[pclmulqdq]

"Driving without due care and attention" sounds like a statute that has a much more specific interpretation than you think, and the police probably aren't the ones who misinterpreted that here. "Careless driving" and "reckless driving" are against the law in many states in the US, but both actually have very specific interpretations that are not entirely contained in the text of the statute. This is the joy of living in a common law country.

Things like running red lights, not stopping at stop signs, and speeding are much easier for laypeople to judge, and it sounds like none of that was happening here.

[scott_w]

So just to be clear “drivers who fuck around go to jail” is not true. But it’s cyclists that are the problem in this discussion.

[rootusrootus]

Don't you hate it when one side just paints the other as being all of the problem? That's very frustrating.

[scott_w]

One side kills and maims 5 people a day in the U.K. The other side doesn’t even come close to that.

If you’re going to call for regulation and enforcement, where would you spend money and effort?

[pclmulqdq]

Yes, drivers who blow through red lights and stop signs like the bad actor cyclists do will find themselves in jail (on reckless driving charges, incidentally) pretty fast. You're trying to compare apples and oranges here: a driver who happened to not see someone while driving (because they were driving more aggressively than you liked) vs. people who regularly flout traffic laws.

[scott_w]

One group kills and maims five people a day (drivers) and your problem is with the group that doesn’t. In fact, you’ll fight tooth and nail to defend the driving that put a man in hospital by choosing not to look for hazards.

This isn’t “more aggressively than I like,” this is a man put in hospital because a driver chose to ignore the UK official guidance on how to drive. Official guidance, I might add, that you must learn as part of your driving course.

Attitudes like that are exactly my point.