Cyclist rant

[GentleGiant]

I have to say, I think cyclists on the road should be mandated to have an identifier on the bike and insurance (Household will often cover it anyway).

 

Had one years ago go into a brand new car my parents had purchased.

At dusk, no lights, black cloths, black sunglasses and no working brakes. He went straight onto a roundabout without looking and into the side of the new car.

 

Was a right gobby so and so, until the police who had been called turned up. Admittedly mobiles were not common back then, but he was in full on blame the car mode.

 

As mentioned above, they can do a lot of damage and break the law by failing to stop and exchange details.

 

New group buy on front/rear view blackviews anyone?

 

 

Lidl are doing HD car cams next Thursday - For under £40!!

 

Cheap enough to buy four, for 360 degree coverage. :strong:

[Can]

There are many car drivers who: Pull out without looking or indicating, Open there doors into the paths of cyclists.

Instead of a "them and us type argument" it should be agreed that there are many car drivers at fault and often many cyclists at fault. However one thing that is certain is that the cyclist is the most vulnerable and at risk from serious harm so that does put the onus on the car driver to be more careful whether you like it or not.

https://www.gov.uk/road-users-requiring-extra-care-204-to-225/motorcyclists-and-cyclists-211-to-213

If we are going to go highway code about this

 

Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. See an explanation of the abbreviations.

 

Although failure to comply with the other rules of The Highway Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.

 

https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82

 

Also If you don't want to take simple steps to protect yourself, maybe we need to legislate for darwinism if you want to be a dumb ass you do so at your own liability.

[Oli3000]

Lidl are doing HD car cams next Thursday - For under £40!!

Cheap enough to buy four, for 360 degree coverage. :strong:

Really? I think I should check that out!

[mac11irl]

i had a cyclist in dublin absolutely verbally violate me thru my passenger window on day for blocking his path... No cycle lane, i was indicating and half way thru turning left when traffic stopped for striaght ahead, not quite enuf space to make the turn so had to stop. I was waiting 3 mins, and this arse hole arrives and starts into me! I told him was turning left but hadnt space long before he arrived so f*ck right off. Which he did, while giving me the middle finger as he pedalled away. ****

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

There are many car drivers who: Pull out without looking or indicating, Open there doors into the paths of cyclists.

 

No doubt and I'd not defend anyone doing so BUT deliberately riding into someone doing so when there was space and time to stop isnt normal or the correct way to behave, even if you were the 'most venerable road user ever'. People have pulled out in front of me on the motorbike, shake of the head and carry on. If someone is really really stupid then I might have a word with them but deliberately riding into them? 

 

People need to take a bit of responsibly for themselves too. When on my CBT the instructor was saying how he hates the slogan 'Think bike'. He said it should be the other way round, 'bike think'. It's a matter of life and death, why would I trust someone else seeing me or reacting to me for something so important. I as a motorcyclist need to be looking and reacting appropriately to dangers in front of me to safeguard myself. People dont see me in a 10t bus let alone a motorcycle or push bike! 

 

Yes, people are stupid, some drivers are awful but if every time someone pulled away without indicating or got a bit close to me I made a video and gave them loads of abuse I'd have filled up the whole internetz storage by now and had a heart attack. 

 

Obviously there are lots of safe, decent cyclists, I'm talking about the minority. (Outside of London/Oxford/Cambridge that is. In these places a good 75% of them seem to be suicidal) 

[cheezemonkhai]

Really? I think I should check that out!

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/our-offers-2491.htm?action=showDetail&id=15036

[Chorlton]

We're not comparing the same thing Chorlton. I'm saying If I am prepared to start it then 

I am prepared to see that decision through to whatever conclusion it leads. 

And regardless of whether or not the outcome ends in my favour.

But let's be clear this almost never happens, and it would take something very very bad to

set me off like that and go looking for a punch up.Like someone being violent toward my wife 

for example. 

 

If however, trouble comes looking for me I do exactly that which you would do wherever possible 

and try and calm the whole thing down. Even if the other person was in the wrong.

I'll still do all I can to try and resolve a situation not of my making peacefully, including back down.

 

I've spent too much time in cells and police vans and court in my younger days to be in any rush to go back. 

But once my personal space has been violated and someone has put hands on me first, then 

I react in kind.  I'd really rather not, I don't like angry me very much, he's a bloody 

nutcase and has been in more scrapes than a cupra splitter. It's better if he stays in his box,

Also, I haven't been nicked since before old bill were issued with tasers, thankfully I am from an era 

where coppers only gave you a cheeky dig in the van when no one was looking. Screw that taser lark 

I have it on VERY good authority that it hurts like hell when you get zapped. And there are definitely

times in the past where they would have shot me with some high voltage rather than the scuffle that did 

ensue before they cuffed me. LOL I guess being older does have a few advantages after all.

That's my lot for this thread, I'm bored with it now. It's going in circles.  

I think we share the same view then really, although it appears you've probably got a bit more experience than me of scary situations.  You should change your username to Hulk!  I was also speaking from experience though. 

 

I've been riding a bicycle on roads since I was about 13 (I'm now 40).  Since then I've used a bike both out of necessity (commuting) and also ridden for leisure and pleasure.   My bikes are always in A1 condition and I'm usually clad in bright coloured clothing and have lights on when needed.  I know a thing or two about observation and road positioning from my cycling experience and I also have a motorbike licence.  I'm a member of British Cycling and have third party insurance, which should keep some on here happy.  I don't pay VED or have registration since these aren't required in the UK.

 

I'm not a militant cyclist, although I have had to voice my displeasure to other road users on many occasions.  This includes motorists pedestrians and other cyclists - in particular I hate cyclists who jump red lights.  I always try to keep my language and gestures civil, a shake of the head is my usual along with a shout.  Despite this quite a number of people don't like to be told their driving is sub-standard by a mere cyclist and the encounter often descends into foul and abusive language on their part, at this point I usually cycle off or step off onto the pavement and walk away.

 

I'm very aware of how vulnerable I am on a bike and take all measures to reduce the risks.  However, I am aware that cycling on the roads has some risk associated with it and am prepared to accept those risks.

 

During my time spent cycling I've been knocked off my bike 3 times by cars, twice at roundabouts (SMIDSY) and once by a motorist passing too close.  On that occasion (about 10 years ago) the motorist passed too close and clipped my bars sending me into the verge/bushes.  I was a bit cut up and scratched but otherwise unhurt - the car didn't stop.  As I passed through the next built up area I saw the car parked up near some shops so I stopped alongside and gave him a piece of my mind and also stupidly emptied my water bottle on the driver through the open window.  This wasn't a good idea as he got out and he was bigger than me.  Shoving, pushing, swearing and scuffling followed.  I got a couple of lucky shots in but came off worst, it's quite hard to fight in cycling shoes.  It could've been a lot worse - what if he had a weapon.  So these days I try to keep a cooler head even when provoked.

[matt_theforce]

The militant cyclists will never acknowledge that car drivers are legally required to pay road tax in the form of vehicle excise duty. Cyclists are not. Drivers are required to pay VED, Everyone who pay's council tax pays into the upkeep of the roads.

 

Car drivers are legally required to pay for insurance to indemnify them in case they cause an accident.  Cyclists are not. True, however, there are quite a few cyclists who purchase insurance to cover themselves and others on the road incase of an accident

 

Car drivers are legally required to have their vehicles registered for use on the road to provide attribution.  Cyclists are not. True, yet some vehicles on the road are in a bad state the same as some cycles

 

Car drivers are legally required to have to pay to ensure that their vehicles meet a minimum safety standard.  Cyclists are not. True, however not all motorists do

 

Car drivers are legally required to be trained and assessed as qualified to use the roads.  Cyclists are not. True, however some schools run a basic Cycling course (at least in my area), would be good to see that nationwide

 

I really don't know why they believe that having a militant attitude somehow gives them moral superiority; because it does not.

 

It just ensures that innocent cyclists are tarred with the same brush.

 

I'm not a militant cyclist but I will not use 90% of the cycle lanes in/around Sheffield.  Most of them are badly planned (leading poorly onto junctions), full of grates/debris & in some cases BT telephony/fibre cabinets. 

For most of my commute though I'm on A/B roads and over 50/60% of my journey doesn't have streetlights.  I will be vocal if I feel unsafe with a motorist passing too closely (within 1m) unless they have slowed down and I have waved them past. 

 

I could tell you about the times I've been knocked off my bike, neither my fault & both by motorists being impatient and not realising how big their cars were.

 

Ultimately, it is human nature to protect yourself's and what you believe to be 'your' safe space, will this ever change? No  We all need to be more aware of our surroundings and be more courtious to each other.

 

I've started learning to ride a motorcycle and the day spent on the CBT course was fantastic, it was so applicable to all users of 2 wheels and also a great insight for those on the course who have never cycled on a road before, they were supprised at how much space is required by 2 wheels and also just how vunerable you feel on 2 wheels. IMO 'every' new driver should have to complete the CBT to understand the road from a different perspective

 

But back to the main topic, the cyclist was very wrong todo what he did, I would like to see a way that more cyclists could be held accountably for poor riding.

[grr666]

I think we share the same view then really, although it appears you've probably got a bit more experience than me of scary situations.  You should change your username to Hulk!  

Nah, I'm a pussy cat these days. 

I'm much happier in myself now, financially secure with a loving wife and a reasonably

bright future as long as I can maintain good health. My life was VERY different

20 years ago and I would kick off in a heartbeat if I felt that was appropriate.

But a comfortable life and no real hardship have given me a new perspective.

Being angry only ever got me into trouble with the fuzz and into plenty of fights.

 

I didn't realise it at the time, but every time I was involved in a punch up I was really

trying to project my anger at my Dad who spent my whole childhood knocking me

around, pretty badly and very often! So I've never been a stranger to physical conflict

ever since I was 5 when it started. 10 years of regular kickings does something to

a person and at 15 I squared up to my old man and it stopped as quickly as it started.

It also meant from then on as a young man I had many issues with displaced anger.

 

I'm not saying I'm a tough nut although I can certainly take quite a beating before I

will stay down. But when that switch is flipped, I simply don't care what happens or who

I take on even if it does (and it did a couple of times) land me in hospital.

 

As I said before, nowadays I'm much happier than I was, I rarely see my family

(my dad is still around, but won't talk about all those years he threw his weight around)  

and my marriage is a very happy one to a great girl who inspires me every day. 

I couldn't care less if I get into a scrape nowadays, I can take a dig and I can take

all the verbal anyone could ever think to say. (I was a london bus driver for some years and you 

learn not to flare up everytime someone calls you a c***. You'd never get any driving done

if you had a row with every lippy passenger. I learned patience in that job) but I'm only 

likely to react violently if someone else I care for is threatened. My dad was a bully, 

and I don't like bullies. 

[harry vederci]

The militant cyclists will never acknowledge that car drivers are legally required to pay road tax in the form of vehicle excise duty. Cyclists are not.

 

Car drivers are legally required to pay for insurance to indemnify them in case they cause an accident.  Cyclists are not.

 

Car drivers are legally required to have their vehicles registered for use on the road to provide attribution.  Cyclists are not.

 

Car drivers are legally required to have to pay to ensure that their vehicles meet a minimum safety standard.  Cyclists are not.

 

Car drivers are legally required to be trained and assessed as qualified to use the roads.  Cyclists are not.

 

I really don't know why they believe that having a militant attitude somehow gives them moral superiority; because it does not.

 

It just ensures that innocent cyclists are tarred with the same brush.

 

I don't pay VED on my car, so what?  Roads are paid for from general taxation.

 

AS for the remainder of requirements for motorists and their vehicles, why do you think the law stipulates they need all these things while cyclists don't?

 

HV

[vindaloo]

"Fighting in cycling shoes".... Erm.... Strap a couple of teflon pucks to your feet and yeah. Though if you choose the SPD route you generally have superior footwear with a nice metal blob on the bottom of it.

[TroyChallenger]

harry vederci, on 28 Jul 2014 - 16:11, said:

I don't pay VED on my car, so what?  Roads are paid for from general taxation.

 

AS for the remainder of requirements for motorists and their vehicles, why do you think the law stipulates they need all these things while cyclists don't?

 

HV

 

I suspect because the Highway Code and the various Statutes related to it were drafted in an era where we didn't have militant cyclists and we didn't have ambulance-chasing lawyers.

 

In 1960 if a cyclist knocked your wing mirror off, he'd almost certainly stop and offer to pay the couple of quid it would cost for you to replace it.  These days, a wing mirror (heated, electrically operated and foldable) won't get you much change out of £300.

 

Times change, society changes........laws are often the last to keep up.

[Mr Ree]

Got myself tagged onto the back of a very long 10mph que yesterday morning on the quite twisty up and down A5 going towards Llangollen.

 

Thought it must be a tractor, or possibly a 6 mile que to get  into  town?

 

No. 20 lycra clad multi colored jersey wearing cyclists all bunched together some two abreast.

Edited 28 July, 2014 by Mr Ree

[Toxicvrs]

Had that up here it was about 20 all riding in formation grrrrrrrrr

[Mr Ree]

Had that up here it was about 20 all riding in formation grrrrrrrrr

I was actually tempted to wind the manual window down and politely ask if they actually knew about the chaos and length of slow moving traffic behind them, but though best not to unless i wanted a bike pump prodded through it. 

[Toxicvrs]

I was actually tempted to wind the manual window down and politely ask if they actually knew about the chaos and length of slow moving traffic behind them, but though best not to unless i wanted a bike pump prodded through it.

Yes I had the rest of the family in car so thought I'd best not! Manual winders Mr Ree?????

[Mr Ree]

Yes I had the rest of the family in car so thought I'd best not! Manual winders Mr Ree?????

Mk1 Fiesta. 

 

Suffers from fuel vaporisation when being driven very slowly though. 

Edited 28 July, 2014 by Mr Ree

[Toxicvrs]

Mk1 Fiesta.

Ohh was about to say! Do love an old Ford

[Mr Ree]

Ohh was about to say! Do love an old Ford

It's thoroughly gorgeous, and very rare now.

[Toxicvrs]

It's thoroughly gorgeous, and very rare now.

I know! Lovely cars I wouldn't mind an Escort mk2 RS

Sorry for hijacking cyclist rant thread

[Mr Ree]

I know! Lovely cars I wouldn't mind an Escort mk2 RS

Sorry for hijacking cyclist rant thread

Pumped the tyres back up on my mountain bike last week if that helps? 

[Toxicvrs]

Pumped the tyres back up on my mountain bike last week if that helps?

Mines in the shed where it's stayed for a while

[grr666]

I'd like a 1.3 supersport. 

The weapon of the discerning 17 year old in my day. 

Doubt there's many left now...

 

[Toxicvrs]

I reckon we should get a classic ford appreciation thread going

[harry vederci]

I suspect because the Highway Code and the various Statutes related to it were drafted in an era where we didn't have militant cyclists and we didn't have ambulance-chasing lawyers.

 

In 1960 if a cyclist knocked your wing mirror off, he'd almost certainly stop and offer to pay the couple of quid it would cost for you to replace it.  These days, a wing mirror (heated, electrically operated and foldable) won't get you much change out of £300.

 

Times change, society changes........laws are often the last to keep up.

 

No, it's because the danger presented by drivers of motor vehicles from the outset meant that legislation was needed to regulate their use in public.  Even with only just over 2 million vehicles on the road in the 1930s, 7,000 people were being killed each year in RTCs. 

 

Bicycles have never presented that level of danger and today are currently responsible for killing around two people per year.  Nowadays, motor vehicles are killing people five times a day, every day.

 

HV