Should a bicycle be on the roads

Fine, I'll take the bait and post in an "AMG take dese menaces off teh roads" thread :)

Theres terrible motorists and cyclists, it's that minority that make the roads bad.

Take someone who managed to pass their driving test on the 27th time round, "yey! congratulations, here's the keys for a ton of steel to catapult around at 70mph". Chances are this driver is terrible at driving. People see it as a right to drive, which is a load of ****. More policing and ripping up of licenses is needed to get the minority of motorists off the road that are a hazard to everyone else.

Cycling does need some sort of test as well, the amount of numptys I see every day riding on bikes dangerously scares me. From kids (and adults) flying around on pavements at 15mph+ makes me wonder why there isn't more serious accidents.
Whats worse is seeing people of equal skill and sense as the above but on roads.

Should cycling be allowed on roads? of course it should, don't think your better than a cyclist because your form of transport is a metal bin with 4 wheels :)*

What is needed is the removal of unsafe drivers and riders, which sadly isn't an easy thing to do.


yer_averagejoe said:
"A cyclist is in front of me!? I MUST OVERTAKE BECAUSE I AM IN A CAAAR RAAAAWWR!"
Click to expand...

So true :), and then take a left turn about 50m down the road.


*said in jest, I'd say about 90% of motorists I meet on the roads are capable and courteous road users :)
 
Cyclists where there before cars.

Also, the faster you go on a bicycle, the worse car drivers are. I was doing 24mph coming into a 20mph zone, slowing down to 20mph, and a car overtook me, don't forget, when I'm doing 17mph it would be showing as 20mph in a car, unless they've all got GPS...

I've being doing 30mph into my village, it's a 30mph limit, I get overtook.

I've being doing 25mph up to a tight bend, I don't need to slow down, bus overtakes me, slams on to about 22mph.

I don't see any reason why responsible cyclists should be forced off the road, and some of the comments by some people in here are silly tbh and it makes me think what they're like.

I've seen car drivers expecting ME to give way to my LEFT before at a roundabout, wtf is that all about... I'm then going along with the flow of traffic and a driver comes up the side of me, impatient idiot.

One of the things I hate I roundabouts and main junctions on the bike, I just feel pressured to go, when it is unsafe, because of the impatient driver behind me, that then may decide to cut me up.
 
Last edited:
redeye_uk said:
Do I hate the fact they dont pay insurance - yes.
Do I hate it when cyclists skip red lights and disregard other laws - yes.
Do I hate it when i'm waiting at traffic lights and a cyclist does that one legged hop between the traffic and I have to stare like a hawk to make sure they don't scratch my car - yes.


Ultimately should cyclists be allowed on the road - yes

At the end of the day I get far more annoyed with other so called drivers than I do with cyclists.
Click to expand...

Why would cyclists pay insurance? Would you expect horse riders or animals or pedestrians to have insurance? There is a clear difference between the two types of roads users!

I'm not sure if this is a London thing or not but most cyclists I know or see do not jump read lights. It would mean injury (either to themselves or a pedestrian) or death. Most cyclists I see are sensible and whilst far from perfect are better road users than a lot of car drivers.

To answer the OP:

Cyclists should be on the road. Cycle paths have there place but a lot of them are very poorly designed full of dust, glass and other crap or worse are shared. Pedestrians pay no attention to being in a cycle path or just wander in and out forcing me to slow down making the time it takes to get anywhere a lot slower.
 
I think they should ban horse riders off the road, unless they all cleaned up the **** off the road from the horse. It's so annoying not to mention sickly running/cycling through it.

There's plenty of fields for horses to go in, and horse boxes to transport them to and from the fields.
 
Morbius said:
For the same reason that car drivers pay insurance.
Click to expand...

Going by that view I expect you would want pedestrians, horse riders and animals to pay insurance as well then?

It is their right to use the road. Better make sure those pesky sheep have insurance and registration plates just in case they damage your car...
 
MickeyFinns said:
This is just round the corner from me and is ideal;

Google maps link

But obviously can't be applied everywhere. I think the new cycle highways in London are a fantastic idea except it appears that cars are still allowed to travel in them :confused: .
Click to expand...

and if you rotate the view 180 you'll see a car stopped in the cycle zone.
this is the problem.
we have a funny situation here, in one direction there is a bus/cycle lane all the way to town but on the way out there is no cycle path for 75% of the way out. the 25% that is covered is pavement with signs but no markings (this side bikes, that side people) and is bearly wide enough for people never mind bikes.
the trees / bushes are growing over the path in many places and it's always covered in glass. but then so is the road.
I'm a driver but also commute to work and back by bike, the only reason I do this is because there is no parking, I do not feel safe on the road (buses and cars give 0 room when overtaking here, because there is no room) nor on the pavement (pedestrians in their own world who, upon hearing a bell, turn around to look as you cycle into them)

we need REAL cycle lanes for BIKES around here. the councils proposed scheme takes you 5 miles out of your way (though the hilliest roads EVER) rather than a 1.5-2mile road.
MADNESS.
 
Morbius said:
For the same reason that car drivers pay insurance.
Click to expand...

Hello,

I drive a car, which I pay insurance for.

I also own two bikes, which are insured and also covers me for up to 3 million in public liability insurance and legal assistance in any dispute.

Now climb down from your high (steel) horse.
 
Surfer said:
Basically i dont think bicycles should be on roads. I think pavements should be expanded to encompass cyclists.
Click to expand...
Well I don't think cars should be in towns - there should be say a ~1 mile private car exclusion zone across the middle of all reasonable sized towns (>100k people for example), at least between 7am and 7pm.

Driving cars through town centres is just daft in my opinion.
 
Nexus said:
Hello,

I drive a car, which I pay insurance for.

I also own two bikes, which are insured and also covers me for up to 3 million in public liability insurance and legal assistance in any dispute.

Now climb down from your high (steel) horse.
Click to expand...

I wasn't the guy suggesting that they should pay insurance. However I commend you for being insured regardless.
 
bam0 said:
That's your perception, as a car I doubt you're watching the road surface immediately in front of you as closely as a cyclist is. Just because you think there was nothing to avoid doesn't mean they thought the same, and if you were following the highway code and giving them enough room when passing it wouldn't matter anyway.
Click to expand...
Bingo.

redeye_uk said:
Do I hate it when i'm waiting at traffic lights and a cyclist does that one legged hop between the traffic and I have to stare like a hawk to make sure they don't scratch my car - yes.
etc... etc...
Click to expand...
Do you watch cars like a hawk too? They can do an awful lot more than scratch your paintwork.
 
Morbius said:
Bicycles are capable of injuring people. Why should they be exempt?
Click to expand...
Are horses or pedestrians not so capable? Remember insurance isn't to cover the possibility of injuring people, but the covering of possible liability. Pedestrians are more likely to cause an accident in my opinion, given the majority of their headless wandering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom