Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,340
- Location
- Rollergirl
Yes, nice comeback. That's another one put me in my place.
I've made my point, and I have no desire to enforce it on you or anyone else. People either agree or disagree.
Poll: Poll pls: In the presence of a dedicated cycle lane, should cyclists be allowed to use the roads?
- Thread starter Diddums
- Start date
Yes, nice comeback. That's another one put me in my place.
I've made my point, and I have no desire to enforce it on you or anyone else. People either agree or disagree.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,111
- Location
- Shepley
Cycle lanes are generally rubbish and I'd rather have a wider road than a narrow road and cycle path in pretty much every situation.
The cyclists have a bucket load of what appears to be independent pedestrian lights to go through to get around the roundabout, cars have far fewer lights.
Also cyclists going a a decent speed also have to watch out for dozy peds looking at their phones. Of course they also have to watch out for car users doing the same thing.
I am a mixed transport user I take the train twice a week and car and cycle 3 times a week.
I nearly missed the 8am train this morning due to a cyclist "freewheeling" very slowly down a busy road.
Sat behind her thinking you are the reason cyclists get a bad name I had to put the car in neutral and coast behind her.
Also cyclists going a a decent speed also have to watch out for dozy peds looking at their phones. Of course they also have to watch out for car users doing the same thing.
I am a mixed transport user I take the train twice a week and car and cycle 3 times a week.
I nearly missed the 8am train this morning due to a cyclist "freewheeling" very slowly down a busy road.
Sat behind her thinking you are the reason cyclists get a bad name I had to put the car in neutral and coast behind her.
Last edited:
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Yes - I ride at a speed inappropriate for most cycle and most cycle lanes stop at junctions - meaning you have stop and start all the time, unlike if you were using the main carriageway.
In the roundabout example in the OP's post, I would however prefer to use the cycle path, as long as the traffic light sequence was quick enough to let me cross the junctions in a decent amount of time. I think to use or not use should be at the discretion of the cyclist though. Ultimately, they are the ones best placed to decide if their skill level and confidence lets them navigate such a roundabout.
Erm, pedestrians are allowed to walk in the road even if there is a perfectly good footpath though!
In the roundabout example in the OP's post, I would however prefer to use the cycle path, as long as the traffic light sequence was quick enough to let me cross the junctions in a decent amount of time. I think to use or not use should be at the discretion of the cyclist though. Ultimately, they are the ones best placed to decide if their skill level and confidence lets them navigate such a roundabout.
Erm, pedestrians are allowed to walk in the road even if there is a perfectly good footpath though!
Last edited by a moderator:
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 3,739
- Location
- Delete *.*
Militant cyclists who insist on using the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane right next to them are just inconsiderate ****s.
It's hard to judge what is a 'perfectly good cycle lane or not'. Just because the government has wasted money building one, it doesn't mean that it is any good. The example of that roundabout is one that may not be very good. It looks like there is traffic light control for cyclists to cross every single entrance / exit of the roundabout. I can understand why someone who is comfortable being in traffic would avoid using that cycle lane as they could navigate the roundabout in 15 seconds rather than start/stop for a few minutes to get round.
Recently one was added in Manchester that directed cyclist pretty much under a bus. Planners get things wrong. Councils will install cycle lanes as they need to be seen to be doing that, but it doesn't mean they're wanted or useful. Also a 'perfectly good cycle lane' might covered in glass, which is something I often find on my commute.
I cycle in and out of Manchester city centre most days. I navigate a similar roundabout, but do so using the cycle lanes as they give access to the centre of the roundabout and from there it's possible to reach other exits without going through various traffic lights / crossing lanes of traffic. Though despite these lights, I've had a few car drivers run the lights and then beep at me for crossing the lane when I had a green light
You can't enforce a law that says you must use a cycle lane unless it's unsafe to do so as judging that it is unsafe is open to discretion.
(fwiw I'm one of those cyclists who doesn't wear lycra (what an awful look), is lit up light a Christmas tree but not with blinding lights that point at drivers and tuts at other cyclists who run red lights)
Recently one was added in Manchester that directed cyclist pretty much under a bus. Planners get things wrong. Councils will install cycle lanes as they need to be seen to be doing that, but it doesn't mean they're wanted or useful. Also a 'perfectly good cycle lane' might covered in glass, which is something I often find on my commute.
I cycle in and out of Manchester city centre most days. I navigate a similar roundabout, but do so using the cycle lanes as they give access to the centre of the roundabout and from there it's possible to reach other exits without going through various traffic lights / crossing lanes of traffic. Though despite these lights, I've had a few car drivers run the lights and then beep at me for crossing the lane when I had a green light
You can't enforce a law that says you must use a cycle lane unless it's unsafe to do so as judging that it is unsafe is open to discretion.
(fwiw I'm one of those cyclists who doesn't wear lycra (what an awful look), is lit up light a Christmas tree but not with blinding lights that point at drivers and tuts at other cyclists who run red lights)
Look at the tone of the thread though. Playing victim? Well in this thread cyclists are being victimised. "They", "them", "lycra nobbers", "lycra clad imbeclies", "lycra mafia", "I actually hate them", "militant cyclists".
It is this general "us and them" attitude and ignorance which is one of the largest factors preventing the improvement of cycling safety in this country, not whether cycle lanes are used or not.
But no, we're not understanding, we are generally selfish road users. We care solely for our own interests. Overtaking people when they're already going the speed limit, cutting people up, flashing lights at people deemed to be driving too slow, tailgating. It is ingrained in our motoring culture. I am guilty of it myself at times.
To think that all cyclists are going to use cycle lanes where available is idiotic, it isn't going to happen. An entire shift in attitude is required and it isn't happening anytime soon. Imagine being able to drive to work with less cars on the roads and needing to slow down a little to pass a cyclist wasn't a big day-spoiling ordeal. For me, that is what we should be trying to head towards. A healthier, greener society, and one where you don't have to sit for such an obscene amount of time in a queue of cars on the way to work; even if is meant having to overtake a few more cyclists.
(Woo I posted in the monthly thread).
Speaking as a cyclist and a driver, some of the the cycle lanes round my way are an inconvenience. They actually made a wide road narrower so they could put a shared cycle path on the pavement. This means cyclists have to stop to give way at all the side roads if they are using the lane. Staying on the road means they can just use the road as normal without stopping. Why would anyone use something that makes their journey slower? Now we have cyclists on the road and on the pavement. It's money spent for nothing.
They could have just as easily made the road wider (there was room) and had plenty of space for motorists and cyclists.
I thought it had been a while since the latest GD bashing of cyclists.
Define "perfectly usable"? Since as a biased motorist, you probably assume a shared path strewn with pedestrians, leaves, stones and glass as perfectly acceptable for the third class road citizens as you've never actually ridden in one for any length of time and don't realise just how unpleasant and dangerous they can be.
When cycle paths are designed properly, cleaned properly, repaired properly, safely built, not shared paths, and bicycles have priority and right of way through junctions I'll stick to cycle lanes. Until then, I'll use my judgement and decide where I ride based on what I believe is safest.
Define "perfectly usable"? Since as a biased motorist, you probably assume a shared path strewn with pedestrians, leaves, stones and glass as perfectly acceptable for the third class road citizens as you've never actually ridden in one for any length of time and don't realise just how unpleasant and dangerous they can be.
When cycle paths are designed properly, cleaned properly, repaired properly, safely built, not shared paths, and bicycles have priority and right of way through junctions I'll stick to cycle lanes. Until then, I'll use my judgement and decide where I ride based on what I believe is safest.
Last edited:
Do you work for the London Taxi Drivers Association? You sound as completely ignorant as their spokespeople.
Did you actually read anything I've posted, or simply see the word "cyclist" and automatically get defensive and play the victim card?
Look at the tone of the thread though. Playing victim? Well in this thread cyclists are being victimised. "They", "them", "lycra nobbers", "lycra clad imbeclies", "lycra mafia", "I actually hate them", "militant cyclists".
It is this general "us and them" attitude and ignorance which is one of the largest factors preventing the improvement of cycling safety in this country, not whether cycle lanes are used or not.
But no, we're not understanding, we are generally selfish road users. We care solely for our own interests. Overtaking people when they're already going the speed limit, cutting people up, flashing lights at people deemed to be driving too slow, tailgating. It is ingrained in our motoring culture. I am guilty of it myself at times.
To think that all cyclists are going to use cycle lanes where available is idiotic, it isn't going to happen. An entire shift in attitude is required and it isn't happening anytime soon. Imagine being able to drive to work with less cars on the roads and needing to slow down a little to pass a cyclist wasn't a big day-spoiling ordeal. For me, that is what we should be trying to head towards. A healthier, greener society, and one where you don't have to sit for such an obscene amount of time in a queue of cars on the way to work; even if is meant having to overtake a few more cyclists.
(Woo I posted in the monthly thread).
Excellent post.
The situation is something we all have to live with. We have to accept that people, whatever their mode of transport can be idiots. Best thing is just to back off, allow a bit more time and chill out. Getting angry every time a cyclist 'jumps a red light' or a car driver 'cut's someone up' is just leading to an irrational hatred towards every member of a group. I was told the other day by a friend of my wife, that they had never seen a cyclist stop at a red light. Really? Can that be true? Or is she just blinded by the hatred?
Perhaps if we were more courteous towards each other people wouldn't feel the need to take so many risks.
One thing's for sure, the roads are only going to get more clogged up, we need to change ourselves for it to get better.
Good point, I agree 100%. I used to drive along the A53 to work, and this is a classic example of this. It has a wide pavement and has has a green cycle lane marked out. Yet, it is completely impractical. The road has many, many side roads interrupting the lane. Not to mention the bus stops, pedestrian crossings, lamp posts and exchange boxes littering the path.
Not a chance am I cycling in that lane. I'm not stopping at every side road and I'm not weaving around all the obstacles. I'm going on the road and bypassing it all, it's faster and saves me time.
Last edited:
I've read all of your drivel in this thread, though only god knows why.
Sorry for coming on a little strong, but you really don't seem to be displaying much analytical thought in this approach. It's also hard not to automatically get defensive in yet another GD thread which from the outset is antagonistic towards cyclists.
You said (provided it's in decent condition ofc) but neglected to say: a) what you consider to be decent condition, b) how we legislate this decent condition (as after all if we're then forcing people to use dedicated cycle lanes, we need some way of measuring their quality), and c) when your journey is being delayed by another few seconds because of a cyclist flaunting this law, what the necessary actions would be, and d) what potential penalties you want.
We need to actively be discouraging people from driving. Introducing ill-thought out barriers to alternatives won't achieve this.
Last edited: