A deadly summer on the roads: cycling in danger

29 cyclists killed on French roads in July, 22 in August, and a rate that didn’t seem to slow down in September, according to daily regional press reports: this is the sad reality of the difficult coexistence between all road users. The silence of public authorities on this matter is deafening.

By Guillaume Judas – Photos: Pixabay.com, Pxhere.com, DR

In Le Parisien on September 14, Cyrille Guimard predicted dark times for French cycling given the results of our compatriots in the general classification of the current Tour de France. For the former national coach and iconic sports director of Bernard Hinault and Laurent Fignon, “French cycling is heading for a wall,” by not detecting young talents early enough, by limiting the difficulty of events offered to the youngest, and by neglecting the revealing discipline of the time trial.

We believe that the one nicknamed the Druid for his knowledge of cycling is fighting the wrong battle. Before thinking about training future champions and filling the gaps of our great talents (Thibaut Pinot, Romain Bardet, Julian Alaphilippe, and Warren Barguil revealed themselves at a very high level at a very young age), they should first be encouraged to cycle. However, today, the real obstacle to cycling in France is road insecurity.

A Sad Reality

We remember taking our first steps as a cyclist on the road at the age of 10, on quiet country roads in Morvan, and riding the roads of the Chevreuse valley solo for the first time at 12. Rides of 25 to 30 km, with the wind in our face on a half-racer, shorts and a t-shirt as our only gear, and a nascent desire to try competition in our last year of middle school.

It is very difficult today to let children ride alone on the road.

Who today would seriously dare to let a 10-year-old child go out alone on the road for an hour or two, given the context, the environment, and especially the complete lack of action by public authorities to penalize the most reckless motorists? Because today we are at that point: more and more cars, increasingly restrictive road infrastructure, more and more exasperated and impatient motorists, but also less and less respect for the most vulnerable road users. And still no adequate response from public authorities, whether in terms of communication or dissuasive sanctions.

In France today, one can kill on the road with almost complete impunity, at least for those who have no conscience.

Thomas Voeckler, former champion, current consultant for France TV on the Tour de France and selector for the French team, stated live this weekend: while cycling to the start of the stage, he had a big scare when a 38-ton truck brushed past him at 20 cm. All avid cyclists know this situation. It happens every day, on every ride for sports cyclists. And increasingly often for cyclists who now commute by bike, to get to work and to promote the famous social distancing, and who discover the road jungle with horror.

Still Insufficient Efforts

Of course, the vast majority of motorists or bus and truck drivers are very respectful of vulnerable road users, whether cyclists or pedestrians. Every day, there are also many safe and careful overtakes, respected priorities, cordial exchanges with a simple smile or a wave of the hand—in short, what we call sharing the road between civilized people. Some local authorities are starting to implement specific communication.

The Haute-Garonne department is launching an awareness campaign with posters on over 900 bus shelters. We await comparable action at the national level. @DR

But there are also the others, increasingly numerous, the absent-minded, those who use their mobile phones while driving, who talk to the kids in the car while turning their heads, or who simply think about their daily life problems. Permanent dangers who run red lights, who enter roundabouts while you are in the middle, who overtake you and cut you off just before a traffic light… But, in good faith, at least these people accept discussion, admit that they had a moment of distraction or inattention. For the cyclist, it often takes a bit of luck or good reflexes to avoid an accident, but the worst is not there.

To the credit of these reckless drivers, urban furniture and artificial obstacles placed in our cities in the hope of making them virtuous cities have, for the past twenty years or so, only complicated all travel. Cars are getting wider and lanes are getting narrower. Speed bumps, roundabouts, bollards, poorly marked bus lanes and bike paths, various and varied road markings are only there to satisfy the ego of our elected officials, who otherwise care little about the happiness of their fellow citizens.

Misconceptions about the Highway Code and cycling

Contrary to what some road users claim, sometimes in good faith, cyclists are not systematically required to ride in single file. They are perfectly entitled to ride two abreast (but no more), and must ride in single file when conditions require it (Article R431–7 of the Highway Code). This may be vague for some, but it is useless to rely on this argument to justify a dangerous overtake.
Sidewalks are prohibited for cyclists over 12 years old. So there’s no need to yell at a cyclist riding on the road.
Wearing a helmet is not mandatory for cyclists over 12 years old (but of course highly recommended).
Not all bike paths are mandatory for bicycles, far from it. In France, very few paths are truly mandatory (marked by a round blue sign), mainly because they do not meet access or width standards, or because the sign dates from before 1998. Bike lanes (square blue sign) are therefore not mandatory, but are still reserved for bicycles. And not for parking cars, even for five minutes. If cyclists do not always use bike paths, it is primarily because they are not suitable (not wide enough, dirty, full of debris, poorly maintained, parked cars, numerous sidewalks and intersections, presence of pedestrians or children, etc.).
Cyclists are allowed to pass certain traffic lights, even when they are red. For this, there must be a triangular sign below the light indicating the authorized direction for the cyclist.
Similarly, cyclists can ride up certain one-way streets in 30 km/h zones.
Cyclists are required to ride on the right side of the road, but not on the shoulder, nor too close to the doors of cars parked on the right, due to the obvious risks of falls or collisions. A minimum space of 80 cm is allowed between the right side of the road and the cyclist’s position on the road.

Increasingly Deliberate Aggressions

In a country where a bus driver is beaten to death for a sideways glance, there is also, unfortunately, the impression that the law of the strongest is taking hold. And the strongest on the road is the motorist, well protected behind their 1.5-ton bodywork, always in a hurry and bothered by those who get in the way, the slower users, and particularly cyclists. They are the bad ones, the aggressive ones, the scum. This is a very small portion of vehicle drivers on the road. Perhaps 1% at a guess. But they are by far the most dangerous, and the worst part is that they risk very little. They can start an overtake on a departmental road in front of you and pass you at 90 or 100 km/h, forcing you to swerve onto the shoulder. That’s a new behavior and, above all, increasingly frequent.

The person who makes their own rules is not stigmatized by their origin, age, or social status. It can be anyone. What matters is to be loud, to impose oneself, to impose their laws, even if it means deliberately committing infractions that can cause death or disability.

Infractions that begin with a lack of knowledge of the Highway Code on the one hand (see above), and above all with a total lack of respect for human life. Which can begin with death threats, often, blows sometimes, gratuitously, just like that, even if it’s a young person, even if it’s a woman, even if the offender knows they are wrong. Because they absolutely do not want to admit they are wrong.

What do these people risk? Well, not much. In case of aggression, if the motorist doesn’t make you fall with their car, you’ll be told when filing a complaint that it’s not serious, that no one died, and that you were lucky. Even a video is not admissible as proof of the risk voluntarily taken by the motorist with your life. A disgrace. In case of an altercation, it’s even worse. You must not retaliate to a blow struck against you. A court will put both parties on equal footing. And even if you don’t retaliate and only insult your aggressor out of anger (or fear), a crooked lawyer will try to argue that you “asked for it.”

In the event of a rear-end collision, the accident theory will be retained, and not that of intentional violence with a weapon by destination, even though the Highway Code provides for 3 points deducted and a fine of €135 for not respecting safety distances.

A Victim Blaming with a mechanism found in rape cases, with an almost systematic attempt to devalue the rights of the victim, who asked nothing of anyone. They try to discourage you from filing a complaint, and if you do, it’s almost a lost cause because mitigating circumstances are found for the aggressor while part of the blame is shifted to you.

In the event of an accident, a complaint has little chance of succeeding.

A part of public opinion follows this line of thought, as can be seen on social networks, particularly by following the comments on the two video examples cited above. Excuses are made for the aggressive motorist by stigmatizing the supposedly irresponsible behavior of cyclists, all cyclists. The finger is pointed (rightly so) at certain behaviors (running red lights, riding in a peloton, not using a bike path) to justify the aggression, without ever asking whether there isn’t a disproportionate reaction from a motorist deciding to take risks with a cyclist’s life simply to reproach them for being there.

An opinion sometimes relayed by the local press, which doesn’t even bother to immediately blame the cyclist, even when they are hit from behind.

Highway Code: obligations of motor vehicle drivers

To overtake a cyclist, the vehicle “must move over sufficiently so as not to risk hitting the user it wishes to overtake. In any case, it must not approach laterally closer than one meter in urban areas and one and a half meters outside urban areas if it is an animal-drawn vehicle, a two or three-wheeled vehicle, a pedestrian, a rider, or an animal” (Article R414-4). This is the most important point of coexistence between cyclists and motor vehicles, as it means that, given road infrastructure, there are places where it is impossible to overtake while respecting the safety distance. Prudence (and intelligence) therefore dictates staying behind the cyclist who cannot be overtaken.
Vehicles turning right or left must give way to cyclists riding on bike paths (and of course on bike lanes) that cross the roadway they are about to enter. (R415-3 and R415-4).
Since 2015, vehicle drivers can cross a solid white line to overtake a cyclist while respecting the safety distance, provided they have clear visibility ahead.
It is forbidden to begin an overtake when you encounter a cyclist in the opposite lane.
Roads prohibited to cyclists are clearly indicated by signs (e.g., motorways or roads for automobiles limited to 110 km/h). All other roads are permitted for cyclists and are not reserved for automobiles. It is up to drivers to adapt their speed to visibility and traffic conditions, not for cyclists to prohibit themselves from riding on a road they help pay for… with their taxes.
It is not mandatory to have a driving license and therefore to pass the Highway Code to cycle on public roads. Whereas a motor vehicle driver must, of course, have their license. Therefore, the motorist must always consider the cyclist to be a vulnerable user, perhaps less experienced than them, and in any case much more exposed. Simple, isn’t it?

Public authorities, the government, are of course responsible for this state of affairs. The State must conduct an awareness campaign. In 2019, 187 people officially died on bicycles on the road, 12 more than the previous year. This year, 2020, suggests even higher figures, while the total number of road deaths is constantly decreasing. Where there are signs, respect for safety distances is better. Why not generalize it?

The police or gendarmerie must accept complaints, conduct investigations, and prosecute those who not only cause accidents but also threaten to do so by clearly violating the Highway Code and the code of living together.

Sports cyclists are the unloved of road traffic.

Teodoro Barduccio, President of the Association Mon Vélo Est Une Vie and one of the instigators of the Permis vélo (Cycling License) for children, recently told us: “in road sharing problems, there are of course things to resolve together, both in terms of motorist behavior and cyclist behavior. Nevertheless, we can want to smooth things over and still expect exemplary judicial decisions regarding serious or fatal accidents, which are not sufficiently punished today.” Because in this area, it’s really time for fear on the road to change sides. A motorist must realize that they are handling a potential weapon that can kill. That their behavior can change the course of their victim’s life, their family’s life, but also their own, with risks of sanctions that can truly encourage them to be more careful, or less aggressive. We have never seen a cyclist kill a motorist, even through carelessness.

But we remain pessimistic, especially when we see that the Law Enforcement agencies themselves do not respect the space allocated to cyclists on the road, as evidenced by this Tweet where the Prefecture of the Rhône boasts of controlling motorist speed… by parking on a bike lane!

This is how cyclists are respected in France today. But it is true that road safety figures show a decrease in road fatalities in France. A decrease for everyone, except for cyclists. So everything is fine.

=> SEE ALSO : All our Mag articles