On a commuter level cycle routes into a city are a good idea particularly for those, kids, men and women, who are less confident in traffic.

The real answer though is to remove individual opinion over who has the most right to the road, and share as our parents should have taught us! If we all used the road as though every other road user was someone we loved then it would be fine...

Personally I don't think cycle lanes are the answer.

Cycle lanes do nothing to address the problem of wreckless, irresponsible drivers, or cyclists who don't concentrate or improve their bike skills. In fact once we are all shoved into a cycling lane they think that is problem solved ignoring the fact that - people park in them, they get full of rubbish, cars drive in them anyway, lull cyclists into a false sense of security etc etc. By the way I am a woman cyclist.

Cycle lanes can be an answer - if they're well designed. I don't use the 'don't care where you put the cyclists as long as they're not on the road' ones marked on the pavement. But the last few miles of my commute to work is on dedicated Sustrans trail and it absolutely solves the problem of reckless, irresponsible drivers by the simple expedient of keeping them a long way away from me. We just need more of them!

@ermintrude well said

@rhext - lucky you that sustran have solved your particular problem for that stretch, what about the others that can't use that route and are encountering drivers who are expecting and no doubt seeing less cyclists and potentially driving is a less cycle friendly manner because of it. It doesn't in any way at all solve the problem of reckless drivers by segregation, they're still out there. Where do we put segregated routes in an urban or heavily built up environment with space at a premium and little in the way of clear routes anmore?

I take the point about women cyclists obeying the law more (though from the POV of a completely law abiding male cyclist) but I think all of these groups would be doing as good, if not better to educate women (all) cyclists to be a bit more circumspect and not choose to place themselves in a drivers blind spot in the first place or to park at lights in such a manner they can't readily have vehicles come alongside them, or if they do find a truck rolling up beside them get out of the way however possible - go to the pavement and waith till its moved off, pull in front wave and make eye contact etc Theres no junction I've ever been at even with barriers where I couldn't get off the road if I needed to - and I've done it. We cyclists need to be looking a bit closer to home sometimes when terrible accidents happen.

Petitioning against lorry drivers (major sources & movers of revenue) won't make a scrap of difference to the government who will take a very pragmatic approach that 8(ono) women died under trucks in all of last year in London compared to the huge number of cycle and truck journeys made and the fact that an average of 7 people (if I recall right) die on the roads every single day of the year. Also how many women is 9000 out of a female population of over 30million in the country especially when backed by some big name organisations.

It's not about the roads - personally I'd prefer they sort out potholes than provide cycle lanes - but about how to deal with riding in traffic. It's no use saying that cycling must be made totally safe so that more women will cycle. It never will be totally safe, life isn't totally safe. The argument about 'safe' roads is spurious; if you're riding on the public highway, it's about cycle handling, awareness and anticipation, just the right amount of aggression, and road nous.

@ermintrude - good post, couldn't agree more.

In my personal experience the main problem is drivers that don't treat you as a road user to be overtaken but someone to "scape past". More awareness on giving cyclists space is better then yet more cycling lanes. There is a danger of segregating traffic to a degree that cyclists who are on the road are seeing as transgressing "should be on the cycle lane instead!" regardless of any local provision of such facilities.

The issue is bad motorists and a lack of confidence in women. Cycle lanes do not do anything to address either issue. More cycle training for women (and some men!) to teach good cycling skills, including assertiveness as an essential component for safe cycling. Also more enforcement of traffic laws for a change, as a cyclist you really see how pervasive speeding is amongst motorists.

If you want to be treated as a car, you have to be a car. That includes riding in the middle of the lane, not on the side. It's about time bad advice about cycling in the gutter was withdrawn.

Women on bikes are generally subjected to abuse from motorists anyway. My partner does a regular commute and prefers cycling with me as she gets a lot less grief from motorists. They cut her up, shout stuff at her,object to her turning right and being in the centre of the road etc. Segregating cyclists from traffic is not the answer it's drivers being more aware

cyclelanes in my experiance actually make things worse! On one particular part of my commute there is a cycle lane on the left, to the right of that is a separate bus lane, to the right of that is three lanes of traffic. I have to turn right halfway down this stretch of road to get to a sustrans track! If i stick to the cycle lane i have to cross 4 lanes of traffic moving at aroudn 40mph. generally i say hell to the cycle lane and get to right far righthand side as soon as i can without being mown down. this then brings abuse from dirvers as i'm in "thier road" when i;ve got a perfectly good cycle land i could use...!

This is a bit of a delicate subject, but i'd say that rather than female cyclists, this is aimed at unconfident cyclists (by stereotype, more female cyclists will be unconfident than male). Once you get somewhat used to how drivers are with cyclists, you do learn to anticipate the worst. Like someone else already said, not stopping in blind spots, keeping a good distance from the kerb, etc. I commute on a mountainbike, and i ride it almost as defensivly as i ride a motorbike. It works the same, most motorbike accidents are "Sorry mate, didn't see you", but were the biker more aware, they would have seen that the driver hadn't seen them and be able to avoid the accident...! (hard to get your head around i know!) Look at it this way, on a motorbike, if i'm on a major road approaching to pass a minor road where a car is waiting to pass, i'm off the throttle and covering the brakes untill i've made eye contact with the driver.

Echoing what was said above - Cycle Lanes are really not fit for purpose.

Developing the rather broken level of interaction is what is needed.

Developing respect for cyclists, their motives and the benefits they bring to traffic and developing cyclists respect for the fact that some cars are needed on the road and need to be given consideration to is the only way things will improve.

I think the propsed law for automatic presumption of guilt to those drivers involved in accidents with a bike is needed.

The principal that the driver did not give enough room to a cyclist or give enough distance from behind etc. in the same repsect as the current 'driver hitting another car from behind' is in place.

Also - Drivers need to have the SMIDSY 'reason' (or get-out-of-jail-free) taken out of the equation. This seemingly universal excuse trivialises road accidents, plain and simple.

When I spoke to the police offider following a car hitting me (after roaring out of a lane of stationary traffic as he was obviously p*ssed of with waiting and I was in a cycle lane with hi-viz and lights on he knocked me out cold. He admitted liability and two witnesses backed this up, so a blatant case of driving without due care and attention) he said "well, it happens all the time so we won't be prosecuting".

Makes me so so so angry.

Either that or tax the bejesus out of motorists - But this affects the poor more disproportinately than the rich. It's a shame as ludicrously high petrol prices or a fuel blockade is the only thing that has lowered motorists on the road and less chance of being hit.

Look, the fact is that all road users have a pretty poor core reason to be frightened of if they act irresponsibly and put other road users in danger through wilful negligence or general lack of awareness (SMIDSY).

The law and penalties imposed.

The punishments handed out in courts under the road traffic act are done so with utter inconsistency and with little real firm guidelines as to what any person causing injury on the road can expect.

If a road user were to set off each day knowing that if they injured or killed someone through their own proven negligence they would get a jail sentence of x years, then I'm sure the standards on our roads would improve.

As a cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver, I can hide behind a whole raft of excuses, and hell, even get an insurance company to pay for my screw ups with a small contribution from myself if I do something silly. That's a lovely little comfort blanket people wrap themselves up in each day and they don't think beyond that.

Ultimately the law doesn't hold people accountable enough for their own actions, and until it does a significant amount road users will continue to go out each day knowing they can play the odds IF they have to. Be that the snarling car driver or the reckless cyclist going for gaps that aren't there. Which simply serves to put a lot of other people at risk.

To be cyclist specific, the RTA barely recognises the rights or value of anybody other than a motor vehicle driver or pedestrian. The cursory nature of the cyclist in the act is why a judge can blame the death of the cyclist on them because they weren't wearing a helmet, despite the driver admitting driving without due care and attention, and why vehicle drivers feel it acceptable to treat cyclists as a mere inconvenience.

The opening two posts say it all. Stop the polarisation of the arguments by specific groups and come at it from a road user perspective. Until that happens it will always be a them and us attitude for all.

The fact is there are too many idiots using all forms of road transport, I have more issues on my commute from other cyclists and lemming pedestrains then cars, so cycle lanes won't solve that. Educating all road users to share responsiblities is whats needed, but in our feckless no blame culture that'll never happen.

Ironic that the woman in the picture is riding in the dirt at the side of the road...

Shouldbeinbed.

My route is slap bang through the centre of a city. My point is that to dismiss bike routes as 'not the answer' is wrong. They can be a part of the answer, particularly if they're intelligently combined with marked routes through lower-traffic residential areas. And I know there are some city centres where it's difficult to find those. But because it's difficult in some metropolitan areas of (eg) London, Manchester, Birmingham etc does not mean they can't work for a substantial number of people fortunate enough not to live in those areas. If the local authority has the wit to join with sustrans and do a proper job on it.

Saying they're not part of the answer and that we should simply rely on drivers to stop being dangerous is letting local councils, in particular, off the hook.

I second rhext's point of view.

I think most cyclists have a too narrow minded point of view, in particular, they don't manage to think in bigger numbers.

Imagine if every other car you see on your commute was a car.

Imagine how a driver would be supposed to safely overtake 10 cyclists separated by only a few yards.

You can't just say "slow down": the road transport system is there to support our economy, by ensuring delays are kept to a minimum.

Look at Copenhagen: without dedicated cycle tracks, cycle super highways, and cycle lanes, there would be no chance the road system would be able to sustain such a large population of cyclists.

If I see a lorry behind me, I ensure I make it safe, and speedy, for it to overtake me. Most thank me in return.

If I see a queue behind me because the road is narrow, I stop and let traffic past me: a half minute wait in return for a much safer cycle home.

I also expect motorists to be alert, and when I signal well in advance, to let me maneuver.

Start thinking big numbers, and you will see that we need to rethink our road system before we can make the journey better for everyone, not just cyclists.

I'm all up for better education and training of all road users.

What next, cycle bridges over junctions, so inexperienced cyclists don’t have to learn how to deal with them too? I have no wish to be segregated into a cycle lane because a minority don't feel safe. Take off your cotton wool, life has risks. Get some training, gain some experience, and make yourself a safer rider. We all just need to use the roads more considerately.

And when will they drop this “that women cyclists are far more likely to be killed by lorries because, unlike men, they tend to obey red lights and wait at junctions in the driver's blind spot” hogwash? There is little danger in stopping at a red light; I do it all the time. If you can’t see the risk in sitting next to the cab of a HGV what are you doing on the road?

A bit of a rant, but I hate this lowest common denominator approach to life.