FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Killing a cyclist
Killing a cyclist
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
"BBC Wales report on a case where a motorist in Gwent had an altercation with a cyclist, resulting in them punching them into oncoming traffic, causing serious life changing injuries. I'm a cyclist. I know it's a vexatiin to be behind a group (I also drive! ) but at what point does your impatience cause to nearly kill someone because of a momentary delay? No-one owns the road, but shoukd people who display tendencies to rage and the inability to control their temper be banned from driving?" I thought the cyclists owned the roads.  | |||
| |||
"BBC Wales report on a case where a motorist in Gwent had an altercation with a cyclist, resulting in them punching them into oncoming traffic, causing serious life changing injuries. I'm a cyclist. I know it's a vexatiin to be behind a group (I also drive! ) but at what point does your impatience cause to nearly kill someone because of a momentary delay? No-one owns the road, but shoukd people who display tendencies to rage and the inability to control their temper be banned from driving?" You could argue they should be banned from lots of things if they get any form of ‘rage’ - I haven’t read the story but it sounds a tragic case and I hope the full force of the law falls upon the perpetrator. | |||
| |||
"The hatred towards cyclists is scary! I cycle commute to work and try my best not to be in anyone's way. People need to calm the fuck down "Same.. i use cycle lanes and paths mainly | |||
"BBC Wales report on a case where a motorist in Gwent had an altercation with a cyclist, resulting in them punching them into oncoming traffic, causing serious life changing injuries. I'm a cyclist. I know it's a vexatiin to be behind a group (I also drive! ) but at what point does your impatience cause to nearly kill someone because of a momentary delay? No-one owns the road, but shoukd people who display tendencies to rage and the inability to control their temper be banned from driving?" Yes. | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. " Sorry. But this is not the answer. Tolerance and education is the what’s required together with an appreciation that everyone has to use the same road. The only difference as I see it is that the motorist is controlling a vehicle which has a very high likelihood of killing someone in the event of a loss of control. I commute by bike about 80 miles a week on busy roads through a city. Doubtless I hold up the occasional motorist for a fraction of a second, but it’s time that they can easily make up and for fuck’s sake I’d be slowing them down more if I was in my car! You can see the evidence of that every time there is a school half term!Yes, I do drive as well. but I try not to use the car for trips under 10 miles and therefore am likely to be on dual carriageways and motorways. I’m fed up with all this nonsense about registration and insurance too. Most cyclists have insurance anyway, either specific cycle insurance, through affiliation with a club or British Cycling, or public liability as part of their home insurance. Bikes on their own do not injure people. The danger in a collision on the road is to the cyclist from the motorist. Registration plates are a ridiculous suggestion, I’ve got 8 bikes. And, as everyone knows we live in a country where hatred of cycling at government level is so engrained it is another thing which penalises the cyclist and cannot be allowed to happen. It is well known that the government wants to (by hook or crook) get all bikes off the road. Cyclists are affected by gusts of wind and potholes and as they are human powered travel at speeds which vary according to weather and topography. Therefore they cannot be guaranteed to follow the algorithms that will be needed for the deals they have signed with google and amazon. | |||
"BBC Wales report on a case where a motorist in Gwent had an altercation with a cyclist, resulting in them punching them into oncoming traffic, causing serious life changing injuries. I'm a cyclist. I know it's a vexatiin to be behind a group (I also drive! ) but at what point does your impatience cause to nearly kill someone because of a momentary delay? No-one owns the road, but shoukd people who display tendencies to rage and the inability to control their temper be banned from driving? Yes." No. They should be locked up for the safety of everyone else | |||
"The hatred towards cyclists is scary! I cycle commute to work and try my best not to be in anyone's way. People need to calm the fuck down
Same.. i use cycle lanes and paths mainly"Please don’t use cycle lanes and cycle paths. This is the establishment’s way to edge out all cycling on the road completely | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. " No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. | |||
"Have you been watching the fly-on-the-the-wall documentary on BBC4 about people who work on the M6 motorway? After watching it, I have changed my mind about driverless cars and lorries - the sooner they happen, the safer we will all be. " Careful what you wish for This is why the government want all bikes off the road. Bikes won’t follow the lines, can’t be tracked and will react to changes in weather, topography and road conditions in ways that computers can’t predict. Therefore they will make algorithm design more difficult for the makers of sefdriving cars, lorries and vans. The government has secretly already signed deals with google and amazon to get all bikes off the road in order to facilitate their delivery and taxi services. Don’t make it easier for them to be able to suppress your freedom to enjoy riding independently. | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. " Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? | |||
| |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks?" No not really. | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. " I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. " Not really. Crime figures show crime levels are broadly static Conviction rates are about 1 in 10 across the board. The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists. | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. Not really. Crime figures show crime levels are broadly static Conviction rates are about 1 in 10 across the board. The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists. " Interesting but I don't necessarily agree with the last comment given publicity campaigns. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. Not really. Crime figures show crime levels are broadly static Conviction rates are about 1 in 10 across the board. The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists. " Thats not true though as crime figures for town centres with high coverage crime drops. A for the "The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists" that's complete rubbish I mistook you for someone who was intelligent obviously that was a mistake. | |||
"Every stick has two ends. I was the first car at a set of traffic lights, indicating left. The traffic lights changed and some dimfuck who was undertaking me on a bike put a deliberate dint in the side of my car. Sorry, this is not a one way street." Fuck. You must have felt your life was under threat! Was that your justification for chasing them down and battering them? | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. Not really. Crime figures show crime levels are broadly static Conviction rates are about 1 in 10 across the board. The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists. Thats not true though as crime figures for town centres with high coverage crime drops. A for the "The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists" that's complete rubbish I mistook you for someone who was intelligent obviously that was a mistake. " Sorry to have misled you. I’m thick as pigshit and actually achieve very little. I suppose I’m only talking like this because I watch the police fail to take any action against anyone even if they follow them overtaking me inches away. Yes, I bet they’re filming it. So if the police don’t use their once dash cams...?? | |||
"Every stick has two ends. I was the first car at a set of traffic lights, indicating left. The traffic lights changed and some dimfuck who was undertaking me on a bike put a deliberate dint in the side of my car. Sorry, this is not a one way street. Fuck. You must have felt your life was under threat! Was that your justification for chasing them down and battering them?" You really are a dreamer he didn't say he chanced them down at all.  | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. Not really. Crime figures show crime levels are broadly static Conviction rates are about 1 in 10 across the board. The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists. Thats not true though as crime figures for town centres with high coverage crime drops. A for the "The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists" that's complete rubbish I mistook you for someone who was intelligent obviously that was a mistake. Sorry to have misled you. I’m thick as pigshit and actually achieve very little. I suppose I’m only talking like this because I watch the police fail to take any action against anyone even if they follow them overtaking me inches away. Yes, I bet they’re filming it. So if the police don’t use their once dash cams...??" Another dream no doubt you are clearly full of it incredible. | |||
 | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. Sorry. But this is not the answer. Tolerance and education is the what’s required together with an appreciation that everyone has to use the same road. The only difference as I see it is that the motorist is controlling a vehicle which has a very high likelihood of killing someone in the event of a loss of control. I commute by bike about 80 miles a week on busy roads through a city. Doubtless I hold up the occasional motorist for a fraction of a second, but it’s time that they can easily make up and for fuck’s sake I’d be slowing them down more if I was in my car! You can see the evidence of that every time there is a school half term!Yes, I do drive as well. but I try not to use the car for trips under 10 miles and therefore am likely to be on dual carriageways and motorways. I’m fed up with all this nonsense about registration and insurance too. Most cyclists have insurance anyway, either specific cycle insurance, through affiliation with a club or British Cycling, or public liability as part of their home insurance. Bikes on their own do not injure people. The danger in a collision on the road is to the cyclist from the motorist. Registration plates are a ridiculous suggestion, I’ve got 8 bikes. And, as everyone knows we live in a country where hatred of cycling at government level is so engrained it is another thing which penalises the cyclist and cannot be allowed to happen. It is well known that the government wants to (by hook or crook) get all bikes off the road. Cyclists are affected by gusts of wind and potholes and as they are human powered travel at speeds which vary according to weather and topography. Therefore they cannot be guaranteed to follow the algorithms that will be needed for the deals they have signed with google and amazon. " Bang on. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"In recent weeks we have announced a range of measures designed to protect vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians. These include new measures to combat close passing, training for driving instructors, better collision investigation and £100 million in new investment through the Safer Roads Fund. Now we are taking further steps. These include a consultation on new cycling offences, further work on national guidance on cycling and walking infrastructure, and improvements to the Highway Code. All these measures are designed to support the continued growth of cycling and walking, with all the benefits they bring to our communities, economy, environment and society. Nice to see laws being brought in to punish both sides." All well & good, so long as the laws are enforced equally. Currently, killing someone whilst driving hardly even draws a prison sentence. Of 40 cases where a driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist in London, 4 of those went to prison. | |||
| |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned." Two abreast is perfectly legal - as is 3,4 or even 5 abreast. Case Law (Taylor V Goodwin 1879) defines cycles as 'carriages' with the right to use the full width of the lane. Cycling two abreast is taught by advanced cycling instruction (Bikeability level 3) because it makes it easier for following vehicles to overtake, as they spend less time in the opposing lane. Y'know, where HC rule 163 asks drivers to be when overtaking vulnerable road users. The vehicle in front has priority, they have no obligation to facilitate an overtake from the vehicle behind. Riding single file is more dangerous as it can often be taken as an invite to perform a dangerous overtake. Thus is why Primary Position is taught, Google it if you don't know what it is. | |||
| |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned. Two abreast is perfectly legal - as is 3,4 or even 5 abreast. Case Law (Taylor V Goodwin 1879) defines cycles as 'carriages' with the right to use the full width of the lane. Cycling two abreast is taught by advanced cycling instruction (Bikeability level 3) because it makes it easier for following vehicles to overtake, as they spend less time in the opposing lane. Y'know, where HC rule 163 asks drivers to be when overtaking vulnerable road users. The vehicle in front has priority, they have no obligation to facilitate an overtake from the vehicle behind. Riding single file is more dangerous as it can often be taken as an invite to perform a dangerous overtake. Thus is why Primary Position is taught, Google it if you don't know what it is." I wasn't suggesting it wasn't legal for a minute - and I also have no issue with cyclists who are aware of other road users who may cycle two abreast - my point was the cyclists who amble along chatting to one another without any seeming awareness of other road users around them that do make it difficult to overtake and in doing so cause problems for other road users and actually do result in people making risky manoeuvres as a result regardless of whose fault that may be by whatever law you have quoted. The point still stands that ALL road users need to be more aware of others be they cyclists, car/van/lorry drivers or people on horses - if they were the roads would be a lot safer  | |||
| |||
| |||
"I'm a cyclist myself and I cycle to Heathrow Airport to go to work on a daily basis and I find that us cyclists aren't given any respect at all. I often shout at drivers to stop that have been dick heads!guess what? That don't because they are gutless! " they | |||
| |||
| |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned. Two abreast is perfectly legal - as is 3,4 or even 5 abreast. Case Law (Taylor V Goodwin 1879) defines cycles as 'carriages' with the right to use the full width of the lane. Cycling two abreast is taught by advanced cycling instruction (Bikeability level 3) because it makes it easier for following vehicles to overtake, as they spend less time in the opposing lane. Y'know, where HC rule 163 asks drivers to be when overtaking vulnerable road users. The vehicle in front has priority, they have no obligation to facilitate an overtake from the vehicle behind. Riding single file is more dangerous as it can often be taken as an invite to perform a dangerous overtake. Thus is why Primary Position is taught, Google it if you don't know what it is. I wasn't suggesting it wasn't legal for a minute - and I also have no issue with cyclists who are aware of other road users who may cycle two abreast - my point was the cyclists who amble along chatting to one another without any seeming awareness of other road users around them that do make it difficult to overtake and in doing so cause problems for other road users and actually do result in people making risky manoeuvres as a result regardless of whose fault that may be by whatever law you have quoted. The point still stands that ALL road users need to be more aware of others be they cyclists, car/van/lorry drivers or people on horses - if they were the roads would be a lot safer " | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity " Highway Code says ‘no more than 2 abreast’ And this is sensible. 2 abreast still takes up less room than a car. And it’s safer for cyclists as it means drivers actually have to wait until there is a gap in the oncoming traffic before taking some hero risk overtake leaving only inches to spare for the cyclist | |||
"I live in bristol where cyclists think they rule. I don't drive, yet their still vermin thanks to shared spaces. I have seen blind person hit by the vermin, I would rather chuck there bikes I the docks. They pay no tax, insurance, ha e no registration, but think they own the roads !!!!!!!" Except that most do have insurance and seeing as most are also drivers they are paying vehicle excise duty on a car they aren’t using at the time you see them. | |||
"Firstly. Cycling is not dangerous. But it is in the interest of the motorist to tell cyclists it is. That way, they mitigate their responsibility when they kill or injure them. Cyclists should not have to wear helmets or high vis jackets. The motorist should not drive into them and should be paying attention. Telling people cycling is dangerous is designed to not do it, thus plays into the hands of the motorist, keeps bikes off the road and means that more accidents happen because drivers can use the excuse of ‘i wasn’t expecting a bike’.." You're right, cycling in itself is not dangerous, any more than driving a car or a whole host of other activities is not dangerous - what IS potentially dangerous is not being aware and considerate of other road users regardless of whether you're on a push bike, a car or in a Chieftain tank!! As for not having to wear helmets or high vis jackets - if I had the option to better safeguard myself against accidents I know what I'd do!! It's not a question of shouldn't have to, more a question of protecting yourself against accidents, that will, and do happen. Ultimately though, the ONLY right answer in all of this is ALL road users being more aware of, and considerate of, other road users regardless of their chosen mode of transport | |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned." Good points. Everyone needs to act as well as they can at all times. But.. Cycling 2 or 3 abreast is unlikely to endanger the life of a vehicle occupant. Ringing a bell might piss you off but it won’t kill you Young lads riding without lights down the middle of the road should be considered ‘cyclists’ in the same way that young lads doing doughnuts in McDonald’s car park should be considered ‘drivers’ | |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity " Cyclists rude 2 abreast to shorten the length of the over take for cars and reference is made to it in the highway code. It's discouraged on faster roads. But the point of my OP was to highlight people resorting to violence because they've been inconvencied? How on earth can people ever justify such actions and if they have a propensity to act like that then take away their privilege of a driving licence? | |||
"Have you been watching the fly-on-the-the-wall documentary on BBC4 about people who work on the M6 motorway? " Sadly no but for BBC 4 and all that watch it 
As a cyclist I live in fear of the driver. My most probable cause of death I think....
Mike xx | |||
".....As for not having to wear helmets or high vis jackets - if I had the option to better safeguard myself against accidents I know what I'd do!! It's not a question of shouldn't have to, more a question of protecting yourself against accidents, that will, and do happen....." As regards cycle helmets a study that sadly I don't have a reference for found that motorists drive closer to cyclists wearing helmets, following the well observed pattern of compensating for the additional perceived safety. It's a common human responce and one that might undue or even reverse any benefit from wearing a helmet! (I don't recall the study running those numbers, ours wasn't really designed to). Mike xx | |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity Highway Code says ‘no more than 2 abreast’ And this is sensible. 2 abreast still takes up less room than a car. And it’s safer for cyclists as it means drivers actually have to wait until there is a gap in the oncoming traffic before taking some hero risk overtake leaving only inches to spare for the cyclist" That doesn’t give a bunch of cyclists the right to ride 3 or 4 a breast, this is a common thing in the country side, this you get a line of traffic queuing behind that can stretch for 20 to 39 vehicles.. I haven’t said that cyclists don’t belong on the road, but most cyclists are fine, you gets minority who aren’t they have no regards for anyone else, don’t always blame drivers!! Most of us always give space to cyclists as most of us have been cyclists! But don’t pretend to think a lot of cyclists are innocent they aren’t How many cases where cyclists have caused death and damage, yes it’s not a common thing, but it happens.. Yet you try to claim for damage caused by a cyclist to your vehicle... no chance!! | |||
"Every stick has two ends. I was the first car at a set of traffic lights, indicating left. The traffic lights changed and some dimfuck who was undertaking me on a bike put a deliberate dint in the side of my car. Sorry, this is not a one way street. Fuck. You must have felt your life was under threat! Was that your justification for chasing them down and battering them?" I didn’t, however if I’d have known they had an attitude like yours I might have done. | |||
| |||
I agree with the OP if you can’t control yourself to the point where you literally end up killing someone then maybe you shouldn’t be driving, some could say it was unfortunate that the man fell into the traffic but it still stands that many people lose their lives or suffer life changing injuries because they have had a hot headed moment. | |||
| |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity Highway Code says ‘no more than 2 abreast’ And this is sensible. 2 abreast still takes up less room than a car. And it’s safer for cyclists as it means drivers actually have to wait until there is a gap in the oncoming traffic before taking some hero risk overtake leaving only inches to spare for the cyclist That doesn’t give a bunch of cyclists the right to ride 3 or 4 a breast, this is a common thing in the country side, this you get a line of traffic queuing behind that can stretch for 20 to 39 vehicles.. I haven’t said that cyclists don’t belong on the road, but most cyclists are fine, you gets minority who aren’t they have no regards for anyone else, don’t always blame drivers!! Most of us always give space to cyclists as most of us have been cyclists! But don’t pretend to think a lot of cyclists are innocent they aren’t How many cases where cyclists have caused death and damage, yes it’s not a common thing, but it happens.. Yet you try to claim for damage caused by a cyclist to your vehicle... no chance!!" I ride in the countryside and you could say the same thing for tractors down single lanes, motorists still try to dodge round them at every chance they get even if it’s into the oncoming traffic, sometimes as a driver you get held up so what? Just be patient and that way everyone gets home safe!! | |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity Highway Code says ‘no more than 2 abreast’ And this is sensible. 2 abreast still takes up less room than a car. And it’s safer for cyclists as it means drivers actually have to wait until there is a gap in the oncoming traffic before taking some hero risk overtake leaving only inches to spare for the cyclist That doesn’t give a bunch of cyclists the right to ride 3 or 4 a breast, this is a common thing in the country side, this you get a line of traffic queuing behind that can stretch for 20 to 39 vehicles.. I haven’t said that cyclists don’t belong on the road, but most cyclists are fine, you gets minority who aren’t they have no regards for anyone else, don’t always blame drivers!! Most of us always give space to cyclists as most of us have been cyclists! But don’t pretend to think a lot of cyclists are innocent they aren’t How many cases where cyclists have caused death and damage, yes it’s not a common thing, but it happens.. Yet you try to claim for damage caused by a cyclist to your vehicle... no chance!! I ride in the countryside and you could say the same thing for tractors down single lanes, motorists still try to dodge round them at every chance they get even if it’s into the oncoming traffic, sometimes as a driver you get held up so what? Just be patient and that way everyone gets home safe!! " Yeh agree about tractors Btw I am a very patient person I have had to be | |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned." According to several spokesmen for cyclists, such a Chris Hoy, Chris Boardman they claim it is better to tide 2 a breast. As this takes up less room on the road, the thought being is there is less length to get past. | |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity Highway Code says ‘no more than 2 abreast’ And this is sensible. 2 abreast still takes up less room than a car. And it’s safer for cyclists as it means drivers actually have to wait until there is a gap in the oncoming traffic before taking some hero risk overtake leaving only inches to spare for the cyclist That doesn’t give a bunch of cyclists the right to ride 3 or 4 a breast, this is a common thing in the country side, this you get a line of traffic queuing behind that can stretch for 20 to 39 vehicles.. I haven’t said that cyclists don’t belong on the road, but most cyclists are fine, you gets minority who aren’t they have no regards for anyone else, don’t always blame drivers!! Most of us always give space to cyclists as most of us have been cyclists! But don’t pretend to think a lot of cyclists are innocent they aren’t How many cases where cyclists have caused death and damage, yes it’s not a common thing, but it happens.. Yet you try to claim for damage caused by a cyclist to your vehicle... no chance!! I ride in the countryside and you could say the same thing for tractors down single lanes, motorists still try to dodge round them at every chance they get even if it’s into the oncoming traffic, sometimes as a driver you get held up so what? Just be patient and that way everyone gets home safe!! Yeh agree about tractors Btw I am a very patient person I have had to be" I know, I didn’t mean you personally, I meant drivers in general xx | |||
"I have to say, no way would I use a cycle on today’s busy roads!!! Too dangerous!! But I know some people aren’t going to like this, some cyclists should read the Highway Code, I was always told ride single breast, yet consistently now some cyclists ignore this and ride 2 or 3 abreast, that’s just stupidity Highway Code says ‘no more than 2 abreast’ And this is sensible. 2 abreast still takes up less room than a car. And it’s safer for cyclists as it means drivers actually have to wait until there is a gap in the oncoming traffic before taking some hero risk overtake leaving only inches to spare for the cyclist That doesn’t give a bunch of cyclists the right to ride 3 or 4 a breast, this is a common thing in the country side, this you get a line of traffic queuing behind that can stretch for 20 to 39 vehicles.. I haven’t said that cyclists don’t belong on the road, but most cyclists are fine, you gets minority who aren’t they have no regards for anyone else, don’t always blame drivers!! Most of us always give space to cyclists as most of us have been cyclists! But don’t pretend to think a lot of cyclists are innocent they aren’t How many cases where cyclists have caused death and damage, yes it’s not a common thing, but it happens.. Yet you try to claim for damage caused by a cyclist to your vehicle... no chance!!" What part of 'it's not illegal' are you struggling with? Cyclists may use the full width of the lane as defined by case law, supported by Statute Law. The Highway Code isn't law in itself, & that segment is merely advisory. A group of cyclists is easier to overtake than a single long line - because you shouldn't be overtaking in the same lane. Training teaches Primary Position, it's done to indicate to the following driver that an overtake isn't safe so stay back until it is. As a driver (or any road user) you don't have the right to get past any other road user. The road user in front has priority, it's not a difficult concept. | |||
"I live in bristol where cyclists think they rule. I don't drive, yet their still vermin thanks to shared spaces. I have seen blind person hit by the vermin, I would rather chuck there bikes I the docks. They pay no tax, insurance, ha e no registration, but think they own the roads !!!!!!!" Yes again time for educating a driver! It is stated in the road traffic act, that motorised vehicles need to have insurance and pay vehicle excise duty. A bicycle has no motor there for no legal requirement for insurance, however you do get insurance from your home policy and also membership of organisations such as the BCF, CTC and RTTC. As for vehicle excise duty, this is based on the emissions of your motorised vehicle, a bicycle has no motor, therefore no emissions and no requirement for any duty to be paid. | |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned. According to several spokesmen for cyclists, such a Chris Hoy, Chris Boardman they claim it is better to tide 2 a breast. As this takes up less room on the road, the thought being is there is less length to get past." I think my point has been missed on this - it's not cyclists riding two abreast I take issue with - but cyclists who ride two (or more) abreast chatting away between themselves and oblivious to other road users, which is a common occurrence round here on a weekend. As I keep saying it's ultimately down to ALL road users being aware of and considerate of others using the roads - there is no better or worse category of road user just the aware and considerate and the unaware and inconsiderate  | |||
"Not a good situation if everyone had dash cams/cycle cams and cyclists had to nave a registration plate and insurgence there would be less altercations. No there wouldn't. Road rage exists in cars where people have licences, registration and insurance etc. Do you think dash cams and cycle cams have not reduced attacks? No not really. I guess you don't think CCTV reduces any crime then. Not really. Crime figures show crime levels are broadly static Conviction rates are about 1 in 10 across the board. The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists. Thats not true though as crime figures for town centres with high coverage crime drops. A for the "The police certainly don’t give a shit about convicting anyone for crimes against, or endangering cyclists" that's complete rubbish I mistook you for someone who was intelligent obviously that was a mistake. Sorry to have misled you. I’m thick as pigshit and actually achieve very little. I suppose I’m only talking like this because I watch the police fail to take any action against anyone even if they follow them overtaking me inches away. Yes, I bet they’re filming it. So if the police don’t use their once dash cams...?? Another dream no doubt you are clearly full of it incredible. "Agree | |||
"Every stick has two ends. I was the first car at a set of traffic lights, indicating left. The traffic lights changed and some dimfuck who was undertaking me on a bike put a deliberate dint in the side of my car. Sorry, this is not a one way street. Fuck. You must have felt your life was under threat! Was that your justification for chasing them down and battering them? I didn’t, however if I’d have known they had an attitude like yours I might have done. "Haha  | |||
| |||
| |||
"Most cyclists , and motorists , are sensible people. However after checking Highway code I can't seem to find the section which says cyclists don't have to abide by the rules of the road i.e. don't bother stopping at road junction when turning left, just ride straight out and cars will swerve to avoid you . Also cyclists don't need to show lights on a nite as cars will have leights on and be able to take evasive action . Also traffic lights don't apply to cyclists just keep going. Also cyclists can rife on pavements and pedestrians will move out of the way. Of course if your car is damaged cyclists won't pay for repairs as the have no insurance , surley should be legal requirement if they are on the highway. Sorry if I upset cyclists but jusr a rant from a motorist who in caned financially at every opportunity by the govt" Do you seriously believe that all cyclist don't own cars and so don't get caned the same as you? | |||
| |||
"so why shouldn't cyclists have to have insurance for any damage the cause to 3rd parties , as car owners do - and why doesn't the highway code apply to them " Most do. Most upstanding anyway, just like most upstanding car drivers do. There quite a few of them that go round uninsured and they can cause a shit load more damage to your car. Who says the highway code doesn't apply to them? I always stop at red lights and junctions, even if turning left. There a whole section for cyclists in the highway code. Again though, quite a few car drivers think the highway code doesn't apply to them. I saw 3 cars go through a red light in my way home from work yesterday | |||
"so why shouldn't cyclists have to have insurance for any damage the cause to 3rd parties , as car owners do - and why doesn't the highway code apply to them " People seem to forget why insurance is mandatory for vehicle operators. Simply put, the potential for massive costs from a vehicle crash is huge. A crash could easily bankrupt many people, costs running into tens, even hundreds of thousands of pounds. When cyclists can potentially cause the same amount of damage I'm sure there will be a change. Til then, not even the insurance industry is calling for it. | |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned. According to several spokesmen for cyclists, such a Chris Hoy, Chris Boardman they claim it is better to tide 2 a breast. As this takes up less room on the road, the thought being is there is less length to get past. I think my point has been missed on this - it's not cyclists riding two abreast I take issue with - but cyclists who ride two (or more) abreast chatting away between themselves and oblivious to other road users, which is a common occurrence round here on a weekend. As I keep saying it's ultimately down to ALL road users being aware of and considerate of others using the roads - there is no better or worse category of road user just the aware and considerate and the unaware and inconsiderate "Hope you never talk to your passenger whilst driving then. | |||
| |||
"I have third party insurance on my my electric bicycle... (I look like bloody Mary Poppins on mine... lol )... And like to think that I am considerate and pull over onto the pavement when it's really busy on the road ... I generally get a wave of thanks when I do this from motorists in the main... " Anyone who has home insurance will generally have public liability insurance. It's not a valid concern, it's a whine. The reason for all the costs surrounding driving is because of the threat of harm to others. | |||
| |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned. According to several spokesmen for cyclists, such a Chris Hoy, Chris Boardman they claim it is better to tide 2 a breast. As this takes up less room on the road, the thought being is there is less length to get past." Yes but not 20 deep about the length of1-2 hgvs all weaving about and chatting. | |||
| |||
"The hatred towards cyclists is scary! I cycle commute to work and try my best not to be in anyone's way. People need to calm the fuck down
Same.. i use cycle lanes and paths mainly
Please don’t use cycle lanes and cycle paths. This is the establishment’s way to edge out all cycling on the road completely "My safety is paramount to me and thats what lanes and paths are for!! | |||
| |||
"Have you been watching the fly-on-the-the-wall documentary on BBC4 about people who work on the M6 motorway? After watching it, I have changed my mind about driverless cars and lorries - the sooner they happen, the safer we will all be. " I work nights on the M6 and the amounts of incidence we have with Motorists has caused us to have a mobile phone safety system set up that sets off flashing strobe lights in our work area when someone drives though the road closure signs. Get to a place of safety and hope for the best. | |||
"As someone said earlier people on all sides of the equation need to be more aware, better educated and more considerate. As a driver of a car I'm very aware of cyclists and other road users, always give them as wide a berth as I can when passing etc., but know there are others that aren't and they need to be better educated and more aware, and where they're at fault for an accident, rightly penalised. However there are those who equally need better awareness on the other side of the equation. To give a few examples: I regularly come across members of the lycra clad cycle brigade, especially on a weekend, who cycle along two, and sometimes three abreast, chatting amongst themselves, seemingly unaware of any other road users and making it difficult for any vehicles following to get past as a result - if they rode single file this wouldn't happen, and wouldn't lead to people taking chances to get round them. Living near Cambridge, it's a city where cycles are a primary mode of transport and cyclists have become to pedestrians what cars are to cyclists - they bomb along in the city centre, which is largely pedestrianised, expecting any pedestrians to get out of their way, often waiting till the last minute to ring their bell impatiently, much in the same way that tailgating cars do by flashing their lights to get people to move. Just this evening I popped into my local town centre to pick up a takeaway, getting back in the car, I was about to pull out when I noticed a young lad on a bike bombing down the middle of the high street, no lights, weaving across the road, seemingly oblivious to any other traffic. All of the above are examples of where cyclists need to be more aware, and can protect both themselves and others by doing so. I re-iterate there are good and bad on all sides of the equation and ultimately it comes down to better awareness and consideration by all concerned. According to several spokesmen for cyclists, such a Chris Hoy, Chris Boardman they claim it is better to tide 2 a breast. As this takes up less room on the road, the thought being is there is less length to get past. I think my point has been missed on this - it's not cyclists riding two abreast I take issue with - but cyclists who ride two (or more) abreast chatting away between themselves and oblivious to other road users, which is a common occurrence round here on a weekend. As I keep saying it's ultimately down to ALL road users being aware of and considerate of others using the roads - there is no better or worse category of road user just the aware and considerate and the unaware and inconsiderate
Hope you never talk to your passenger whilst driving then."I think we both know that's not what I was saying, and there's a world of difference between driving/riding and maintaining concentration on the road and not doing so. As I've said till I'm blue in the face, the key here is ALL road users, regardless of their vehicle of choice, being aware AND considerate of others plain and simple | |||
