Cycleists should have to take a test

volospian said:
The problem I have with cyclists is their totaly arrogance regarding rural road use. They seem to think that, because it's a country road, and they are a cyclist, they don't have to give way to traffic. That can ride side by side, or in the middle of the lane, around twisty country roads thereby forcing a line of vehicles to trail along behind at 20mph because they can't see if it's safe to go right over into the other lane to get past. Or that it's perfectly acceptable to be so out of control of the cycle that they wobble about like a drunken butterfly and then expect every other road user to get a ton or so of metal out of their suddenly random path.

The amount of times I've seen families of amatuer cyclist families wobbling around like a living representation of brownian motion because "it's a nice Sunday morning, we should all go out for a family ride in the country.... now where's my old bike that I haven't ridden for about a decade"

FFS, learn to ride properly before you go out, and respect the fact that you will only be doing 20 in a 60 limit, and therefore that others will want to get past you safely, so move over, ride single file and try not to swerve into the middle of the road randomly when there is traffic behind.

Oh, and use lights, reflective jackets and so on. Just because you can see our bright lights hurtling towards you in the twilight, it doesn't mean we can see you!
Click to expand...



Typical arrogant driver mentality.
 
badbob said:
No. We can't go on the motorway so why should we? We don't do as much damage as cars either.
Click to expand...

Nor can small engined mopeds and they pay road tax, so that argument is out of the window.
As for the claim that they cause less damage, by some of the actions that cyclists take, a huge amount of devastation can be (and has been) caused.
 
And tell the rest of the forum that quite a number of cyclists in the UK get killed and quite often injured by motorists who drive too fast and don't drive at all responsibly when passing cyclists.

I was run over at the end of my road about 10 years ago when coming back from my mates. Sitting at the junction quite happily waiting to go right when she buggered me from behind. The police reckoned she was doing 45 in a 30 (looking at the skidmarks) and the only reason I am still alive is the helmet that I was wearing at the time.

Kinda puts things in perspective when motorists whinge about cyclists and how they always get in the way.

:)
 
How does that put anything in perspective? Yes car drivers break the law and there are consequences of those actions. The issue is that so do cyclists, but they are unregulated and generally untraceable following such incidents.
I'm not bothered about the road tax issue, but I do think they should be accountable for thier actions which just isn't the case at present.
 
DampCat said:
I think cyclists should pay road tax.
Click to expand...
I do, but only because I own a car.

Cyclists put very little wear and tear on the road tho... but also cycling is being encouraged right now as it's environmentally friendly, and introducing road tax for them would go against that.
 
MikeHunt79 said:
I do, but only because I own a car.

Cyclists put very little wear and tear on the road tho... but also cycling is being encouraged right now as it's environmentally friendly, and introducing road tax for them would go against that.
Click to expand...


I don't think cyclists should have to pay road tax, but I think that they should display registration, and pay insurance.
 
emailiscrap said:
How does that put anything in perspective?
Click to expand...

Because the Clarkson mentality that is so furiously held on forums like these is that cyclists are a nuisance, a menace to society and should be treated as such. It gets a little tiring.

Road tax would be a joke, why exactly should they pay that?

JPMonkey is right, if anything insurance would be the way forwards and a registration plate would also be useful.
 
I agree with the sentiments expressed in this thread in general, but I do want to just say don't tar all cyclists with the same brush (that of the kerb-hopping, red-light ignoring muppet)

I am both a regular driver and a (slightly less) regular cyclist and can appreciate both sides of the argument. I ALWAYS wear a helmet (personal choice but with encouragement from family after a relative died after going over the handlebars), ALWAYS take fully functioning lights when it is likely that I am going to be travelling there or back after dark, ALWAYS stop for red lights including pelican/toucan/other crossings, ALWAYS ride with great consideration of other road users and VERY RARELY kerb hop and when I do I always give priority to pedestrians.

Sadly it seems in my behaviour that I'm in an extremely small minority. Cambridge has a large number of cyclists compared to its' population and the vast majority ride like fools. My two pet hates even when I'm on my bike are cyclists riding 2/3 abreast and of course red light jumping - I have been known to shout after the muppets that do it after they've squeezed past me waiting at the white line at the lights and cycled straight across, shortly followed by me catching them straight up and overtaking them as they ride like grannies imbetween lights as Matteh will testify.

Yet on the flipside, I get fed up with motorists - particularly bus drivers and hgv drivers - not leaving enough room for cyclists and generally not paying any care or attention to our presence on the road. While I've not had an accident yet (touch wood) I've had several near misses...
 
Last edited:
Mohinder said:
I don't think there's really anything wrong with being a ruthless, suicidal, law-breaking, red-light jumping, pedestrian harassing pedal-powered missile, I used to quite enjoy it.

I must say, you're very defensive.
Click to expand...

I'd be careful doing that around London if Traf Pol are about, I've seen them nicking cyclists for jumping reds.
 
It's the pedestrian crossings in London that get me, cyclists just don't seem to think they have/need to stop! I know lots of people who have been hit and quite a few who have been hurt by cyclists riding straight through crossings and I loose count of the number of near misses that I've seen or been involced in (I don't even live there or visit that often!). Registration and insurance would go along way to helping with this becasue at least then there would be a way of tracing the individual so they can be fined as appropriate, a chance of compensation fr injuries and financial pain for the cyclist in terms of increased premiums.

I also have a pet hat about London cyclists moaning about getting hit by lorries turning right, simple solution don't ride down the inside of a lorry at a junction it's not exactly rocket science is it!

Other than that no real problem drivers treat cyclists like muck so cyclists do likewise big deal!
 
I always try and ride within the law when I'm out and about on the bike and the only time I've ever had a spill was because of an idiot driver pulling out from behind a car waiting to turn right without checking his left mirror, cue me being pushed into a high kerb and going for a nice slide down the pavement. Fortunately his car had no damage. :rolleyes: I was left with cuts from my ankle to my thigh and damaged tendons in my wrist after I put my hand out to cushion the fall, he got nothing as I was kind enough to get out of his way. :mad:
 
I don't think cyclists should have to take a test. I just think they should be allowed to ride on the pavement where there isn't a cycle lane.

It's between the danger of the cyclist being hit by a car (likely to be lethal or very damaging) vs the danger of a pedestrian being hit by a bike (unlikely to do more than bruise someone).

That and a legal requirement for bikes to have speedos, max speed limit of say 5mph on pavements, max limit of (something) on the cycle lanes, and a legal requirement for lights... and we're sorted!

Some cyclists would moan "but my BMX is for tricks, I don't want the weight of lights and speedos!" can shut up because it takes about 4 seconds to un-clip lights and speedos from a bike.
 
So the cycling proficiency test isn't compulsory? I thought it was. I did it at primary school and it taught us everything we needed to know at the time about road use and awareness..
 
Nah it's not. At my school (cor this is thinking back!) I remember being told it's compulsory if I wanted to ride my bike to school, maybe they said something similar to you, but it's only a school rule to get you to take & pass the test :)
 
I have issues with cycle lanes. The type of cycle lane that is painted on the road is often ignored by drivers, and the ones that are on pavements are usually covered in broken glass and dog crap.

Your correct, there is no excuse for not having lights + high vis clothing when required, speedos less so as you dont tend to get people cracking 30mph on a commute as a sustained speed.

Also a bike + pedestrian collision can be very painful for both parties. Broken bones and bent parts of bike as well as bad cuts and bruises would not be uncommon especially when your on quite a pacey ride.
 
Matteh said:
Your correct, there is no excuse for not having lights + high vis clothing when required, speedos less so as you dont tend to get people cracking 30mph on a commute as a sustained speed.

Also a bike + pedestrian collision can be very painful for both parties. Broken bones and bent parts of bike as well as bad cuts and bruises would not be uncommon especially when your on quite a pacey ride.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's why I suggested speedos as a requirement - then police could enforce a speed limit for cyclists on pavements :) A 5mph collision with a bike isn't going to break your bones unless you have particularly fragile bones or fall over in an awkward way, and it would get cyclists out of the way of road vehicles.

I gotta say drivers not listening to painted out cycle lanes is totally the drivers fault ;) Should be paying attention to what the roads doing :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom