So what do we think?

[gangzoom]

For all those moaning about cyclists....ask yourself

 

1) Have you ever tried to cycle on a 'cycle lane'?

 

2) Have you ever been crashed into by 1.5tons of metal?

 

3) When was the last you cycled to work and had the joy of experiencing the 'excellent' driving standards on British roads without the luxury of been surrounded by a metal safety cage?

 

I'm all for cyclist having insurance, but its quite funny to hear drivers moan about cyclists when the majority that moan have no idea what its actually like cycling on British roads ....On the plus side there are more and more cyclists on the roads, and the majority of drivers on the road seem to be much more bike friendly compared to 5-10 years ago .

Edited August 15, 2013 by gangzoom

[WhackyWill]

For all those moaning about cyclists....ask yourself

 

1) Have you ever tried to cycle on a 'cycle lane'?

 

2) Have you ever been crashed into by 1.5tons of metal?

 

3) When was the last you cycled to work and had the joy of experiencing the 'excellent' driving standards on British roads without been surrounded by metal/leather?

 

I'm all for cyclist having insurance, but its quite funny to hear drivers moan about cyclists when they the majority that moan have no idea what its actually like cycling on British roads ....On the plus side there are more and more cyclists on the roads, and the majority of drivers on the road seem to be much more bike friendly compared to 5-10 years ago .

 

You obviously don't live or cycle or drive in London every day. :angry:

[gangzoom]

 

You obviously don't live or cycle or drive in London every day. :angry:

 

No but i have covered 2000 miles on the bike this year, including cycling from Lands End to John O'Groats....though I do understand London is by far the most important part of the UK, and it's residents are clearly superior to every one else in the country

[WhackyWill]

You obviously don't live or cycle or drive in London every day. :angry:

 

No but i have covered 2000 miles on the bike this year, including cycling from Lands End to John O'Groats....though I do understand London is by far the most important part of the UK, and it's residents are clearly superior to every one else in the country

 

No the cyclists are just bigger prats in London, as for the rest of your comment ..I'll chose to ignore it.

[docwra]

You obviously don't live or cycle or drive in London every day. :angry:

 

No but i have covered 2000 miles on the bike this year, including cycling from Lands End to John O'Groats....though I do understand London is by far the most important part of the UK, and it's residents are clearly superior to every one else in the country

 

So what about Cambridge then, are you telling me that we dont have enough cycle paths or that the general standard of riding here is even legal?

[coldel]

I used to be into cycling, when living in France I cycled from Cognac to Paris via La Rochelle for fun. But I have to say the behaviour of cyclists in France is way better than the UK. They obey the rules of the road, they stop at lights and dont use pavements as cut throughs where roads rules say you cant go. On gangzooms comments:

 

1. Yes some are crap some arent, but there are lots of cyclists who clearly are incapable of cycling above 5 mph and in a straight line, they should be in the cycle lane full stop

2. No havent personally been crashed into by 1.5 tonnes of metal, but if that is such a fear then it should be a massive motivating factor in not going through red lights, wrong way up one way streets and undercutting cars

3. London roads are horrible, I appreciate people ditching their cars and using bikes, I cycled to work a fair bit in London when living in Putney and all the time when living in Paris. London roads are not made for all these different forms of transport, they are really only suitable for the occasional horse and cart in all honesty but again it reiterates the importance of cyclists taking on responsibility for their behaviour, which clearly most do not

 

I will reiterate it but most people I drive with are considerate, most cyclists aren't and almost feel like they have a point to make on the road. I remember on Lower Richmond road in Putney (designated a cycle super highway) where you can see hundreds of Sky Yellow jerseys swerving in and out of traffic all stopping at a red light, to the point I really thought something was wrong! Then I saw the coppers pulling a whole load of cyclists further up the road for jumping the light.

[rtbiscuit]

I don't live in London, I do drive there infrequently as I have family in Chiswick and crouch end. Every time I drive there its the motorists who are the biggest danger not the cyclists. But this could be down to the London driving style, which seems to be offensive not defensive. It is different to the suburbs and the countryside. Maybe the cyclists have adapted to fit round the motorist style in London. It always seems very much kill or be killed down there.

[coldel]

The driving of cars is irrelevant if we are talking about cyclists. Yes there are bad drivers, but do all cyclists have to drive through red lights wrong way up one way streets and generally disregard the rules of the road because there are bad drivers? Not at all. Its not an excuse to cycle badly which the majority do. As I said before, there are bad drivers, but the number of these compared to bad cyclists is probably in the ratio of 1:10. The more cyclists take responsibility for their actions on the road in the way of undercutting and generally ignoring many road laws the better received they will be by drivers and vice versa. Unfortunately there are many more cyclists to convince of this than drivers.

[rtbiscuit]

When I cycle I follow the road rules, but then I'm old school and did my cycling proficiency when I was 11. I also use the cycle paths if they're there. I agree there are a lot of bad cyclists. I just don't think most motorist have the moral high ground when it comes to correct use of the road. I would be happy to see the police pull cyclists over for incorrect road use and fine them. I see so few cyclists I obviously don't have the same taint as others do about the,, that or my more relaxed driving style means I don't get as riled as others on here about them. A question, if I drive a car i've already paid my road fund licence, so when I get on to my carbon neutral bike I should exempt like the hybrid and electric cars

Edited August 15, 2013 by rtbiscuit

[coldel]

When I cycle I follow the road rules, but then I'm old school and did my cycling proficiency when I was 11. I also use the cycle paths if they're there. I agree there are a lot of bad cyclists. I just don't think most motorist have the moral high ground when it comes to correct use of the road. I would be happy to see the police pull cyclists over for incorrect road use and fine them. I see so few cyclists I obviously don't have the same taint as others do about the,, that or my more relaxed driving style means I don't get as riled as others on here about them. A question, if I drive a car i've already paid my road fund licence, so when I get on to my carbon neutral bike I should exempt like the hybrid and electric cars

 

Many more laws and enforcements in place to punish drivers, naff all in reality to punish cyclists. Probably a big reason why they do it.

[coldel]

And still think cyclists who dont own a driving licence should pass a knowledge test of the road. If you need to pass a theory test based around what road signs mean etc to drive a car, not sure why that isnt required for a cyclist.

 

But then again that would really throw a spanner in the governments policies so it will never happen.

[The G Man]

That's a money spinner they've missed, need to write to the transport minister

[sipar69]

Not fussed about the tax, just wish they would obey the rules of the road and use cycle lanes when they're available. When I was a kid in the 80s riding a bike was something you did for casual fun. Now it seems to have become some macho culture thing. All that ill fitting Lycra and insisting on riding two abreast in the main lane, even when there's a cycle lane, just seems weird to me.

[coldel]

Yeah the lycra is wrong in so many ways on a lot of cyclists, wish their nearest and dearest would point it out to them instead of inflicting certain views on other road users!

[AK350Z]

Just start taxing the cyclists. Maybe bring our tax down a bit

 

Hmmm, we're all in the same basket though aren't we? As 84% of cyclists own cars anyway and all that. I've got 3 bikes and pay over £600 in VED every year, so I think i'm covered. Not to mention cyclists and every other person pay 20% tax every time they buy bike parts/cars/other goods. We all pay enough.

 

I jumped red lights and all that when I was at uni in Bristol, Mostly it was to save time, as in that special way that overtaking people in the car sometimes gets me there 30 seconds faster. Obviously it's pointless in the grand scheme of things, but people still do it, and as a cyclist, you know you can get away with it. Strangely, I didn't always do it, a lot of the time I stopped at the lights like everyone else. It was just down to mood and perceived need I guess.

 

Cycle lanes are too often a fudge, many take you too far out of your way, make it slower to get where you're going, or are blocked by cars or shitting dogs and their owners.

 

The problem with cycling tests etc is that bikes and cyclists are far too numerous to be effectively tracked or monitored, so how would you ever do it cost-effectively?

 

Make me glad to live up here though, cycling is a lot easier!

[sipar69]

I think the sad case of affairs are with cyclists is that if you see one stop at some lights you actually find it unusual and you do notice it. I would say in my experience in London at least 90% of cyclists go through red lights, wrong way on roads, on pavements etc. on a regular basis - yes drivers do speed in 30mph zones etc but no where near to the sheer degree and numbers that cyclists do. I think if they made more effort to be part of road traffic and follow the same rules as everyone else then they would not get the same angst from car users they currently do.

 

That's true. It's actually quite a surprise in London if they stop at lights, aren't in Lycra and don't nearly kill you on a crossing. You almost feel like giving them a thumbs up just for obeying the rules

[glrnet]

That's a good point really: Anyone who speeds or otherwise breaks the laws of the road really can't complain much about cyclists not obeying the law if they don't bother to do so themselves.

 

Speeding doesnt really bother anyone though, and I dont think I know any car drivers who regularly ignore red lights or 1 way streets ..........

 

The missus rides a horse BTW, and while Im not a great fan at least they usually travel in single file, you might annoy them but youre unlikely to pile into the back of one because youve got nowhere else to go

Do you need to be insured in some way to ride a horse on the public highway?

[AliveBoy]

That's a good point really: Anyone who speeds or otherwise breaks the laws of the road really can't complain much about cyclists not obeying the law if they don't bother to do so themselves.

 

Speeding doesnt really bother anyone though, and I dont think I know any car drivers who regularly ignore red lights or 1 way streets ..........

 

The missus rides a horse BTW, and while Im not a great fan at least they usually travel in single file, you might annoy them but youre unlikely to pile into the back of one because youve got nowhere else to go

Do you need to be insured in some way to ride a horse on the public highway?

 

Nope, get on and off you go. It isn't even a requirement to wear a skid lid. They advise that you do the "riding and road safety" test, but it's not mandatory and it's pretty rubbish anyway as they never take you on real roads.

 

You are required to have a horse passport though and if you don't have an insurance policy you're an idiot as a seemingly small thing on a horse can add up to several thousand pounds to get put right.

[coldel]

Just start taxing the cyclists. Maybe bring our tax down a bit

 

Hmmm, we're all in the same basket though aren't we? As 84% of cyclists own cars anyway and all that. I've got 3 bikes and pay over £600 in VED every year, so I think i'm covered. Not to mention cyclists and every other person pay 20% tax every time they buy bike parts/cars/other goods. We all pay enough.

 

I jumped red lights and all that when I was at uni in Bristol, Mostly it was to save time, as in that special way that overtaking people in the car sometimes gets me there 30 seconds faster. Obviously it's pointless in the grand scheme of things, but people still do it, and as a cyclist, you know you can get away with it. Strangely, I didn't always do it, a lot of the time I stopped at the lights like everyone else. It was just down to mood and perceived need I guess.

 

Cycle lanes are too often a fudge, many take you too far out of your way, make it slower to get where you're going, or are blocked by cars or shitting dogs and their owners.

 

The problem with cycling tests etc is that bikes and cyclists are far too numerous to be effectively tracked or monitored, so how would you ever do it cost-effectively?

 

Make me glad to live up here though, cycling is a lot easier!

 

Some interesting points above

 

1. Most cyclists already pay VED, so I agree there shouldnt be a road tax as such, but they should be insured

2. The middle paragraph is typical of most thinking of cyclists (and no dig at you AK) but yes cars over take to grab their 30 seconds back but that doesnt justify cycles going through red lights. Going through a red light is illegal, overtaking is not. Also cycle lanes do sometimes take you out your way, but so do lots of one way systems but as a driver you dont see them going the wrong way around it just to save time. I actually have no problem with a decent standard of cyclist using the road instead of a cycle lane, if they are of a decent standard - unfortunately its the cyclist who cant cycle straight, uses no road sense, undertakes cars and generally is a hazard on the road that drivers have a problem with when there is a perfectly viable cycle lane available. But seriously, not obeying the rules because they 'delay your journey' is not an excuse

3. If there was a financial incentive for enforcement officers to target cyclists to check for test passes/bike IDs etc then it would happen - unfortunately the law is not set up for that so it wont happen. In fact things like dangerous cycling (and subsequently accidents) and bike theft would all be reduced if a concentrated effort was put in

[docwra]

I was thinking about this on the way to work, I wonder if its more of a perception thing. On my average drive to work I probably pass 50 cars but only about 5 cyclists.

If I was on a bicycle Id probably still only see 5 cyclists but Id see about 1500 cars and lorries.

 

If we say 1% of each group are a menace on the roads, then it would take me 20 journeys before I saw one dodgy cyclist, but if I was on my Raleigh Burner Id see 15 bad car drivers every day, no?

Hence cyclists accuse car drivers of being dangerous, because they have more exposure to the dickheads

 

If you are a cyclist stop reading here.

 

Except I dont, Im seeing 1-2 riders with a death wish every day, if I went into Cambridge Id probably see a dozen. Ergo, by the power of statistics and probability, bicyclists are 300 times more likely to be a bad road user

[AliveBoy]

Edited August 16, 2013 by Dedman

[rtbiscuit]

Police can use other offences to prosecute cyclists. They just don't tend to see the need. Outside of London most cycling accidents tend to come down to motorist at fault not cyclist. Hence the onus is on the motorist being insured not the cyclists. You have to remember a cyclist is classed the same as a pedestrian. Under these new forum road rules would I now need insurance and road tax on my roller skates. Would my kids need an mot on their push scooters? Would my shoes need to be taxed every 12 months. The reason the motorist pays is because the motorist is the biggest danger on the road. Pedestrian= max weight 300kg max speed 20 mph although as weight increases speed decreases. Cyclist = similar weight to pedestrian max speed = 50mph but again speed decreases the heavier the cyclist. Motorist = anywhere between half a ton to 50 tons. Speed = over 70mph weight tends to only impact stepping time. Being hit by either a cyclist or a pedestrian would leave only minor injuries. Most motor vehicles over 30mph can be fatal. Cars have insurance because they are both expensive items and in the wrong hands a fatal weapon. The most a cyclist is for motorists is a pain in the backside.

[coldel]

Cyclists are only classed as pedestrians when pushing or walking their bike, not when they are cycling on it (which is why its illegal to cycle on the pavement)

[rtbiscuit]

Cyclists are only classed as pedestrians when pushing or walking their bike, not when they are cycling on it (which is why its illegal to cycle on the pavement)

But they put the cycle lanes on the pavement

[coldel]

And cycle lanes in the roads, plenty around here. Probably only on the pavement where the road just isn't justifiable (councils doing it cheap?). To be honest they shouldnt be on pavements at all, only takes a toddler to fall over and an oncoming cyclist will inflict serious damage.