I was sent this article by Austin Bike Blog reader Dave, and wanted to pass it along. This is an editorial from the Guardian newspaper in the UK for a law that is common in some European countries – here’s a quote:
There is another important factor at work in the Netherlands and in Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and several others European countries. It’s the principle of strict liability. This puts the onus of responsibility on drivers in civil compensation cases in the event of a collision – not on the cyclist or pedestrian as is the case here. It does not affect criminal cases. Furthermore, as Roadpeace reports (pdf), in several of these countries children and the elderly are deemed not liable for their actions in civil cases. As far as I can see, this is bound to focus drivers’ minds.
on Nov 25th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
The chances of getting such a law through the Texas Legislature is somewhere between 0 and -1. Insurance companies have a lot more lobbyists than bikeriders do.
on Nov 25th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
that would get my vote! we should definitely push this. it may have to fail a few times before we finally get it through, but we need to bring it into public consciousness anyways.
on Nov 26th, 2008 at 5:15 am
I can assure you it really works. It’s one of the many measures that make up bicycle policy in the Netherlands. The main reason why this law passed relatively swiftly (I believe 25 years ago) is that most car drivers are also cyclists.
I guess the Dutch could have done without in the end, but even for the born-on-a-bike breed of the human race there needed to be some legal clarity to handle particular situations (For instance, when a cyclist rides without a light at night in the city and gets hit by a car (right of way or not), what happens? Dutch cities have lots of negligent students -and other people- on bikes, in practice there’s only so much police enforcement to go around. So the law puts all responsibility with the driver, and on the other side the police tries to crack down on light-less cyclists through periodical checkpoints, gov awareness campaigns etc.
As with all laws and practices, it’s a balancing game between setting end goals and taking enough into account to level unwanted side effects.
Obviously, there’s more to tell about this law, but this should give you some insight.
on Nov 26th, 2008 at 6:14 am
as you probably gathered from my earlier comment, this law is NOT the solution to instant or ever enduring bicycle safety. This still requires so much more, elements, coming together in an integral, comprehensive bicycle policy:
- Infrastructure, accommodating cyclists as seriously as car drivers (or giving preference to one over the other). This also involves parking facilities and bike facilities on public transport.
- Research & Development. Budget test/pilot projects. Only by trial and error and accumulation and sharing of data improvements can be made (and money saved in the end).
- Promotion. Publicly funded gov campaigns, promoting awareness of services, laws, taxation/rewards (Tax incentives for bike us, benefit employers and employees), etc.
- Emphasis on simplicity, utility, accessibility and joy of cycling, not fear-mongering.
The Dutch have a nationally and regionally coordinated and promoted bicycle policy, which in itself is part of the overall transportation budget and policy. (This approach kicked off in the early 70′s)
I only point this out to be clear on how many facets there are to the notion of creating a bicycle friendly environment.
on Nov 26th, 2008 at 7:22 am
amsterdamize,
I agree. Changing a law doesn’t do a whole lot of good if the roads aren’t built to accommodate cars and bikes together safely. Still, this would be a welcome change from the current situation in the U.S. and Texas especially where there appears to be an institutional prejudice against cyclists and for drivers in accidents.