Do cyclists have a date with death?

EvilDreams said:
a) are there for free and b) slow me down. Meanwhile they are paying nothing to essentially have me at their mercy while they trundle along at 10mph.
Click to expand...
I don't know. My bicycles cost considerably more then my car(s), and I know quite a lot of people who are in the same boat.

EvilDreams said:
Bikes should be on the pavement with the other freeloading peasants.
Click to expand...
Our place is not on the pavement, as dictated by a) the law, and b) any modicum of common sense that would indicate it's dangerous.
 
Wow, this has moved on to pointless arguments... Cycling is being a cheapscate? Since when? What on earth have ED been smoking? I cycle because it takes me less time to get to work then any other mode of motorised transport I have access to, perhaps if I had a jetpack... Hmmm.

What has price has anything to do with that? Its all about convinience.
 
OspreyO said:
There are good and bad cyclists and drivers. Most of these threads can't accept that simple truth. As most drivers don't cycle, therefore they don't understand why cyclists do things. Whereas most cyclist also drive.
Click to expand...

I rarely see any posts in these threads making sweeping generalisations, the complaints are about the bad cyclists, not all cyclists.

I also disagree that most motorists dont cycle and most cyclists also drive - I think its the other way round
 
iaind said:
I rarely see any posts in these threads making sweeping generalisations, the complaints are about the bad cyclists, not all cyclists.
Click to expand...

There are still some people on here that fail to recognise that all cyclists are not bad !
 
[DOD]Asprilla;14738796 said:
Really? Comparatively few people I know actually cycle on a regular basis (maybe 10% of my friends) but all of them drive.
Click to expand...

Hard to prove either way - I doubt there's any research or numbers anywhere?
 
I guess a lot more people own a car now than they used to. I guess the same probably goes for owning a bike what with the current economic climate and the cost of fuel etc. Therefore the chances of someone owning a bike aswel as a car i say are probably quite high. This is of course just total speculation.
 
EvilDreams said:
Dangerous and illegal? A tad strongly worded there considering we have have hardly any examples of the supposed danger (versus how many accidents happen on the road every day) and despite the police moaning at me for many other things over my cycling career, they never once in years did anything about me or the many others that cycle on the pavement.

Are you suggesting that putting yourself on top of a flimsy bicycle with no means of protection against collision or even a seatbelt, and then surrounding yourself with a load of heavy metal boxes going a lot faster than you and thus forced to get past you is anything other than dangerous?
Click to expand...

It's the law. The idea of a grown man cycling on the footpath for any distance is ludicrous.

The reason you don't hear many examples is because it's illegal and most people realize it's dangerous not to mention ridiculous. So many obstructions on the pavement you'd make no progress. Stopping at every crossing. Completely pointless unless your a child.

People drive beside far heavier trucks buses and 4x4s all day long and seat belt won't stop one of those ploughing through your flimsy tin box. Do they drive on the footpath then?

You're not forced to do anything. That's a dangerous attitude To have on the road. It's an bad excuse for poor driving. Is dangerous your middle name or something?
 
Apparently bike sales have risen by 22% from last year, average bike cost is down around £220 so a lot of cheap bikes around. Also a bike is stolen in the UK something like every 105 seconds, or about 300,000 per year :o It also looks like more expensive bikes are stolen less often as they are harder to shift on, the most targeted bikes are ones worth under £100.
 
JasonM said:
You think it's bad now, come November when most cyclists don't have lights.
Click to expand...

That old trick makes me apolpectic, but I can usually see them a mile off from their faint glow of their mobiles as they cycle non-handed because they are texting.

Mind, alternatives like the old fella I had a go at for putting on his lights, helmet and reflective yellow jacket before setting off up the footpath make me equally angry.
 
So does anybody here think to cycle on the road you should have to pass some sort of test? I'd say something along the lines of a provisional + theory test would be ideal. I have a full license but don't drive at the minute but I think I know how roads work pretty well!
 
JasonM said:
You think it's bad now, come November when most cyclists don't have lights.
Click to expand...

True the cops should really fine people for this a lot more. Confiscate bikes

That said even with lights, most people don't look anyway. So don't rely on lights to keep you safe. Assume no one sees you.
 
Jonny ///M said:
So does anybody here think to cycle on the road you should have to pass some sort of test? I'd say something along the lines of a provisional + theory test would be ideal. I have a full license but don't drive at the minute but I think I know how roads work pretty well!
Click to expand...

Certainly some sort of test of the highway code, but as with driving tests most folks will study to pass the test and then discard what they have learned.
 
Cycling Proficiency tests are available, I passed mine in school and got the freaking shiny lapel to prove it (!) but making it a "must" to pass the test would anger many cyclists.

Just give them some room dammit, it's not too difficult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom