It might suit you fine, but it probably doesnt suit all the motorists behind you
Do cyclists have a date with death?
- Thread starter Firegod
- Start date
It might suit you fine, but it probably doesnt suit all the motorists behind you
Lucky for me I cycle to work at 7.50am and home at 4.30. So I don't tend to meet many people on my route. True though that it is illegal and I do cycle down through a Sainsburys but as ever, with proper care taken (I either freewheel or push the bike while on it) I think I'm doing the best I can. But irrespective of the law I simply do not feel safe cycling on a road, never mind a busy one.
Hear hear, they could even pedal those ridiculous bikey-things to provide electricity generation for our electric cars, eh old chap?
I would just like to add that as a young'un I was reduced to tears by two police officers who stopped me when I was cycling home mid evening about 9pm from a friends house on the pavement as I didnt want to cycle on the main road.
They were taking a drunk into the station and they stopped me and told me off for doing so.
Moving a few years down the line, a cycle path has now been painted on that stretch, some on the road, and some of it on the pavement!
They were taking a drunk into the station and they stopped me and told me off for doing so.
Moving a few years down the line, a cycle path has now been painted on that stretch, some on the road, and some of it on the pavement!
Then petition your council to get a cycle lane put in. I'm sure everyone else would sign it.
![[DOD]Asprilla](/styles/overclockers/avatars/8.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
Same for most cyclists. As I emntioned before Bike Radar and other forums are full of threads slagging off cyclists who do this; it's just plain wrong.
forgot to mention....i work night's so i leave at 9.30pm and leave work at 6.30am.
i dont tend to see many cars on the road at that time.
perhaps you motorist's should use a bike sometime instead of moaning about cyclists.
i do have a car but dont use it because i want to stay fit (ish).
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 1,332
- Location
- Aotearoa
I cycled to and from work in central London for the better part of two years. Apart from tourists randomly stepping onto the road my biggest gripe was other cyclists! Felt they were mostly were a bunch of 'tards on wheels... cutting across traffic, leaping onto footpaths and back to the road again, running red lights 
They gave the rest of us that obeyed the road rules a bad name...
They gave the rest of us that obeyed the road rules a bad name...
haven't read the thread, but as a cyclist I find that cars hold me up far more than I hold up cars. My average speed through London is far greater than a car's so perhaps you should get out of your car and onto a bike and stop holding me up.
Cyclists don't pay road tax because if there were no cars on the roads and only bicycles there would be 0 road damage caused by them, the only damage would be caused by nature. Lorries, buses and cars do serious damage to roads which is why you have to pay road tax.
Yes there are some poor cyclists, but you must also realise that the laws written are made for cars and often put cyclists in danger - I never stop for zebra crossings because if I do then a car will overtake me and put both me and the pedestrian in danger. I actually stopped once and waved a boy across and he said "no, the cars won't stop - they will overtake you", so I went on and left him to cross after a car stopped for him.
Cars != Bicycles, as a cyclist I can be a pedestrian when it suits me and a vehicle when it suits me - just one of the benefits of risking my life each day!
I suggest you try riding a bike (I actually think that it should be mandatory for driving tests - so that drivers see how the more vulnerable road users feel) and then come back and apologise.
Daven
Cyclists don't pay road tax because if there were no cars on the roads and only bicycles there would be 0 road damage caused by them, the only damage would be caused by nature. Lorries, buses and cars do serious damage to roads which is why you have to pay road tax.
Yes there are some poor cyclists, but you must also realise that the laws written are made for cars and often put cyclists in danger - I never stop for zebra crossings because if I do then a car will overtake me and put both me and the pedestrian in danger. I actually stopped once and waved a boy across and he said "no, the cars won't stop - they will overtake you", so I went on and left him to cross after a car stopped for him.
Cars != Bicycles, as a cyclist I can be a pedestrian when it suits me and a vehicle when it suits me - just one of the benefits of risking my life each day!
I suggest you try riding a bike (I actually think that it should be mandatory for driving tests - so that drivers see how the more vulnerable road users feel) and then come back and apologise.
Daven
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 1,841
What about those of us who don't live in London?
According to the pedants, it's not road tax, it's vehicle excise duty. A bicycle is a vehicle just as much as a car or lorry.
Which would seem another reason why bicycles aren't meant to be on the roads.
Thus earning the hatred of everyone else on the road who has to obey actual rules or they get points on their license. Something a cyclist doesn't need to worry about.
I rode a bike for years and years before I got a driving license at 25. I used to take my bike everywhere, chiefly on the pavement and on the road only if it was empty and I always gave way to cars (i.e got on the pavement in good time to give them a clear path) because they are big and metal and a lot faster than me. Only once in about 10 years did I get moaned at by a pedestrian and not once did the police say anything to me about cycling on the pavement.
The problem is that apparently the cyclists here won't stand for being held up by pedestrians (i.e being courteous and riding on the pavement) but they expect motorists to be overjoyed at being held up by them.
Last edited:
I have been riding a bicycle a lot lately because I need to get my fitness up for when I sell my car. Through experience as a driver, the only time cyclists become a nuisance is when you are on a road with those traffic calming 'islands' in the middle; they make overtaking cyclists a pain because there isn't enough room. As I know how much of a pain this is, when I cycle I go on the pavement in such areas if it's a busy road.
As both a cyclist and a driver I don't think people who ride bicycles should have to pay tax.
As both a cyclist and a driver I don't think people who ride bicycles should have to pay tax.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,034
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
There is nothing pedantic about it. The upkeep of the highways is paid for from council tax and general government coffers; the amount you pay for having a car has nothing to do with paying for roads. This was your initial argument remember; that cyclists should pay the same as drivers to use the roads.
The highway code is for all road users with specific rules for each type of transport. It's not an exclusive club.
So cyclist who chooses to walk their bike across a crossing, or on the footpath in a perfectly legal fashion should be dispised for doing so? He said he can be a pedestrian or a vehicle, not that he was breaking the law.
You chose to break the law and now you feel that all other cyclists do as well?
The problem is that apparently the driver here won't stand for being held up by cyclists (i.e being courteous and respectful on the road) but he expects pedestrians to be overjoyed at being put in danger by them.
Actually I think you should cycle more as all I'm detecting here is jelousy; you don't like the fact that cycling is cheaper, you don't like the fact that cyclists can filter though stationary traffic and you don't like the fact that we can get off your bikes and walk over crossings at junctions.
Come join us, you might like it.
Last edited:
So are zero-emission cars, yet they don't pay VED either. You seem to keep ignoring that.
Now you're just sounding jealous and bitter because you're so utterly dependent on your car.
It is FAR more dangerous to ride on the pavement than on the road. On the pavement you have pedestrians, dodgy pavements, lampposts and other "street furniture". On the road you have cars and lorries etc. that are driven by people who also want to go to their destination - they aren't out for a stroll. Often the pavement isn't wide enough for a bike to safely be ridden with pedestrians around.
I think there needs to be new laws in place for cyclists, but the law says we are allowed on roads and it shall remain that way for the foreseeable future.
How fast did you manage to go on the pavement? It isn't practical for cyclists who actually want to go somewhere, I average around 14-15mph and often hit near enough 30, show me a pavement where I can do that. If I rode on the pavement to uni it would take probably take longer than walking.
Cyclists don't get points on their "license" because if they hit a car, who is going to be hurt? Car drivers don't really have a need to be careful on the road what with all the new technology - airbags, huge crumple zones, seatbelts etc. the drivers aren't going to be hurt as often as the unprotected people they hit. Obviously cyclists need to behave properly but I feel that although I do violate some laws on my bike I do it safely without posing any danger to other road users. I don't think all cyclists think that way, but then neither do car drivers. Just walking down the road I see loads of people on their phones, jumping lights, speeding etc. the difference between them and me, is the child that runs out in front of them will probably die.
A bicycle is NOT a vehicle like a car or lorry. A bicycle doesn't pollute, a bicycle doesn't mortally injure people when / if they are hit, a bicycle doesn't damage the road surface, a bicycle doesn't take up a lot of room on the road.
If I feel it is unsafe to overtake, I will put myself right in the middle of the lane so no one can overtake - this is because I have often been overtaken on blind corners and seen a head on collision almost occur because of an idiot driver who was overtaking me to join a traffic jam.
As a vulnerable road user I feel that I need to ride defensively and I will continue to do that while dangerous people are allowed to drive. If it means I hold you up for a few seconds then so be it. You will just join a traffic jam at some point anyway, and I'll filter down to the front.
I think you need to get over yourself, or get back on your bike - you may find you get where you want to quicker!