The tragic case of Sam Harding, who was run over and killed after being hit by a motorist opening their car door has raised much anger about the ‘weakness’ of current law. Since the motorist was cleared of the manslaughter, campaigners have pushed for a tightening of laws relating to cyclists.

There are clearly gaps in the law that need addressing, but perhaps it’s not that straight forward. From a moral (not legal) point of view, there appears to be a fairly grey area: If a motorist is to be convicted of carelessness, then surely the motorist must be expected to know what constitutes an appropriate level of care and attention?

So whilst tightening current laws would definitely be beneficial, perhaps better education is as big a part of the solution than the ability to convict (?).

Providing education could be pretty simple. Additions to driving tests would force drivers to engage with the risks involved and also encourage best-practice techniques (such as opening the drivers door left handed, to force drivers to look properly in their mirrors).

Even if motorists are currently unaware of the risks to others, they should be in the habit of checking carefully for oncoming traffic purely out of self interest for any motorist who opens their car door without checking for oncoming traffic runs the risk of serious damage to their vehicle. In itself this should provide enough incentive for motorists to give due attention to oncoming traffic and so, even without considering the potentially catastrophic impact on others, (rational) motorists should take care. Yet, given the rising number of cyclists being ‘doored’, something’s going wrong; Motorists can’t be fully aware of the risks they take when exiting their vehicles and unless they are taught, it wont be until after an accident has occurred that they assess their actions.