Riding illegal bikes can lead to being charged with driving offences.

[soundwave]

not my problem is it

Actually somebody has been killed which is the point of this thread.

 

[Amoto65]

And I rest my case.....

 

[vfr400]

To be fair you can sympathise with the cycle commuters who want a little more speed to keep up with traffic but it's obvious that the sort of people prepared to break the law and unrestrict their bikes are more likely to go through red lights, cycle carelessly and injure people.than those of us who feel more constrained to obey the law. Not all donglers are wankers but it's a far higher % than of those who don't turn their bikes into e mopeds.

I wouldn't draw that conclusion at all. I know loads of riders that have unrestricted ebikes and I know that not one of them would go through a red light.

 

[Andy McNish]

Anecdotes are fine, but as a matter of psychology, running a red light and dongling an e bike are very similar, apparently "victimless' crimes, where the person doing them feels the law shouldn't apply to him and he is 'man enough' to take the risk. It would be astonishing if there really was zero correlation.

Also from my own commuting observations I would say that up to half bike commuters run red lights when they think it's safe. So for you not to know a single one amongst many of your dongler friends doesn't seem realistic, sorry.

 

[Deleted member 25121]

Anecdotes are fine, but as a matter of psychology, running a red light and dongling an e bike are very similar, apparently "victimless' crimes, where the person doing them feels the law shouldn't apply to him and he is 'man enough' to take the risk. It would be astonishing if there really was zero correlation.

And they also seem to believe that because there are ambiguities in the law it should be ignored in toto.

 

[Nealh]

To be fair you can sympathise with the cycle commuters who want a little more speed to keep up with traffic but it's obvious that the sort of people prepared to break the law and unrestrict their bikes are more likely to go through red lights, cycle carelessly and injure people.than those of us who feel more constrained to obey the law. Not all donglers are wankers but it's a far higher % than of those who don't turn their bikes into e mopeds.

You only have to see the videos and news of London cyclists who regularly go thru red lights very few are using e bikes.
I was in Rottingdean/E.sx and one year when on a ride I waited at the lights to go red when a woman totally ignored them and went straight thru on her pedal bike.

 

[sjpt]

You only have to see the videos and news of London cyclists who regularly go thru red lights very few are using e bikes.
I was in Rottingdean/E.sx and one year when on a ride I waited at the lights to go red when a woman totally ignored them and went straight thru on her pedal bike.

When something similar happened to me I had the impulse to knock the cyclist off on purpose. Luckily for me as well as him the impulse came too slowly; the cyclist was gone. And about quarter of a second after the impulse came it went again, to be replaced with more rational anger.

 

[vfr400]

Anecdotes are fine, but as a matter of psychology, running a red light and dongling an e bike are very similar, apparently "victimless' crimes, where the person doing them feels the law shouldn't apply to him and he is 'man enough' to take the risk. It would be astonishing if there really was zero correlation.

Also from my own commuting observations I would say that up to half bike commuters run red lights when they think it's safe. So for you not to know a single one amongst many of your dongler friends doesn't seem realistic, sorry.

I've seen cyclists jumping red lights, but never ebikers. If you ever saw an ebiker jump lights, how would you know if their bike was dongled. This idea is just a figment of your imagination and there's no proof that there's any sort of relationship between the two crimes.

Many cyclists don't care about the law because they ride around with non-conforming/illegal lights. So, if they don't care about the law, does that make them more likely to jump the lights, go shoplifting or murder someone?

 

[youngoldbloke]

I'll bet those red-light jumpers don't have reflectors on their pedals either!

 

[sjpt]

I can't tell from the video, but it looks very likely to me from the sequence of events that the e-cyclist shot a red light in the case that started this thread.

I'm sure many/most donglers keep as strictly to the red light laws as we (all) do, but I agree with Andy that there is almost certainly a (non-causal) correlation between dongles and red light shooting; even if quite a low one.

Anyone know a source of half toe-clips that are easy to fit reflectors to, or that just come with reflectors?

 

[vfr400]

I agree with Andy that there is almost certainly a (non-causal) correlation between dongles and red light shooting; even if quite a low one.

How? Where's the evidence? It's just something you've imagined. That doesn't make it true.

 

[Deleted member 25121]

How? Where's the evidence? It's just something you've imagined. That doesn't make it true.

It's sjpt's opinion (which I tend to agree with), do have any facts to prove it's incorrect?

 

[Andy McNish]

Obviously I'm not suggesting that dongled ebikers shoot red lights in pure number terms more often than non ebike cyclists. That would be ridiculous given the sheer number of 'normal' cyclists on the road, but when you buy an e bike you have a simple choice.

You can relatively easily and cheaply defeat the 25km/h cap (breaking the law) or leave it be (follow the law). The chances of you being caught and punished are minimal.

Quite a lot of people choose to break the law.

The same choice is met every time you come to a red light which is holding you up and you can see there is no cross traffic coming. As you don't have a reg number the chances of you being caught and fined for breaking the law are again minimal.

Quite a lot of people choose to break the law.

Anyone with a basic understanding of human psychology can see that the type of person to decide to break the law in the first case is more likely to decide to break it in the second as well.
It's not like trying to correlate dongling to shoplifting, racism or murder. It's not a general 'donglers are criminals' thing.

It's an obvious conclusion to draw from basic human psychology. Electing to fit a dongle already confirms that a person is willing to break the rules when he (and it is usually a he) sees them as petty or pointless, and when he sees the rule breaking as victimless with risk only to himself which he is willing to take.

And there won't be any hard data as dongled ebikes intentionally don't identify themselves.

In fact we only have one data point in the UK don't we?

And from it, it looks like 100% of dongled ebikers run red lights, sadly.

 

[anotherkiwi]

One of the great things about riding a pedelec is that you stop for pedestrians, red lights, the whole caboodle. It doesn't cost you any effort to get on your way again. The most difficult thing is explaining to little old ladies you are not going to run them over...

 

[Andy McNish]

One of the great things about riding a pedelec is that you stop for pedestrians, red lights, the whole caboodle. It doesn't cost you any effort to get on your way again. The most difficult thing is explaining to little old ladies you are not going to run them over...

Yes. You could even argue that because of the momentum thing ebikers, even dongled ones, might tend to stop at red lights more often than normal cyclists. It would be interesting to get data on that. But of the two categories, legal ebikers and donglers, there is no way that the donglers arent going to be more likely to ignore red lights. If you try to cross a river on the back of a giant turtle and a crocodile, the crocodile is much more likely to try to eat you, after all.

And the hardest thing is getting people jogging down cycle paths with bloody headphones in to realise you are behind them in my experience.
Even more irritating than the phone zombies who step out in front of you or the taxi drivers who think you are only allowed in cycle lanes.

 

[vfr400]

Obviously I'm not suggesting that dongled ebikers shoot red lights in pure number terms more often than non ebike cyclists. That would be ridiculous given the sheer number of 'normal' cyclists on the road, but when you buy an e bike you have a simple choice.

You can relatively easily and cheaply defeat the 25km/h cap (breaking the law) or leave it be (follow the law). The chances of you being caught and punished are minimal.

Quite a lot of people choose to break the law.

The same choice is met every time you come to a red light which is holding you up and you can see there is no cross traffic coming. As you don't have a reg number the chances of you being caught and fined for breaking the law are again minimal.

Quite a lot of people choose to break the law.

Anyone with a basic understanding of human psychology can see that the type of person to decide to break the law in the first case is more likely to decide to break it in the second as well.
It's not like trying to correlate dongling to shoplifting, racism or murder. It's not a general 'donglers are criminals' thing.

It's an obvious conclusion to draw from basic human psychology. Electing to fit a dongle already confirms that a person is willing to break the rules when he (and it is usually a he) sees them as petty or pointless, and when he sees the rule breaking as victimless with risk only to himself which he is willing to take.

And there won't be any hard data as dongled ebikes intentionally don't identify themselves.

In fact we only have one data point in the UK don't we?

And from it, it looks like 100% of dongled ebikers run red lights, sadly.

But that's the same argument as saying that cyclists that buy non-conforming lights are clearly the type of person that's willing to break the law, so they're more likely to jump red lights, or people that knowingly drive their cars at 31 mph in a 30 zone are more likely to jump red lights when riding their bikes. Are your lights marked as conforming to BS6102/3 or an equivalent EC standard, which is the law?

 

[anotherkiwi]

Local news: A drunk 22 year old ran over a 17 year old and killed him. Problem was the 17 year old was walking down the footpath in town at time of death. Footpaths are dangerous places for pedestrians!

Drunk driving is illegal. Thousands around the world are killed by drunk drivers monthly. I would much prefer my chances of being killed by a dongled pedelec. I bet I'd win the lottery before that happened.

Like many I have used my pedelec unrestricted. I found it to be dangerous because car drivers don't expect an old man they see pedalling a bicycle to be doing 45 kph. They are trained (ahem...) to appreciate the speed of others on the road around them but unfortunately it seems to be a talent that is hard to master. Especially when you are texting on your mobile phone... The trike is another kettle of fish, "what the hell is that?!" kind of kettle, so they stay well away and it isn't or won't be restricted. In any case I average 32 kph on the flat without a motor.

 

[Andy McNish]

But that's the same argument as saying that cyclists that buy non-conforming lights are clearly the type of person that's willing to break the law, so they're more likely to jump red lights, or people that knowingly drive their cars at 31 mph in a 30 zone are more likely to jump red lights when riding their bikes. Are your lights marked as conforming to BS6102/3 or an equivalent EC standard, which is the law?

It's not, because most cyclists haven't a clue about the law as regards lights at all so don't make a positive decision to break it. Everyone who dongles a bike or runs a red light knows perfectly well it's illegal.

People who knowingly break the 30mph speed limit in cars are a better example yes. I bet there is a strong corollation between motorists who get speeding points and ones who get points for running red lights. You're suggesting there won't be?

 

[sjpt]

How? Where's the evidence? It's just something you've imagined. That doesn't make it true.

Absolutely. Sorry, I should have explicitly qualified that with 'opinion' and 'no evidence'. (or in other words 'prejudice')

 

[Amoto65]

If it had been a driver in a car with no licence, no insurance,no mot and no tax (which is effectively the same as riding a dongled/illegal ebike) who had killed a cyclist on an ebike, you would all be up in arms about it, hypocrisy seems rife here....