Punishment for cyclists?

McGray said:
I run red lights daily on my bike. Sometimes I'll just hop the curb and go around them.

Probably get to work quicker than all the polluters too.
Click to expand...

Are you saying you think it is ok for you to run red lights or to "hop the curb"?
Are you further suggesting it is ok because you are not a "polluter"? :rolleyes:


BTW it's "kerb" not "curb" /pedant :p
 
Richie said:
Are you saying you think it is ok for you to run red lights or to "hop the curb"?
Are you further suggesting it is ok because you are not a "polluter"? :rolleyes:


BTW it's "kerb" not "curb" /pedant :p
Click to expand...

I just stick on the pavement. I'd rather not go on the road.
 
Rhodri2311 said:
Ironically this is much the same reaction I had after reading your post. Cyclists running red lights is a valid complaint, and the police will fine anyone they see doing this, as it is dangerous and illegal.

Having to have a mandatory fitness test in order to ride a bike though is a ridiculous idea, can you imagine the amount of tax-payers money that would be required to enforce something like that, for no real gain what-so-ever. Would you recommend we also have a mandatory fitness test before people are allowed to walk on pavements as well, just in-case they take up some precious seconds of your day?
Click to expand...

I could say the same about you.. I didn't say anything about a "mandatory fitness test" as you suggest. It's about the lack of responsibility and state nannying that people want everywhere. Simply put, if i could not ride at a reasonable pace I wouldn't do it, rather than going ahead and making the irresponsible decision and forcing everyone else to live with the repercussions. The only reason that story is there is because it was relevant to the trip I took in which the other two events transpired. It's less about state enforcement and more about individual mindset and selfishness.
 
Draeger said:
Awesome. The monthly 'stupid cyclists' thread has now become a weekly event.
Click to expand...

More and more stupid cyclists about that is why.

The other day on my way to work ( a route quite heavily used by cyclists) there were three cyclists just stopped having a drink on a NSL road...:confused. There is grass either side of the road where they could just stand instead but nope they just stopped standing on the road.
 
i run red lights all the time, walking.. just wondering if i should get 6 points on my walking licence if their was such a thing or not ?
 
Gammawolf said:
I could say the same about you.. I didn't say anything about a "mandatory fitness test" as you suggest. It's about the lack of responsibility and state nannying that people want everywhere. Simply put, if i could not ride at a reasonable pace I wouldn't do it, rather than going ahead and making the irresponsible decision and forcing everyone else to live with the repercussions. The only reason that story is there is because it was relevant to the trip I took in which the other two events transpired. It's less about state enforcement and more about individual mindset and selfishness.
Click to expand...

I took your comment of - "Surely if you're going to cycle on roads there should be some minimum fitness level before being allowed?" to mean that if you weren't fit enough you wouldn't be allowed, and how else would that be enforced without a fitness test?

People are selfish in all walks of life, many people drive selfishly, many people are selfish whilst on public transport or whilst cycling - yes it annoys me and it sucks but unfortunately that's just life, I don't see any real way of changing how people think (or in many cases, don't).
 
As someone who both drives a car and rides a bike regularly here are my thoughts:

1. Some cyclists are morons.

2. Some drivers are morons.

3. Bikes don't need mandatory insurance because they do far less damage. If a car hits a bike it totals the bike and probably causes significant damage to the rider. If a rider hits a car he might slightly scratch the paint. They should however still be liable for the damage they cause.

4. Running red lights is stupid whoever you are. However cyclists have much better peripheral vision and awareness (generally) than cars as they can hear the traffic noise around them better and see more clearly - hence occasionally trying to skip a light.

5. Bikes don't pay Vehicle Emissions Duty because they have no emissions (thought I'd pre-empt 'ROAD TAX BLAH BLAH BLAH')

6. People who like to cycle bikes are not peasants. People who like to drive cars are not eco destroying maniacs.

7. Cyclists are allowed to share the road - if you get stuck behind a slow one, bad luck. You have no more right to that road than they do.

8. Cycling should be encouraged so people are more healthy and waste less energy.
 
Rhodri2311 said:
I took your comment of - "Surely if you're going to cycle on roads there should be some minimum fitness level before being allowed?" to mean that if you weren't fit enough you wouldn't be allowed, and how else would that be enforced without a fitness test?

People are selfish in all walks of life, many people drive selfishly, many people are selfish whilst on public transport or whilst cycling - yes it annoys me and it sucks but unfortunately that's just life, I don't see any real way of changing how people think (or in many cases, don't).
Click to expand...

It's probably worded a bit suggestively, I meant it more in terms of a self assessment type of scenario. But as you touched upon, there isn't a way to stop selfishness and how people think, or lack of. Its just the direction modern society has developed, people will push the limits until told not, instead of actually thinking and making a valid assessment or the particular situation.
 
Last year some complete **** on a bike went sailing down the middle of the road, in between two lanes of stationary traffic, and left a very nice and very deep scrape all the way along my car. From rear wing to front wheel arch on the offside.

Guess who had to stump up the cash to get it repaired? Here's a clue, it wasn't the cyclist.
 
I think it's about time cyclists were forced to acknowledge that the roads are for cars. They can ride on the roads, but they have to promise to stick to the gutter and stay the hell out of the way. They also have to agree to have a bomb implanted into the base of their skull, attached to a GPS receiver - when the GPS receiver detects a speed of over 15mph, the bomb is armed. If the cyclist drops below 15mph, the bomb explodes, à la Speed. If they don't like it, they should get a car and sit in it like every normal human being does.
 
Malevolence said:
Last year some complete **** on a bike went sailing down the middle of the road, in between two lanes of stationary traffic, and left a very nice and very deep scrape all the way along my car. From rear wing to front wheel arch on the offside.

Guess who had to stump up the cash to get it repaired? Here's a clue, it wasn't the cyclist.
Click to expand...

Leave a bigger gap next time? its not hard to leave enough space for a cyclist to go down, i do it, and i give a thumbs up to people who do it for me when im on my bike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom