Bloody Cyclists!!

[miserableoldgit]

I saw something this morning that if it hadn`t had been so annoying and possibly dangerous, would have been very funny. I was waiting at some traffic lights ( because the light were RED) when two cyclists coming from different directions, both facing red lights, decided to excercise their "right" to ignore them and sail on through. In doing this they both had to take avoiding action to stop colliding with each other.

 

Why is it that the majority of cyclists (and it IS the majority) think that red lights do not apply them, ride without lights at night, ride on pavements and yet take the moral high-ground and accuse motorists of not being "bike-aware??"

[wobbly saint]

It's not the majority I assure you.

 

Tw*t cyclists stand out much as tw*t motorists and tw*t football supporters do. Most of us are very aware of our precarious position on the roads and act accordingly. Having said that the above (and what I often see in a similar vein fr4om my bike and car) is inexcusable and annoys mosy cyclists as much as it does you.

[JackFrost]

I saw something this morning that if it hadn`t had been so annoying and possibly dangerous, would have been very funny. I was waiting at some traffic lights ( because the light were RED) when two cyclists coming from different directions, both facing red lights, decided to excercise their "right" to ignore them and sail on through. In doing this they both had to take avoiding action to stop colliding with each other.

 

Why is it that the majority of cyclists (and it IS the majority) think that red lights do not apply them, ride without lights at night, ride on pavements and yet take the moral high-ground and accuse motorists of not being "bike-aware??"

 

I couldn't agree with you more. There is this culture where in an accident between a car and a bike the driver of the car will always get blamed for it. Because of this there are cyclists out there who don't think the rules of the road apply to them. The amount of times I've come up behind a cyclist and they've swerved out in the middle of the road without looking and with no indication to turn right has been unbelievable.

 

There again the proportion if idiots cycling is probably about the same as it is with idiot car drivers

[hamster]

They should be licensed/registered, a simple factory stamped number would actually reduce thefts

 

They should be taxed, this would then help justify the millions spent on cycle lane provision. The red ones in London are ace btw.

 

They should be insured, just like any vehicle on a public road they can and do cause accidents.

[hamster]

The other week I had to ride my Dawes folding boneshaker (circa 1975) from St Catherines Dock to Liverpool Street Station.

 

I would not have made it alive had it not been for the cycle lanes.

 

In spite of the lanes, I still had to keep stopping to ask directions, without exception every cyclist I spoke to was helpful and courteous. However, as soon as lights went green they were off like lunatics. Scared me more than the cars if I'm honest.

 

However, however, I can see why they have to ride like that, if they didn't they would have been just like myself; scared, going nowhere fast and a threat to those around them.

 

With a few exceptions I'd say it's car drivers who need to slow down.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

They should be licensed/registered, a simple factory stamped number would actually reduce thefts

 

They should be taxed, this would then help justify the millions spent on cycle lane provision. The red ones in London are ace btw.

 

They should be insured, just like any vehicle on a public road they can and do cause accidents.

 

Yes, they should attract the same duty as other vehicles in lowest emission banding - £0.

[Saint In Exile]

They should be licensed/registered, a simple factory stamped number would actually reduce thefts

 

They should be taxed, this would then help justify the millions spent on cycle lane provision. The red ones in London are ace btw.

 

They should be insured, just like any vehicle on a public road they can and do cause accidents.

 

As a regular cyclist in London I couldn't agree more, if cyclists were licensed, taxed and insured then, hopefully, you'd remove most of the poor ones as licensing, taxing and insuring does with car drivers...

[miserableoldgit]

The other week I had to ride my Dawes folding boneshaker (circa 1975) from St Catherines Dock to Liverpool Street Station.

 

I would not have made it alive had it not been for the cycle lanes.

 

In spite of the lanes, I still had to keep stopping to ask directions, without exception every cyclist I spoke to was helpful and courteous. However, as soon as lights went green they were off like lunatics. Scared me more than the cars if I'm honest.

 

However, however, I can see why they have to ride like that, if they didn't they would have been just like myself; scared, going nowhere fast and a threat to those around them.

 

With a few exceptions I'd say it's car drivers who need to slow down.[/QUOTE]#

TBF I wouldn`t disagree, but there is a difference between ill-mannered driving and deliberately breaking/ ignoring laws/rules which is what MOST cyclists do when it comes to traffic lights, lights at night etc. I do believe that it is the majority as I am always pleasantly surprised when I DO actually see a cyclist waiting at the lights.

[doddisalegend]

I saw something this morning that if it hadn`t had been so annoying and possibly dangerous, would have been very funny. I was waiting at some traffic lights ( because the light were RED) when two cyclists coming from different directions, both facing red lights, decided to excercise their "right" to ignore them and sail on through. In doing this they both had to take avoiding action to stop colliding with each other.

 

Why is it that the majority of cyclists (and it IS the majority) think that red lights do not apply them, ride without lights at night, ride on pavements and yet take the moral high-ground and accuse motorists of not being "bike-aware??"

 

My Dads way of looking at it has always been that everyone else on the road be it car, bike, moped, bus or lorry is a grade A ****ing lunatic. Just expect them all to something stupid and dangerous and you'll be fine.

 

I use a cheap 125 moped to commute and work and back and some bastard in car will try and knock my off every day having said there are plenty of mad cyclists to and most moped/motorbike riders seem to drive like they want to die.

Edited 6 June, 2011 by doddisalegend

[Minty]

If every road user respected every other road user, then we'd be fine. There are poor cyclists, poor drivers, poor motorcyclists, and poor pedestrians who also like to use the road sometimes!

 

A couple of things re some points raised above:

 

- Cyclists are 'taxed'. Roads and cycle lanes are paid for through general taxation. Vehicle Excise Duty does not pay for them. And if cyclists were brought in to be covered by VED, then they would have zero charge because of their 'emissions'. Except perhaps those who'd had a curry the night before.

 

- Insurance and licensing, I agree, should be compulsory for *any* vehicle on the road.

 

- doddisalegend is spot on... assume everyone is going to cut you up or drive like an idiot. Anticipation is king.

 

- Responsible cyclists hate those who go through red lights and ride carelessly as much as any driver, if not more so, because we get labelled the same way.

 

- Speed is undoubtedly a problem, but impatience is worse. The combination is what usually causes serious accidents.

[JackFrost]

My Dads way of looking at it has always been that everyone else on the road be it car, bike, moped, bus or lorry is a grade A ****ing lunatic. Just expecti them all to something stupid and dangerous and you'll be fine.

 

I use a cheap 125 moped to commute and work and back and some bastard in car will try and knock my off every day having said there are plenty of mad cyclists to and most moped/motorbike riders seem to drive like they want to die.

 

It's the mentality I've always taken in the 25 years I've been driving and I haven't had an accident yet.

[doddisalegend]

If every road user respected every other road user, then we'd be fine. There are poor cyclists, poor drivers, poor motorcyclists, and poor pedestrians who also like to use the road sometimes!

 

A couple of things re some points raised above:

 

- Cyclists are 'taxed'. Roads and cycle lanes are paid for through general taxation. Vehicle Excise Duty does not pay for them. And if cyclists were brought in to be covered by VED, then they would have zero charge because of their 'emissions'. Except perhaps those who'd had a curry the night before.

 

- Insurance and licensing, I agree, should be compulsory for *any* vehicle on the road.

 

- doddisalegend is spot on... assume everyone is going to cut you up or drive like an idiot. Anticipation is king.

 

- Responsible cyclists hate those who go through red lights and ride carelessly as much as any driver, if not more so, because we get labelled the same way.

 

- Speed is undoubtedly a problem, but impatience is worse. The combination is what usually causes serious accidents.

 

Spot on hence all the people who pull out at junctions when it isn't safe, cut people up at round abouts or overtake on blind corners. I've seen this behavoiur from all types of road users.

[keithd]

My Dads way of looking at it has always been that everyone else on the road be it car, bike, moped, bus or lorry is a grade A ****ing lunatic. Just expect them all to something stupid and dangerous and you'll be fine.

 

I use a cheap 125 moped to commute and work and back and some bastard in car will try and knock my off every day having said there are plenty of mad cyclists to and most moped/motorbike riders seem to drive like they want to die.

 

yep, spot on. when i was learning to ride my motorbike my instructor taught me that when i approached a junction even if the driver is looking directly at you, has acknowledged your existance and is wearing a tee shirt saying "i have seen you" assume he hasnt seen you and treat acordingly

 

oh and talking of taxing road users, horses as well. they use the road, they sh*t on the road and make it dangerous so tax them too!

[Dimond Geezer]

They should be licensed/registered, a simple factory stamped number would actually reduce thefts

 

They should be taxed, this would then help justify the millions spent on cycle lane provision. The red ones in London are ace btw.

 

They should be insured, just like any vehicle on a public road they can and do cause accidents.

 

I don't know why we bother with these things. Many cyclist don't use them. My journey to work takes me through Chilworth without fail there are cyclist on the road ignoring the bloody things. This morning there were four of the mongs cycling about 15m apart on the road, 2m to their left is a nice shiny, barely used cycle path they could have safely used.

[Hatch]

oh and talking of taxing road users, horses as well. they use the road, they sh*t on the road and make it dangerous so tax them too!

 

This, so much this.

 

This country has billions and billions and billions of acres of fields. Why do they need to even be on the road.

[Minty]

I don't know why we bother with these things. Many cyclist don't use them. My journey to work takes me through Chilworth without fail there are cyclist on the road ignoring the bloody things. This morning there were four of the mongs cycling about 15m apart on the road, 2m to their left is a nice shiny, barely used cycle path they could have safely used.

 

Cycle paths are very good for the occasional or recreational cyclist who is not confident using the road. Unfortunately for people like myself they are like going down a bumpy B road when there is a motorway available. Newer ones are not bad, but many are poorly surfaced, quite a few are dangerous because you're sharing with pedestrians, and they are a lot slower because you have to give way to 101 different things that you don't have to on the road.

 

The difference in quality of cycle lanes is shocking. Some are very good, and I use them. On some very busy roads, they are almost essential (Millbrook Road for example... although it's not ideal, you generally don't want to be on the 3-lane carriageway unless it's quiet). But many of them are pointless, too short, in poor condition, unsafe for pedestrians, and give no benefit to competent cyclists.

[Dimond Geezer]

Cycle paths are very good for the occasional or recreational cyclist who is not confident using the road. Unfortunately for people like myself they are like going down a bumpy B road when there is a motorway available. Newer ones are not bad, but many are poorly surfaced, quite a few are dangerous because you're sharing with pedestrians, and they are a lot slower because you have to give way to 101 different things that you don't have to on the road.

 

The difference in quality of cycle lanes is shocking. Some are very good, and I use them. On some very busy roads, they are almost essential (Millbrook Road for example... although it's not ideal, you generally don't want to be on the 3-lane carriageway unless it's quiet). But many of them are pointless, too short, in poor condition, unsafe for pedestrians, and give no benefit to competent cyclists.

 

 

The paths I'm talking about are of a reasonable standard, I know because I'm a fairweather cyclist and during the summer will use them to cycle to work, they are shared with pedestrians, but there are very few, if any, pedestrians on them at 7.30 am. As I see it the the problem is 2 fold, the first is cyclist arrogance, determined to excercise their right to use the road, the second is patience, something the driver is often accused of not having. As you mentioned in your post, most cyclists don't want to have to give way to anything, including red lights as alluded to by the OP.

[Minty]

As I see it the the problem is 2 fold, the first is cyclist arrogance, determined to excercise their right to use the road, the second is patience, something the driver is often accused of not having. As you mentioned in your post, most cyclists don't want to have to give way to anything, including red lights as alluded to by the OP.

 

Poorly worded on my part perhaps, so please don't confuse my comment about giving way to things with impatience. Put simply, if there are two routes you can legally take, and one takes a lot longer than the other, which would you take? Cycle routes are mostly conversions of pavements of existing paved areas that cross driveways, access roads, side roads, and use crossings etc, which take far longer than using the road.

 

I know the road you mean, and to be fair, that isn't a bad cycle route. I've used it myself many times, however one of my main reasons is because some drivers drive quite quickly along the single carriageway road and struggle to brake in time when they come round a couple of the corners to be faced with an obstruction, or a cyclist they want to overtake and a vehicle is coming the other way.

[CB Saint]

Why is it that it is ok for a horse to have a dump on the road and the owner be allowed to leave it there, when if a dog owner did the same they would be fined?

 

Oh and back on topic - if you are one of the cyclists who insists on ignoring the cycle path on the milbrook road, you have a death wish which will probably come true one day.

[saintsab1]

Speaking as a driver for 20 years (10 years commercially) and a part time cyclist for the last 5 years, I have to be honest and tell you that cyclists really do get a raw deal on the roads, however there are bad cyclists as well as bad drivers. My twice a day 7 mile trip across the city usually means at least 4 or 5 dangerous encounters with cars.

 

The thing that seems to really annoy car drivers is the "jumping red lights" issue. What advantage do you think a cyclist gains from going through a red light? Realistically, they are not really going to get to their destination any quicker, and certainly not quicker than the driver who will pass them further up the road when it is much safer to do so.

 

The reason cyclists go through red lights is because it is simply SAFER to get yourself away before all the other traffic starts moving.

 

Imagine cycling down Bitterne Road towards the City Centre and wanting to turn right into bullar Road. Do you think cyclists look for a gap on a dual carriage way with cars doing 50mph+ to then pull out into the outside lane ? It would not only hold the traffic up but would also tempt drivers into performing dangerous undertaking. So what would you do??

 

Have a think about a cyclists alternitives next time you see one...

[miserableoldgit]

Speaking as a driver for 20 years (10 years commercially) and a part time cyclist for the last 5 years, I have to be honest and tell you that cyclists really do get a raw deal on the roads, however there are bad cyclists as well as bad drivers. My twice a day 7 mile trip across the city usually means at least 4 or 5 dangerous encounters with cars.

 

The thing that seems to really annoy car drivers is the "jumping red lights" issue. What advantage do you think a cyclist gains from going through a red light? Realistically, they are not really going to get to their destination any quicker, and certainly not quicker than the driver who will pass them further up the road when it is much safer to do so.

 

The reason cyclists go through red lights is because it is simply SAFER to get yourself away before all the other traffic starts moving.

 

Imagine cycling down Bitterne Road towards the City Centre and wanting to turn right into bullar Road. Do you think cyclists look for a gap on a dual carriage way with cars doing 50mph+ to then pull out into the outside lane ? It would not only hold the traffic up but would also tempt drivers into performing dangerous undertaking. So what would you do??

 

Have a think about a cyclists alternitives next time you see one...

How can anyone claim that it is safe to ignore a red light at a road junction? I assume that it is still illegal to go through a red light.

[trousers]

It's not the majority I assure you.

 

I take it you don't go to London very often?

 

90% (no exageration) of cyclists ignore red lights in London.

[trousers]

I assume that it is still illegal to go through a red light.

 

Yes. For cyclists as well as motorists.

[Hatch]

I take it you don't go to London very often?

 

90% (no exageration) of cyclists ignore red lights in London.

 

I don't. :-)

[Barry the Badger]

The amount of times I've come up behind a cyclist and they've swerved out in the middle of the road without looking and with no indication to turn right has been unbelievable.

 

Perhaps. But next time you are driving count the number of times you see a motorist doing something without indicating.

[saintsab1]

How can anyone claim that it is safe to ignore a red light at a road junction? I assume that it is still illegal to go through a red light.

 

I didnt claim it was SAFE, I claimed it was SAFER and clearly doesnt apply at all junctions, and yes it is still illegal to go through a red light. But I assume its still illegal to break the speed limit in a car? I take it you'd never do that......

[badgerx16]

Perhaps. But next time you are driving count the number of times you see a motorist doing something without indicating.

Or even indicating one way and turning the other !

 

I think that cyclists, as with any other subset of the population, suffer by having a small proportion of f()ckwits who wish to impose their will upon others who might not share their evangelistic position, eg those that 'own' every inch of tarmac and resent having to share any part of it with unbelievers, be they in a car or on foot. On the other hand, I've lost count of the number of drivers, whether in car or lorry, who leave the absolute minimum distance to my right as they shoot past me, or who cannot wait behind for 20 yards as I pass the junction they wish to turn into - I had one who went past me and turned no more than 10 yards in front into his drive, why the f'ing rush ?

[mcjwills]

One of the problems that, drivers suffer from with cyclist are the F***wit drivers that will simply not pass a cyclist unless they can go on the other side of the road and give at least 9 feet between the side of their car and the cyclist, and as that means they have to go virtually on the other side of the road that means those following the f***wit have to wait until a 3 mile space is available on the other side of the road, and we have to travel for 1/2 mile behind the cyclist at 6 miles an hour, just what you want in rush hour on your way to work. If it was just 1 f***wit it would be ok but the standard of driving has dropped so much nowadays that 25% behave like this. I was taught just pull out enough to pass safely and drive past, this usually means your drivers side wheels just crossing the white line, not your whole bloody car.

[hamster]

Well I am afraid that I would not have fell into that zero emissions category the other week, I shat myself every time I had to make a right turn. But point taken.

[mcjwills]

I was turning right out of Lowford onto the A27 the other day when whilst waiting patiently at the junction a group of racing club types come up on my left and proceed to cut around the front of me as I am turning right and then abuse me for not letting them go before turning right because those cannts have just cut me up.

[hamster]

Red lights are for car drivers as it is they who NEED TELLING when to slow down. Just observe the courtesy or lack of at a roundabout, almost no existent.

 

Cyclist in general much like motorcyclists have some sixth sense that I believe many car drivers are jealous of. I am a very rare cyclist but Tge feeling when freewheeling along is very embracing. I'd go as far as to say that cycling is probably the next best travel experience to driving a convertible.

 

I also loved seeing those Boris Bikes, brilliant and very popular.