It still doesn’t make it safe though.
Why does the UK hate cyclists?
- Thread starter rIcK
- Start date
- Status
It still doesn’t make it safe though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 9,198
- Location
- Southampton, hopefully not too hot, or too cold
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_stop_line
Motorists are in charge of a device that can easily kill cyclists, when their vehicles are used in aggressive manner. Most people will stop if they cause damage to other road users, but you also get those chancers who will either flee the scene, or pretend to leave their details on a parked vehicles windscreen while writing something like, "I'm writing this note so anyone watching thinks I'm leaving my insurance details."
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
I have noticed amateur made signs warning of a "Cycle Race" on our local roads have been changed fairly recently to indicate a "Cycle Event". I presume this has some insurance significance regarding admittance to racing on a public highway? Does it mean we motorists can have a "Car Event" with impunity, and the joy of the equivalent of riding furiously?
Never been to a modded car cruise?
This post sums up my view perfectly.
Some of them have a death wish.
To add: Unfortunately, my view towards Cyclists are because of the few idiots I come across - as with most things in this world, it’s ruined by the select few morons.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Got an example?
One thing that annoys me more than anything (not cyclists fault as such as i believe they are the rules) is when a whole load of cars spends ages trying to get round a cyclist only to come to a junction/set of traffic lights and have the cyclist overtake all the cars again and wait at the front. Then, when the lights go green, the big string of cars has to overtake the cyclist again - and rinse and repeat. Totally bonkers.
No problem with cyclists who are assertive and visible. I do have an issue with the people who decide in the winter to just cycle to /from work with no helmet, not high vis and only a dirty reflector on the back of the bike though.
Sadly where I live this seems to be the norm for most bikers. I'd like some minimum safety gear to be required, so I can seen them easier, know where they are and see where they are going - many don't even look before moving out and don't signal in any way.
Experienced cyclists who are properly equipped I've never had a problem with, we get groups of cyclists around here all the time as it's nice countryside and with good roads so I'm just use to it.
Sadly where I live this seems to be the norm for most bikers. I'd like some minimum safety gear to be required, so I can seen them easier, know where they are and see where they are going - many don't even look before moving out and don't signal in any way.
Experienced cyclists who are properly equipped I've never had a problem with, we get groups of cyclists around here all the time as it's nice countryside and with good roads so I'm just use to it.
Going straight on in lanes for turning left or right for one - one of the roundabouts near me there are 2 lanes marked as for use for the second exit only - loads of cyclists go all the way around in the left lane for the 3rd exit or to go back the way they came and that puts them at odds with traffic using those lanes - especially the second lane, to go off the second exit.
Is that not because these threads are directed at cyclists thiugh? There are plenty of threads directed at penisbrained motorists too!
Cycling isn't method of transportation, it is activity, with a side effect of transporting you places. And as such, when performed on public roads en masse it becomes cumbersome to the rest of the traffic. We do understand this about most of activities in public spaces, but somehow, for whatever reason that unwritten rule of "do your sporty **** in such a fashion as to not affect others" got lost in the process at some point. It's like rollerskating on pavements, or push scootering through city streets. Technically could be done, would take you to work or school etc, yet we don't do it because we all understand it'd be pain in the donkey for everyone else.
It really isn't any different with cycling, but the savoir vivre of this activity in public spaces, the "do no harm" element of it, somehow slipped into abyss of British selfishness about a decade ago and never re-emerged. As in - we've always had cyclists on British roads, those who wanted to cycle always cycled, and they never clashed with the rest of road users until the new type of cyclist emerged - the one that "has right to be on the road and slow everyone down", the one that promotes "the code says you have to give me the same space as the other cars, so I will ride abreast to ensure my safety" without thinking why the other road users are the road, thus loosing purpose of the whole exercise. Which takes me to my next point:
Most of the road users are on the road, in their cars because.... they don't have other choice. Ladders, pipes and cables won't get to places where plumbers and electricians work unless they travel with them in vans, packages, food and other items won't public transport themselves to shops unless they travel in HGVs. Majority of commuters wouldn't be able to travel to work without their cars, if there was a viable alternative they would be already using it. So it's fair to presume that road users, as a whole, in general, as a statistical majority - remain on the road, in cars, because they don't have any other viable choice. Anything other than car would be slower, more troublesome and more expensive. Cyclists, in general, as a statistical majority - do have a choice. Majority of cycling journeys will be short enough (short enough to push bike it) and inner city enough to use other methods of transportation, but they are done on bicycle because of "healthy" or "free" or "independent" or "I like it". And as such the balance of necessities between cars trying to move as fast as they can because "we need to be places" and cyclists moving slow because "healthy, free, goes with my hipster lifestyle" doesn't really work as a whole. For the society as a whole.
Third point is pure British problem of regulating the traffic. When let loose on public roads, unlike anywhere else in the world, cyclists stopped behaving like drivers on push bikes and started behaving like opportunist a-holes - jump red lights, go against one way streets, block other road users, undertake, take chances filtering on the inside. And became incompatible with the rest of the traffic. Nobody expects cyclist sneaking up along turning, indicating lorry between rear wheels and kerb because no other object in traffic, in history of road use would behave that way. Its' not about being two wheel vehicle - just ask any motorbiker. It's not about moving slow (just ask any agricultural machinery driver). It's not about it being an activity (just ask any horse rider). There is something inherently broken about statistical British cyclist, that makes them behave like no other element of traffic anywhere else and thus endanger themselves and wreck lives of others through their oddity and unpredictability.
And it's a new thing, because as I said before - until we understood that cycling was just an activity - and it was performed on public roads as such with full awareness of the primary road users - we got along. We got along for many decades, then something broke. And cyclists became paint in the rectum, and subject of regular internet discussions. And as their numbers grew we bred the new type of cyclist - the cyclist that hates the other cyclists because they slow them down. The cyclist that won't use cycle lane. The "chav in BMW" of cyclists. Never seen outside of British Isles.
It really isn't any different with cycling, but the savoir vivre of this activity in public spaces, the "do no harm" element of it, somehow slipped into abyss of British selfishness about a decade ago and never re-emerged. As in - we've always had cyclists on British roads, those who wanted to cycle always cycled, and they never clashed with the rest of road users until the new type of cyclist emerged - the one that "has right to be on the road and slow everyone down", the one that promotes "the code says you have to give me the same space as the other cars, so I will ride abreast to ensure my safety" without thinking why the other road users are the road, thus loosing purpose of the whole exercise. Which takes me to my next point:
Most of the road users are on the road, in their cars because.... they don't have other choice. Ladders, pipes and cables won't get to places where plumbers and electricians work unless they travel with them in vans, packages, food and other items won't public transport themselves to shops unless they travel in HGVs. Majority of commuters wouldn't be able to travel to work without their cars, if there was a viable alternative they would be already using it. So it's fair to presume that road users, as a whole, in general, as a statistical majority - remain on the road, in cars, because they don't have any other viable choice. Anything other than car would be slower, more troublesome and more expensive. Cyclists, in general, as a statistical majority - do have a choice. Majority of cycling journeys will be short enough (short enough to push bike it) and inner city enough to use other methods of transportation, but they are done on bicycle because of "healthy" or "free" or "independent" or "I like it". And as such the balance of necessities between cars trying to move as fast as they can because "we need to be places" and cyclists moving slow because "healthy, free, goes with my hipster lifestyle" doesn't really work as a whole. For the society as a whole.
Third point is pure British problem of regulating the traffic. When let loose on public roads, unlike anywhere else in the world, cyclists stopped behaving like drivers on push bikes and started behaving like opportunist a-holes - jump red lights, go against one way streets, block other road users, undertake, take chances filtering on the inside. And became incompatible with the rest of the traffic. Nobody expects cyclist sneaking up along turning, indicating lorry between rear wheels and kerb because no other object in traffic, in history of road use would behave that way. Its' not about being two wheel vehicle - just ask any motorbiker. It's not about moving slow (just ask any agricultural machinery driver). It's not about it being an activity (just ask any horse rider). There is something inherently broken about statistical British cyclist, that makes them behave like no other element of traffic anywhere else and thus endanger themselves and wreck lives of others through their oddity and unpredictability.
And it's a new thing, because as I said before - until we understood that cycling was just an activity - and it was performed on public roads as such with full awareness of the primary road users - we got along. We got along for many decades, then something broke. And cyclists became paint in the rectum, and subject of regular internet discussions. And as their numbers grew we bred the new type of cyclist - the cyclist that hates the other cyclists because they slow them down. The cyclist that won't use cycle lane. The "chav in BMW" of cyclists. Never seen outside of British Isles.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
That displays your ignorance of of the rules I'm afraid. Another instance of directing ire at a cyclist when they are doing nothing wrong (see helmets, high vis etc). It's perfectly valid for a cyclist to use the left hand lane for all exits on a roundabout. The only reason it puts them at risk is that drivers don't know the rules. This is yet another instance where if drivers were better educated, cyclists would be safer.
There is other guidance from the DfT stating it's fine for cyclists to use the left hand lane for any exit and drivers should be aware of this.
Of course, this would be a mute point if we had properly designed roundabouts like the Dutch.
Well no because the onus in that situation as per the taking extra care, etc. is for the cyclist not to put themselves in a bad position when doing that - but then blaming the driver when they just ignore other traffic that is using the roundabout as per the lane markings and being a dick about it when they nearly get run over.
I've never seen for instance in this situation a cyclist signal right to indicate they aren't leaving the roundabout as recommended.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 1,403
- Location
- Blackburn - Glastonbury - Portsmouth
and then run the risk of some knob in a vehicle undercuting your slow moving cycle in the middle lane of a roundabout whilst being over taken by some knob in a car trying also to get past and cut in front to go off the roundabout with no indication.
No win situation.
No win situation.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Oh, and while we're on the subject of helmets.
How many people do you see using helmets in this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp3s2EP0zVo
How many people do you see using helmets in this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp3s2EP0zVo
Well ultimately a large number of people whether driving or cycling make poor use of roundabouts anyhow but still.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Car drivers have eyes, a steering wheel and brakes you know. What some of them lack is the mental capacity to put them to good use.
On the subject of roundabouts this one is a fun one too - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.9...4!1sVh9706BY9uGwQ8C7ZBKKaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The roundabout is usually more overgrown these days blocking visibility - get cyclists coming down the dual carriage way building up a lot of speed and carrying it into the roundabout and then people walking out in front of them at the pedestrian crossing here because of the combination of speed, not great visibility, low noise and pedestrians just not caring.
In an ideal situation sure - that doesn't remove the requirement for the cyclist to also take some responsibility rather than just going along with "I'm in the 'right' so why should I modify my behaviour" as some seem to.
The roundabout is usually more overgrown these days blocking visibility - get cyclists coming down the dual carriage way building up a lot of speed and carrying it into the roundabout and then people walking out in front of them at the pedestrian crossing here because of the combination of speed, not great visibility, low noise and pedestrians just not caring.
In an ideal situation sure - that doesn't remove the requirement for the cyclist to also take some responsibility rather than just going along with "I'm in the 'right' so why should I modify my behaviour" as some seem to.
- Status