Cyclists protesting about road safety

[Notters]

Maybe pedestrians need to protest about pavement safety due to the ever increasing number of selfish *******s who think they have the right to cycle on the pavements and footpaths. They don't! It's illegal. Just because the OB are too lazy to do anything about it, doesn't mean that it isn't unlawful.

(And I have it in writing from the OB who agreed that it is unlawful to ride a bicycle anywhere other than the public highway or designated cycle path...but they have no intention to enforce it. That is presumably until a young child or frail senior is killed or seriously injured when we will have a massive over-reaction. I even did some numbers for Sussex Police and demonstrated how many PCSOs they could recruit if they enforced the law and collected the fines. They still didn't want to know!)

Yes I'm sure it's laziness and nothing to do with budgets and priorities :rollseyes: [MENTION=249]edna krabappel[/MENTION]

 

[Machiavelli]

I drive a car, ride a motorbike and occasionally cycle if it's shorter distances.

When on two wheels, I ALWAYS give cars the right of way and respect, because I'm extremely vulnerable on the road, even more so on the bicycle.

I don't skip red lights, don't ride on the pavement and make myself as little an inconvenience as I possibly can.

What's helped is completing a full car driving test and two separate motorbike tests, which mean I know the rules of the road, and the 'unwritten rules' (or COMMON SENSE skills) that keep me safe.

I think all cyclists should HAVE to do a full bike test (theory), before they ride.
I've had one close-call with a car (whilst on motorbike), and many close calls with bicycles as many just don't seem to have any common sense (no lights, dark clothing, running reds, on the hands-free/phones, no helmet etc, etc).

While, like you, I drive a car (but not a motorbike) and cycle, I adopt a very different strategy when in/on both vehicles. It's patently obvious that the car is a more dangerous machine than a bike, and should be treated as such, as is a bike a more dangerous machine than a pedestrian. As such, car drivers should give cyclists and pedestrians priority, wherever reasonable.
I ride a bike more pragmatically than you, and won't follow rules such as "don't skip red lights", although in general and if there's other traffic/pedestrians around then they are to be followed, but if you're alone I really don't see why they should be respected, just as I don't respect red lights as a pedestrian if there's no other traffic around, or follow the rule adopted by my partner (in part, to instruct our son) that roads should be crossed at lights or designated crossings.
I'd actually say that, rather than cyclists having to do full bike tests, car drivers should have to be a cyclist, and demonstrate experience of it too, before passing their driving test.
I do agree that there ought to be more education for cyclists, especially to indicate the 'common sense' factors you raise.

 

[AWAYDAY]

If you cycle do it safely for you and others.

If you drive, do it safely for you and others.

Some cyclists are dangerous. Some drivers are dangerous. Cyclists generally come off worse.

Just be smart!

 

[SAC]

It's a fact that ALL cyclists jump red lights. Motorists never do, if they did there would be multiple threads on NSC about them.

 

[Albumen]

It's a fact that ALL cyclists jump red lights. Motorists never do, if they did there would be multiple threads on NSC about them.

 

[Albumen]

I've managed to go my entire adult life without hitting, or in turn being hit by a car or bike, be it powered or otherwise. Maybe some of you are just clumsy bad driving menaces to the continued survival of the human race, and should cease reproduction for the good of the species.

This should now be the standard answer to end all these car v cyclists threads.
Wonderful.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I ride a bike more pragmatically than you, and won't follow rules such as "don't skip red lights", although in general and if there's other traffic/pedestrians around then they are to be followed, but if you're alone I really don't see why they should be respected, just as I don't respect red lights as a pedestrian if there's no other traffic around,

Have i misunderstood, or are you saying that if we don't see any other traffic or pedestrians around, then we can ignore the highway code ?

 

[Falmer Flutter ©]

I never know where to stand in these dull debates. I love driving (no points in 25 years), I pay VED ("road tax" for the thickies), I love cycling (regularly commute in and around London), I don't jump red lights (even at an empty pedestrian crossing), I don't ride on the pavement, I wear a helmet, I have lights, I have insurance (via British Cycling membership). However, I do wear Lycra (and actually quite enjoy it, even though I do look a bit like an overstuffed sausage at times).

I'd like to think I'm a more patient and considerate car driver and cyclist as a result. People (and this includes car drivers, cyclists and pedestrians) just need to chill the **** out a bit, and everyone will get to work/the shops/home/wherever in one piece and in basically the same time.

In summary: other people are shit.

 

[Southern Scouse]

I wish I could phrase it better, but I cannot stand cyclists on our roads or pavements. I work with a lot of them, intelligent, caring people who once they don that lurid whatever colour clothing seem to change into domineering, thoughtless individual.
I simply think they should be banned and leave the highways to paying road tax users and pedestrians.

 

[DavidRyder]

I walk from Victoria through Hyde Park a lot. If you're a pedestrian, you really have to have your wits about you. Go anywhere near the cycle path that runs parallel to the normal path, and you're likely to get steamed into by the Froom wannabees. Combine these Froomies with the ambling tourists on Boris bikes, and it could easily end in carnage.

I'm certainly not pro car/anti bike - i think there's plonkers on both sides.

Worse than any of these are pedestrians with their face glued in a downward direction onto their phone....

 

[Machiavelli]

Have i misunderstood, or are you saying that if we don't see any other traffic or pedestrians around, then we can ignore the highway code ?

If you're a cyclist or a pedestrian, yes; if you're in a motorised vehicle no. I'm saying exactly the same as [MENTION=14225]AWAYDAY[/MENTION]

 

[theboybilly]

Side by siders are the most ignorant tosspots of all. Chatting about complete and utter meaningless shite that no normal person would ever be interested in, because they have no friends, other than other spandex wearing crap spouting side by side tosspots.

How do you know what they're talking about?

 

[drew]

How do you know what they're talking about?

You are aware you're feeding a troll!

 

[Fitzcarraldo]

I never know where to stand in these dull debates. I love driving (no points in 25 years), I pay VED ("road tax" for the thickies), I love cycling (regularly commute in and around London), I don't jump red lights (even at an empty pedestrian crossing), I don't ride on the pavement, I wear a helmet, I have lights, I have insurance (via British Cycling membership). However, I do wear Lycra (and actually quite enjoy it, even though I do look a bit like an overstuffed sausage at times).

I'd like to think I'm a more patient and considerate car driver and cyclist as a result. People (and this includes car drivers, cyclists and pedestrians) just need to chill the **** out a bit, and everyone will get to work/the shops/home/wherever in one piece and in basically the same time.

In summary: other people are shit.

Ain't that the truth. I commute on my bike in London too and the utter rage some drivers and cyclists work themselves into in the morning especially (but the rest of the day too) is quite amazing.

 

[BensGrandad]

My 2 complaints about cyclists are when they are riding side by side taking up more of fhe road than a car who pay to be there and when they ride on a pavement that is designed to be safe for pedstrians unless being 'chased' by a skate boarder.

 

[theboybilly]

My 2 complaints about cyclists are when they are riding side by side taking up more of fhe road than a car who pay to be there and when they ride on a pavement that is designed to be safe for pedstrians unless being 'chased' by a skate boarder.

What do you mean by 'pay to be there'?

 

[Carrot Cruncher]

What do you mean by 'pay to be there'?

You know full well what he means. He's one of the thicker than a whale omelette made with extra pigshit brigade who thinks that VED is road tax and therefore affords you more rights on the road.

 

[seagullwedgee]

I only have two problems with spandex Wankers...

Everything they do, and everything they say.

Do us all a favour, pay road tax or get off the road. Keep your poxy carbon fibre penny farthings and your too tight lurid spandex for private land, public parks, velodromes, or static in the gym.

Spandex Wankers, enough already.

 

[Fignon's Ponytail]

I only have two problems with spandex Wankers...

Everything they do, and everything they say.

Do us all a favour, pay road tax or get off the road. Keep your poxy carbon fibre penny farthings and your too tight lurid spandex for private land, public parks, velodromes, or static in the gym.

Spandex Wankers, enough already.

Ooooooooh, HANDBAGS!

 

[theboybilly]

You know full well what he means. He's one of the thicker than a whale omelette made with extra pigshit brigade who thinks that VED is road tax and therefore affords you more rights on the road.

I must admit I did and was waiting for his reply. There is always one to spout this claptrap

Edit: Make that two