's no law requiring a cyclist to have a calibrated speedometer. However you can still be prosecuted for dangerous riding and I know that CTT (the organisation that looks after Time Trials in England and Wales) has also said that Time Trials that use roads newly classed as 20mph should no longer take place just because it looks bad if cyclists are racing through, head down.

Richmond Park in SW London (a hugely popular circuit for cyclists) has tried on various occasions to insist that their park speed limit of 20mph does apply to cyclists before usually giving up and just asking cyclists to be responsible - not caning through a queue of traffic for example!

[Pinhead]

You learn something new every day thanks

[Pinhead]

The 20mph limits do NOT apply to cyclists

Just call your local police force to confirm this

I'm fairly certain my local police force wouldn't have a clue and they're renowned as being fairly anti-cyclist anyway (very low score on following up helmet-cam submissions of dangerous driving).

But yes, speed limits (in general, not just 20mph) do not apply to cyclists because there's no law requiring a cyclist to have a calibrated speedometer. However you can still be prosecuted for dangerous riding and I know that CTT (the organisation that looks after Time Trials in England and Wales) has also said that Time Trials that use roads newly classed as 20mph should no longer take place just because it looks bad if cyclists are racing through, head down.

Richmond Park in SW London (a hugely popular circuit for cyclists) has tried on various occasions to insist that their park speed limit of 20mph does apply to cyclists before usually giving up and just asking cyclists to be responsible - not caning through a queue of traffic for example!

[Pinhead]

The 20mph limits do NOT apply to cyclists

Just call your local police force to confirm this

I'm fairly certain my local police force wouldn't have a clue and they're renowned as being fairly anti-cyclist anyway (very low score on following up helmet-cam submissions of dangerous driving).

But yes, speed limits (in general, not just 20mph) do not apply to cyclists because there's no law requiring a cyclist to have a calibrated speedometer. However you can still be prosecuted for dangerous riding and I know that CTT (the organisation that looks after Time Trials in England and Wales) has also said that Time Trials that use roads newly classed as 20mph should no longer take place just because it looks bad if cyclists are racing through, head down.

Richmond Park in SW London (a hugely popular circuit for cyclists) has tried on various occasions to insist that their park speed limit of 20mph does apply to cyclists before usually giving up and just asking cyclists to be responsible - not caning through a queue of traffic for example!

THAT was on youtube this morning, GCN, cycling they were discussing time trials and the danger it causes AND new ideas (NOT in the UK) on legislation regarding dangerous cycling.

[Cugel]

The 20mph limits do NOT apply to cyclists

Just call your local police force to confirm this

What does apply to cyclists concerning speed, and to all other road users, is the law of good sense*. This states that going too fast for the conditions and your skill level is potentially dangerous, to you and others, so you shouldn't.

What is "too fast"? If one doesn't know, one shouldn't be cycling on that particular road.

How do you learn what's too fast for a particular bit of road and your skill level? You can learn the easy way or the hard way.

Let's not say "common sense" as this is rarely common and often not sensible at all.

[Pinhead]

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... r-cylists/

I 100% agree that something needs to be done but how would they police it in day to day life

[rareposter]

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... r-cylists/

I 100% agree that something needs to be done but how would they police it in day to day life

That's an article from last year and it got soundly rubbished by everyone (after the usual round of media frenzy - that RAC article is basically cribbed straight from the Daily Mail).

Shapps is no longer Transport Secretary and the DfT have repeatedly said they won't introduce any such requirements. It gets trotted out every once in a while when the Government want to hide some scandal or other because they can rely on the topic occupying the media for 2-3 frantic days of opinion columns, radio phone ins and angry letters from readers.

Then it'll go away for another year.

And I 100% disagree with you that "something needs to be done".
Other than far better policing and sentencing of dangerous driving.

[a.twiddler]

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... r-cylists/

I 100% agree that something needs to be done but how would they police it in day to day life

Old news from a previous transport minister. Just a distraction to grab headlines to draw attention away from the real problems facing the country. All very London-centric and has been shown many times to be unenforcable in the UK and elsewhere. Focusing on the actions on a minority of cyclists to justify drastic measures against the rest is the epitome of poor government. This topic has risen so many times and has died a death an equal number of times, due to the cost of setting up a system not being anywhere near any revenue that might be received.
More police, more civil servants to run new departments, and all the other costs associated with the ideas of compulsory road tax (presumably £0), insurance, number plates, enforcing speed limits on cyclists. Things like red light jumping and failing to comply with traffic signs are already covered by existing law. I'm boring myself just repeating all this which has all been said before by various other posters over the years.

[Pinhead]

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... r-cylists/

I 100% agree that something needs to be done but how would they police it in day to day life

That's an article from last year and it got soundly rubbished by everyone (after the usual round of media frenzy - that RAC article is basically cribbed straight from the Daily Mail).

Shapps is no longer Transport Secretary and the DfT have repeatedly said they won't introduce any such requirements. It gets trotted out every once in a while when the Government want to hide some scandal or other because they can rely on the topic occupying the media for 2-3 frantic days of opinion columns, radio phone ins and angry letters from readers.

Then it'll go away for another year.

And I 100% disagree with you that "something needs to be done".
Other than far better policing and sentencing of dangerous driving.

That IS something

[Psamathe]

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... r-cylists/

I 100% agree that something needs to be done but how would they police it in day to day life

That's an article from last year and it got soundly rubbished by everyone (after the usual round of media frenzy - that RAC article is basically cribbed straight from the Daily Mail).

Shapps is no longer Transport Secretary and the DfT have repeatedly said they won't introduce any such requirements. It gets trotted out every once in a while when the Government want to hide some scandal or other because they can rely on the topic occupying the media for 2-3 frantic days of opinion columns, radio phone ins and angry letters from readers.

Then it'll go away for another year.

And I 100% disagree with you that "something needs to be done".
Other than far better policing and sentencing of dangerous driving.

That IS something

It is something unrelated to your response of "something needs to be done" in response to a 20 mph speed limit for cyclists.

It is a daft idea and was clearly never going to be taken seriously. Daft at so many levels, impractical for so many reasons and having no impact on anybody's safety ...

Ian

[cycle tramp]

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motori ... r-cylists/

I 100% agree that something needs to be done but how would they police it in day to day life

.... http://www.bikeprovo.org/line-of-sight-premier/

The slightly more .. er... just more... side of cycling (please note this video shows criminal damage and the discharge of fire arms in public places.)... its like the daily Mail's worst nightmare sound track by motorhead, and all the better for it.

[cycle tramp]

Just call your local police force to confirm this

On the other hand please don't. Having worked with the police control rooms over a number of years, they really don't need any more calls, especially if its about general enquiries which could be easily checked on line.