I think that the issue of stricter liability for the more potentially dangerous vehicle has been a little confused in this thread. For a start, this would have no bearing on criminal liability. The change would only affect those seeking compensation as a result of injury.
In my opinion (and from my experience) the number of cyclists being able to bring forward a claim for their injury would not dramatically increase if the law did change in this way.
I think that the real benefits would be psychological ones i.e. making drivers more aware that they are responsible for their actions, plus shifting society away from being so 'motor-centric'.
I agree with the bulk of David's OP, but I think we need to look for a different way to get this result, rather than trying for a dramatic change the law which is unlikely to happen.
I think that the issue of stricter liability for the more potentially dangerous vehicle has been a little confused in this thread. For a start, this would have no bearing on criminal liability. The change would only affect those seeking compensation as a result of injury.
In my opinion (and from my experience) the number of cyclists being able to bring forward a claim for their injury would not dramatically increase if the law did change in this way.
I think that the real benefits would be psychological ones i.e. making drivers more aware that they are responsible for their actions, plus shifting society away from being so 'motor-centric'.
I agree with the bulk of David's OP, but I think we need to look for a different way to get this result, rather than trying for a dramatic change the law which is unlikely to happen.