Today, we look at some idiots.

This all starts here:

Shortest route home by bike? Don't rely on the Sat-Nav! Cyclist stopped on M25…yes really: http://t.co/tPCN91mG1C http://t.co/icU9aghuDI — Surrey Police (@SurreyPolice) February 25, 2014

Idiot 1

What sort of idiot rides a bicycle on the hard shoulder of a 70mph motorway?

What sort of idiot crosses a slip road on a 70mph motorway?

What sort of idiot rides alongside a carriageway where HGVs brush past at the speed limit?

Idiot 2

What sort of idiot puts a tiny bicycle lane on the edge of a 70mph dual carriageway?

What sort of idiot makes a cycle lane cross a slip road on a 70mph dual carriageway?

What sort of idiot puts these facilities where HGVs brush past at the speed limit?

Idiocy is idiocy

I don’t for one moment condone the idiocy of venturing onto a motorway on a bicycle. And I suspect nor do you condone it. It’s insane. It’s incredibly dangerous. And it’s illegal, and in this case a fine was levied.

But nor do I for one moment condone the idiocy of highway engineering that directs people to behave in precisely the same manner (with about a quarter of the width of tarmac to cycle on and far fewer safety criteria for the road as a whole). Yet, most people do condone it. It’s insane. It’s incredibly dangerous. Yet it’s legal, and people get paid for it.

On the A3, just a few miles from where our first idiot had his collar felt, is engineering that designs in the exact behaviour he exhibited; behaviour that attracted widespread and vociferous criticism from the police, the media and an angry public. And this is far from an isolated example of such engineering.

If you’re going to call someone an idiot for riding a bicycle like this, you have no choice but to also call people idiots for explicitly designing that behaviour into the roads.

Are we getting the message here?