Cyclists! Why do they ride in the middle of the road?
Discussion
KarlMac said:
When I do go to overtake my car will kick down and then I get a gobful as I pass on the opposite side of the road. This is most nights.
I think it's the kickdown that's not helping. To anyone who doesn't recognise the sound of an autobox it sounds like you've just dropped a couple of gears and floored it. Probably also makes the unobservant amongst them jump out of their skin as well.(not trying to excuse their behaviour - just offering an insight)
Mr SFJ said:
f
king hell... Anything to defend the lycra brigade. In an insurance matter, who will win?
The Cyclist because he ran a red light?
or the driver who was proceeding but hadn't accounted for the moron breaking the law running the red light?
I'm not defending the "lycra brigade" - whoever they are in your head. I hate cyclists that jump red lights, for example, and am happy to see much greater enforcement against all road users who do so.king hell... Anything to defend the lycra brigade. In an insurance matter, who will win? The Cyclist because he ran a red light?
or the driver who was proceeding but hadn't accounted for the moron breaking the law running the red light?
What I am saying is that a green light is not a free pass to put your blinkers on and avoid looking around you. That is what the law provides for. Do you think differently? Do you not check for, say, emergency vehicles when you cross junctions on a green light? If not, then good practice suggests you should.
Insurance liability would depend on the circumstances. Sometimes drivers passing through a green light can be held partially responsible even if they hit someone running a red.
Mr SFJ said:
will_ said:
Insurance liability would depend on the circumstances. Sometimes drivers passing through a green light can be held partially responsible even if they hit someone running a red.
This I need examples of.http://www.lawtel.com/MyLawtel/Documents/AC9300999
In that case, whilst the cyclist ran the red light, the taxi was speeding. Blame was apportioned 80% to the cyclist. But the taxi driver had to take 20% of the blame for the accident, even though his traffic signal was green and the cyclist shouldn't have been there regardless of the speed of the taxi.
Further, in that case, the taxi-driver had a good "response time" - had he not done so, it could be suggested that he would have been held more negligent - even if passing through a green light.
The point is, a green light does not give a road user carte blanche to drive however they wish to do so through a junction. Having said that, (from a liability point of view) it is hard to envisage a situation where a driver will be held liable if they've done nothing wrong. But that's not to say that they couldn't possibly have avoided the accident (and I'm sure you grasp the distinction).
Mr SFJ said:
exactly. 5% that could be avoided if they obeyed the law.
Twice as many could be avoided if motorists didn't run into the back of cyclists.And about the same amount would be avoided if people checked before opening their doors.
The full report is here. It makes interesting reading:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/ped...
mikeveal said:
I also have bad news for you if you're thinking that I give a stuff that people disagree with my opinion.
You clearly do, since you bothered to take the time to post.mikeveal said:
If you want to pick holes in my post, go ahead.
I did. The hole was in your presentation, which was dire. If you want to be taken seriously, give things their proper name. If you don't it's entirely reasonable of others to conclude you aren't worth the effort of treating you like an adult. That's my constructive input 
will_ said:
73mark said:
Why not pay you want to use the roads on you're toys.
Gosh, I think you're going to struggle.I'm also fairly sure what the "73" represents.
Also... your toys.
Also, my bike gets me to work, which makes it more useful to me than my car. I'm told quite a few people use them for this not-very-toylike endeavour.
73mark said:
This is life everything is taxed, cyclist get away with it is my point
Are you quite done embarassing yourself? I'm pretty certain quite a lot of things aren't taxed. Walking, for example, on the segregated infrastructure the government provided to protect pedestrians from drivers. Also, taxes aren't decided on the basis of "something else is taxed", so there is no "getting away with it".Oh how I wish I could charge for pointing out obvious idiocy on forums.
Incidentally, wasn't Snowboy saying earlier how PHer's are too intelligent for "road tax"?
Edited by paranoid airbag on Wednesday 16th April 17:54
Urban Sports said:
Not read it all because I cba but this also annoys me, they genuinely seem to enjoy getting in the way of road tax paying motorists, they boil my piss.
I too am a road tax paying motorist, a TVR, a BMW and a 900cc Honda to be precise.Does this mean I have more entitlement to the roads than you when I'm cycling?
Urban Sports said:
Not read it all because I cba but this also annoys me, they genuinely seem to enjoy getting in the way of road tax paying motorists, they boil my piss.
I wouldn't say enjoy, it's more that they just dont give a st. Why would they? If you're the type to let his piss get boiled over something as insignificant as a few seconds delay then you probably spend half your life in a state of impotent rage. God help you when you encounter an actual problem.
I really can't be bothered to read the whole thread but this was posted on facebook and is relevant to the discussion:
http://www.motoring.co.uk/car-news/cyclists-why-do...
http://www.motoring.co.uk/car-news/cyclists-why-do...
zippyprorider said:
lol cycling is the only topic where everyone wants the government to tax us more! Road tax is based on emissions FFs get used to it.
When out for a blast a Toyota Prius causes way more of a problem than a cyclist to make progress!
As a collective, on PH i'm guessing we like generally like big fWhen out for a blast a Toyota Prius causes way more of a problem than a cyclist to make progress!
k off engines. We should all just agree to stop mentioning Road Tax on cycling related debates as it's pointless and we all know that it makes no impact on the environment whatsoever.Mr SFJ said:
will_ said:
When has that happened?
A study in London showed that only 5% of cycling fatalities involved a cyclist running a red light.
exactly. 5% that could be avoided if they obeyed the law.A study in London showed that only 5% of cycling fatalities involved a cyclist running a red light.
Snowboy said:
However, I do agree with the intended sentiment of the campaign which was to ask drivers to give bikes plenty of space when they pass.
That is pretty much ALL I ask for. 95%+ of drivers can do that. They aren't the ones I'm worried about. The small minority are the Jimplops and the 73Mark and Deltasheds of this forum. Amazing drivers (supposedly) but cannot negociate past a 2 foot wide bike without loosing hours and miles and miles (apparently it's IMPOSSIBLE to just slow briefly then pass after 5 seconds 
)Mr SFJ said:
Whether they complain or not, they still ran a red light and broke the law. And; frankly if they hit a car after doing so I have no sympathy for them at all as it was entirely their fault. I'd have more sympathy for the car driver having to deal with any trauma/damages.
I go with that. If you RLJ and have a rta. No sympathy. Same as the car drivers who speed at 100+ down the road and crash. Same thing. However, if a person is killed/seriously injured whilst acting completely legally. I tend to take a different view Urban Sports said:
Not read it all because I cba but this also annoys me, they genuinely seem to enjoy getting in the way of road tax paying motorists, they boil my piss.
And after 3 pretty sensible posts from car but not bike owners. Here comes another uneducated fool to drag the discussion back to the gutter -*-*-
Did you all know by the way that Garlick of this parish is a keen cyclist. Did you also know there is a Pistonheads cycling jersey (in Lycra) available. Gosh, promoting a car website AND cycling. The lesser IQ'd amongst us will implode
Rich_W said:
And after 3 pretty sensible posts from car but not bike owners. Here comes another uneducated fool to drag the discussion back to the gutter
-*-*-
Did you all know by the way that Garlick of this parish is a keen cyclist. Did you also know there is a Pistonheads cycling jersey (in Lycra) available. Gosh, promoting a car website AND cycling. The lesser IQ'd amongst us will implode
I think we have to accept there's both mental cyclists and mental motorists.-*-*-
Did you all know by the way that Garlick of this parish is a keen cyclist. Did you also know there is a Pistonheads cycling jersey (in Lycra) available. Gosh, promoting a car website AND cycling. The lesser IQ'd amongst us will implode
After some hard thinking, I reckon the problem people have, but find it difficult to articulate, is not so much the actual act of slowing down or waiting behind someone but more the feeling that someone else thinks it's okay to make decisions for you by stopping you doing it with no indication or recognition. It's like the guy who sits in lane 2 750 yards from a merge so you don't "push in", or the person who just throws their car out in front of you to over take a lorry doing 50mph at 51 mph. In the same instance we don't mind letting people out of junctions, giving way in towns when you don't need to because generally we're nice people and we wave each other on and show thanks.
Ultimately we just need greater communication as unit of road users between each other to allow us the empathise with each others situations. We're in an age where we can send a 2 billion gigapixel camera into space to map out paths of the milkway to then reverse the trajectory of stars and work out how it all started, yet no ones put indicators, hazard lights, brake lights or any other form of signalling that could be powered by a 9v battery onto their push bike.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff