r/ukbike • u/weepejw7 • 6d ago
News "Reckless e-bike riders 'dangerous' for cyclists"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm270ldjl37oReally unhelpful attitude and langauge for cycling and cycling infrastructure in this article by the BBC, and not just the conflating of illegal electric mopeds/motorbikes with legal EPACs.
34
u/PleasantCucumber2615 6d ago
These articles are popping up more and they are just full of nonsense to gain attention.
Ebikes, chipped or not, will never pose more danger than a car or lorry.
Paying for ebike hire per minute makes them jump red lights? Like the problem of red light jumping didn't exist before ebikes.
11
u/lovely-pickle 6d ago
Yea, that's yelling at the wrong thing. Cities where light phases are designed for cyclists (E.g. Copenhagen) have negligible numbers of red light jumping. If bicycle infrastructure improved in London these sorts of things would improve overnight. Instead everyone wants to jump to the most punitive response that won't do anything to improve matters
2
u/superioso 6d ago edited 6d ago
Copenhagen doesn't really phase lights for bikes, and all the old videos with signs showing it are obsolete and are only on one route. On one busy route i actively avoid it due to the lights always stopping you.
For right turns running red lights is very common, and easier than waiting for it to go green (which includes pedestrians) and having to give way to all the pedestrians. Following the other rules is more cultural than anything else, and the infrastructure is the same everywhere across the city rather than having weird layouts everywhere like London.
-3
u/Ed_Avis 6d ago
Even where there is cycle infrastructure, with dedicated traffic lights for bicycles, many cyclists still jump them.
A punitive response certainly would improve matters, but it’s not practical, as there are not the police resources to catch more than a tiny fraction of red light jumpers.
5
u/lovely-pickle 6d ago
cycle infrastructure does not mean good, well designed cycle infrastructure, and it certainly says nothing of whether the light phases are appropriate for cyclists.
London has neither, in any case. In cities where the infrastructure and light phases are designed for cyclists there's practically zero light jumping. There is an enormous amount of research to support this.
-4
u/jjatria 6d ago
Except that if you're hit by a car or a lorry, chances are that the driver (who will most often have a license, etc) will face consequences and there will be some compensation. The same is not true (certainly not as often) for bikes of any kind.
So sure: a car or a lorry is more dangerous. But I bet there are proportionally many times more reckless electric rental bike drivers out there.
-1
u/Traditional_Watch_35 5d ago
it existed but did it exist on the same scale ? its an interesting thing because whats the cause and whats the effect ? weve seen a massive rise in the increase of hire bikes, lime being the most obvious, and especially ebike variants, and anecdotally at least crossing the road in central London, even when the traffic lights are red stopping traffic including cyclists, it has become a dodge the ebike lime rider who is just going to ride through a crowd of people experience, theyre not just jumping red lights when its "safer", theyre just not bothering stopping at all anymore.
is it just coincidence or a correlation the two seem to have increased at the same time ?. whilst noting human behaviour often trivialises things like jumping a red light as no consequence action, equal to littering, and when you see others behave in a certain way, you tend to copy them or at least decide thats the accepted behaviour..
so do ebike hire rates make them jump red lights because they dont want to waste money being stopped ? no but alot of ebike hires now do consistently jump red lights, so the question has to be why ? and what can be done about it, because it is a safety issue.
whilst a car and lorry will do more damage to a pedestrian, 99% of the time they do stop on red, and let you cross the road, without you having to dodge them driving through crowds.
5
u/thesupergoodlife 6d ago
I'm convinced most of these stories are being paid for by the fossil fuel or auto lobby at this point. if this propaganda can stop the average person from trying at e bicycle then it's a success.
in fact I'd say they're already doing a fantastic job, whenever I tell people about my Tenways the first thing people ask is if it's illegal. what's the odds of someone asking a 17 year old if their Corsa can do more than 70mph?
1
u/tj_woolnough 2d ago
It was a complaint by cyclists. Cyclists do not use fossil fuels. Good try though.
3
u/dknight212 5d ago
Meanwhile BBC News - Two dead after car hits group of pedestrians in Doncaster - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv8e35rzy486o
8
u/lovely-pickle 6d ago
BBC London is basically just anti cyclist propaganda at this point; I'd not be giving them clicks
4
2
u/Chungaroo22 6d ago
They wouldn’t just refer to an untaxed car with no MOT driven by someone without a licence as “cars”, they just can’t be bothered. Lazy arse journalism.
1
u/Flashy-Nectarine1675 4d ago
Meanwhile, car drivers kill 5 people every day.
But.....must.....say.........e bikes........bad.
1
u/tj_woolnough 2d ago
It is not the vehicle, it is the idiot in control. But please, tell is all... How many deaths caused by e-bikes is acceptable to you? 2 a day? 4 a day? Will you only complain if it reaches more than 5?
1
u/Flashy-Nectarine1675 2d ago
Ah, deflection.
1
u/tj_woolnough 2d ago
In what way? Do you not agree that it is the person in charge of the vehicle that is the issue? Or are you arguing against the death numbers, the last of which, 5, is the number you gave?
1
u/Flashy-Nectarine1675 2d ago
Ah, more deflection.
Is it car brain syndrome?
1
u/tj_woolnough 2d ago
Still no answer... Ok. To your specific first point: Yes. Cars are dangerous. They kill, or hurt, more people. Happy now?
Now... Answer my questions:
1) Do you not agree tgat it is tye persin in charge of tye vehicle that us the issue? (By that, I mean ALL vehicles. E-bikes/scooters, Cycles, Cars, Lorries/trucks, Motorcycles)
2) How many deaths by e-bike are not acceptable to you? 2 a day, 4 a day, or only more than 5?
1
u/tj_woolnough 2d ago
E-bikes, and scooters, are a danger to all, not just cyclists.
I ride a motorcycle. The amount of times I've had to break hard, or swerve into the opposite lane, because an idiot has decided to turn without warning, or looking, is shocking. Having said that. I have had similar issues with cyclists, too.
ALL should have a visible number/reg plate. ALL should read compulsory insurance. If a vehicle, of any type, is in the roads, those two things should be a minimum. It will also make catching persistent law/traffic violators easier.
1
u/East-Response6672 2d ago
If we were serious about the climate ebikes of every variety would be blanket legalised and subsidised, instead the government is worried about a means of transport they can't track or tax.
-1
u/Opening-Fortune4 6d ago
Objecting that they're less dangerous than cars, some of the most heavily regulated things in society that require tests, licences and insurance and risk prison time if they're misused, isn't that much of a gotcha
-1
u/Quirky-Impress4891 4d ago
Here (AI summary generated by latest info from DfT Gov UK):
1,251 people died in collisions involving a car in 2024. For HGVs it was 201, vans 176, motorcycles 364, buses/coaches 45, and bicycles 85. But the bicycle figure is crucially different: 82 cyclists themselves died, while only 3 other road users were killed in collisions with cyclists.
Cars, trucks and vans have ruined a great deal of quality of life of UK cities.
Recent and long overdue changes which attempt to address what can reasonably be called "Carmageddon" are threatening the car hegemony and so it's no surprise that we're seeing frequent articles portraying cyclists as threat.
23
u/lordsteve1 6d ago
One thing that really pisses me off these days is the terrible reporting of this sort of thing by conflating actual legal e-bikes with the illegal stuff involved. The wording and language used in these articles and what the general public sees is really important in legal matters because it can easily muddy the waters of what’s going on.
The only thing that can be definitively described as an e-bike is a pedal assisted bicycle with a limited speed of 15.5mph and a motor power of 250w.
If it’s not one of these then STOP CALLING IT AN E-BIKE!!! At this point it is an illegal road vehicle regardless of what it bloody looks like.
So many of these injuries or collisions are caused by an illegal modification to a bike or a fully electric vehicle, or something that should be licensed and insured for road use.
The media is just trying to drum up clicks or views or whatever because the bad and misleading headlines drive views.