My point in to operate a policy of harm reduction policy. Enforce the things that are more risky to others. Having 4 policemen handing out leaflets and talking to cyclists about pavement cycling will not reduce harm, having the same policemen pulling over drivers on their phones will reduce the possibility of harm.
People talk about speeding (a factor in many incidents) almost proudly while the every single time the media talk about cycling they ask about rljing which while illegal, doesn't feature in many harmful incidents.
i.e. "stop picking on us and pick on them?"
If you encouraged equal enforcement - for example police ticketing ASL encroaching drivers AND RLJ'ing cyclists on the same day in the same locations - don't you think that that would send a far stronger message to all road users?
It might also serve in some small way to bring all road users together, given that one thing that drives them apart at the moment is both camps pointing to the other never being punished for things- RLJ/Mobiles/ASL/Pavement/Speeding/blah blah blah.
i.e. "stop picking on us and pick on them?"
If you encouraged equal enforcement - for example police ticketing ASL encroaching drivers AND RLJ'ing cyclists on the same day in the same locations - don't you think that that would send a far stronger message to all road users?
It might also serve in some small way to bring all road users together, given that one thing that drives them apart at the moment is both camps pointing to the other never being punished for things- RLJ/Mobiles/ASL/Pavement/Speeding/blah blah blah.