Cycling on the footpath
Discussion
rohrl said:
How tedious. Can't you, NigelWorcs and the other anti-cycling t
ts go elsewhere?
No, I can't. On the contrary, if you're unable to accept that people have a different opinion to the one that you hold, I might suggest that internet based fora are not the best place for you to spend your time. It really won't do your blood pressure any good.ts go elsewhere?And for your information, I am not anti cycling. I am however anti the minority of cyclists who ride like plonkers. You know, the ones who insist on putting themselves in danger on the road, when a cycle lane exists; the stupid ones who attempt to dictate traffic around them; the ones who ride through red lights; cyclists who make it as difficult as they can for you to overtake them, then squeeze past your wing mirror at the next set of lights. This minority tarnishes the reputation of the rest of the decent cyclists on the road and through their actions, I have no sympathy for the plight of cyclists in general.
My comment was meant to be tounge in cheek, yours is little more than a loosely veiled insult, sadly par for the course on PH laterly.
mikeveal said:
and through their actions, I have no sympathy for the plight of cyclists in general.
...Which makes your view highly irrational. You may as well say because of Alcoholics, I dislike the brewing industry. What other statistical irrelevancies do you focus on to the point of prurience?mikeveal said:
No, I can't. On the contrary, if you're unable to accept that people have a different opinion to the one that you hold, I might suggest that internet based fora are not the best place for you to spend your time. It really won't do your blood pressure any good.
And for your information, I am not anti cycling. I am however anti the minority of cyclists who ride like plonkers. You know, the ones who insist on putting themselves in danger on the road, when a cycle lane exists; the stupid ones who attempt to dictate traffic around them; the ones who ride through red lights; cyclists who make it as difficult as they can for you to overtake them, then squeeze past your wing mirror at the next set of lights. This minority tarnishes the reputation of the rest of the decent cyclists on the road and through their actions, I have no sympathy for the plight of cyclists in general.
My comment was meant to be tounge in cheek, yours is little more than a loosely veiled insult, sadly par for the course on PH laterly.
Have to agree with this, some cyclists try to bully other road users and pedestrians in this manner. I would have no sympathy for them if they act like this and come a cropper. No more than I would a car driver that drives like a jerk and then crashes And for your information, I am not anti cycling. I am however anti the minority of cyclists who ride like plonkers. You know, the ones who insist on putting themselves in danger on the road, when a cycle lane exists; the stupid ones who attempt to dictate traffic around them; the ones who ride through red lights; cyclists who make it as difficult as they can for you to overtake them, then squeeze past your wing mirror at the next set of lights. This minority tarnishes the reputation of the rest of the decent cyclists on the road and through their actions, I have no sympathy for the plight of cyclists in general.
My comment was meant to be tounge in cheek, yours is little more than a loosely veiled insult, sadly par for the course on PH laterly.
I suspect a lot of motorists who pay good money to use the road would also not appreciate cyclists trying to impede their progress unnecessarily.
As a pedestrian in a shopping precinct recently I had to move out of the way for some cyclists to avoid them, despite the "no cycling" signs. A couple of policemen nearby ended up telling them not to ride there, presumably they are sick of having to do so.
When I used to cycle I did it responsibly, shame others don't.
I don't understand why all pavements aren't created dual use as cycle paths with the onus of safety being placed on the cyclist. Closing speed between an average cyclist and pedestrian will be around 10mph where as between car and bike will be 20mph or more. Add to the fact both cyclists and pedestrians are "vulnerable" road users and it becomes a no brainer (and I am a cyclist btw).
What truly deeply frustrates me more than any other annoying habit of fellow cyclists (and there are many) is when there is a dedicated cycle path by the side of a busy road and they don't use it, totally inconsiderate cycling of the worst kind, why slow cars down to your speed when you just don't need to be on the road??? Using the cycle path isn't as quick but it's seconds difference compared to sticking yourself in harms way with frustrated drivers slowing from 60 in a 2 ton metal box. They are virtually impossible to overtake with a large vehicle.
What truly deeply frustrates me more than any other annoying habit of fellow cyclists (and there are many) is when there is a dedicated cycle path by the side of a busy road and they don't use it, totally inconsiderate cycling of the worst kind, why slow cars down to your speed when you just don't need to be on the road??? Using the cycle path isn't as quick but it's seconds difference compared to sticking yourself in harms way with frustrated drivers slowing from 60 in a 2 ton metal box. They are virtually impossible to overtake with a large vehicle.
Justin Cyder said:
mikeveal said:
and through their actions, I have no sympathy for the plight of cyclists in general.
...Which makes your view highly irrational. You may as well say because of Alcoholics, I dislike the brewing industry. What other statistical irrelevancies do you focus on to the point of prurience?Logically and rationally I accept that most of the cyclists on the road are good. They're cycling well and we are both able to make progress without any issues. But these are not the cyclists that I remember. See my previous note for a (not comprehensive) list of the annoying antics carried out by the minority.
Yes, its a minority. But due to their actions, when I see a cyclist that's what I'm expecting.
To use your analogy, if drunks from a local bar repeatedly behaved in a way which inconvenienced and annoyed me, then yes, I'd grow to dislike the bar and have no sympathy when the council closed it in the same way that I have no longer have any sympathy for the plight of cyclists.
wildoliver said:
I don't understand why all pavements aren't created dual use as cycle paths with the onus of safety being placed on the cyclist. Closing speed between an average cyclist and pedestrian will be around 10mph where as between car and bike will be 20mph or more. Add to the fact both cyclists and pedestrians are "vulnerable" road users and it becomes a no brainer (and I am a cyclist btw).
What truly deeply frustrates me more than any other annoying habit of fellow cyclists (and there are many) is when there is a dedicated cycle path by the side of a busy road and they don't use it, totally inconsiderate cycling of the worst kind, why slow cars down to your speed when you just don't need to be on the road??? Using the cycle path isn't as quick but it's seconds difference compared to sticking yourself in harms way with frustrated drivers slowing from 60 in a 2 ton metal box. They are virtually impossible to overtake with a large vehicle.
Many pavement 'cycle paths' are littered with debris and broken glass, require giving way at every side road and are a very poor alternative to the road for cyclists trying to make progress, rather than beginners out on a Sunday jaunt.What truly deeply frustrates me more than any other annoying habit of fellow cyclists (and there are many) is when there is a dedicated cycle path by the side of a busy road and they don't use it, totally inconsiderate cycling of the worst kind, why slow cars down to your speed when you just don't need to be on the road??? Using the cycle path isn't as quick but it's seconds difference compared to sticking yourself in harms way with frustrated drivers slowing from 60 in a 2 ton metal box. They are virtually impossible to overtake with a large vehicle.
Ask yourself if you would willingly opt to stop and give way at every side road while driving your car.
And let's not forget that the use of such paths is optional and that cyclists have every right to use the road...
mikeveal said:
No, it's human nature.
Logically and rationally I accept that most of the cyclists on the road are good. They're cycling well and we are both able to make progress without any issues. But these are not the cyclists that I remember. See my previous note for a (not comprehensive) list of the annoying antics carried out by the minority.
Yes, its a minority. But due to their actions, when I see a cyclist that's what I'm expecting.
To use your analogy, if drunks from a local bar repeatedly behaved in a way which inconvenienced and annoyed me, then yes, I'd grow to dislike the bar and have no sympathy when the council closed it in the same way that I have no longer have any sympathy for the plight of cyclists.
Sorry, but it's not human nature at all to tar an entire group based on your experience of a minority. It's [i]your nature[/] & it's for you to realise what others can already see as unreasonable. Logically and rationally I accept that most of the cyclists on the road are good. They're cycling well and we are both able to make progress without any issues. But these are not the cyclists that I remember. See my previous note for a (not comprehensive) list of the annoying antics carried out by the minority.
Yes, its a minority. But due to their actions, when I see a cyclist that's what I'm expecting.
To use your analogy, if drunks from a local bar repeatedly behaved in a way which inconvenienced and annoyed me, then yes, I'd grow to dislike the bar and have no sympathy when the council closed it in the same way that I have no longer have any sympathy for the plight of cyclists.
I actually don't feel 'right' cycling on the pavement, whether it's a cycle lane or not. I guess it comes from being repeatedly told not to when I was younger - back then, graduating from having to stick to the pavement to being 'allowed on the road' was something to look forward to.
I must admit there's one section of pavement I cycle along where I shouldn't, but I think on the road it would be more dangerous as it's quite narrow, and would hold up vehicles for the same reason. But I'm there at a specific time, have yet to encounter any pedestrians and would divert if needed.
I must admit there's one section of pavement I cycle along where I shouldn't, but I think on the road it would be more dangerous as it's quite narrow, and would hold up vehicles for the same reason. But I'm there at a specific time, have yet to encounter any pedestrians and would divert if needed.
mikeveal said:
rohrl said:
How tedious. Can't you, NigelWorcs and the other anti-cycling tts go elsewhere?
No, I can't. On the contrary, if you're unable to accept that people have a different opinion to the one that you hold, I might suggest that internet based fora are not the best place for you to spend your time. It really won't do your blood pressure any good.ts go elsewhere?And for your information, I am not anti cycling. I am however anti the minority of cyclists who ride like plonkers. You know, the ones who insist on putting themselves in danger on the road, when a cycle lane exists; the stupid ones who attempt to dictate traffic around them; the ones who ride through red lights; cyclists who make it as difficult as they can for you to overtake them, then squeeze past your wing mirror at the next set of lights. This minority tarnishes the reputation of the rest of the decent cyclists on the road and through their actions, I have no sympathy for the plight of cyclists in general.
My comment was meant to be tounge in cheek, yours is little more than a loosely veiled insult, sadly par for the course on PH laterly.
t.CaptainSlow said:
oh dear
BGarside said:
Curiously this side of the debate is hardly ever mentioned in the press, which instead devotes column inches to drivers complaining about traffic congestion, fuel prices and parking problems. If you think life is difficult in your car, try cycling in UK traffic...
My comment was relevant to this post, not sure what your comment even means never mind its relevance?Fed up of hearing cyclists winging if I'm honest. I pay a lot of money to use the roads, if I had a moan every time I'm inconvenienced I would not have time to sleep. Despite the difficulties of getting around you don't see me taking to the pavements in my car.
JagXJR said:
CaptainSlow said:
oh dear
BGarside said:
Curiously this side of the debate is hardly ever mentioned in the press, which instead devotes column inches to drivers complaining about traffic congestion, fuel prices and parking problems. If you think life is difficult in your car, try cycling in UK traffic...
My comment was relevant to this post, not sure what your comment even means never mind its relevance?Fed up of hearing cyclists winging if I'm honest. I pay a lot of money to use the roads, if I had a moan every time I'm inconvenienced I would not have time to sleep. Despite the difficulties of getting around you don't see me taking to the pavements in my car.
Justin Cyder said:
Sorry, but it's not human nature at all to tar an entire group based on your experience of a minority. It's [i]your nature[/] & it's for you to realise what others can already see as unreasonable.
Really? If people repeatedly see a minority misbehaving then yes, the perception of the majority will eventually and inevitably become tainted by the actions of the minority. Yes, this is prejudice, yes it's unfair. I'm aware of that. I stated once already, that I am not anti cyclist, but I am anti the minority.
You honestly don't think that it's human nature to remember the cyclist who was a pain to pass and to forget the one who made everyones life easy? (I'd say this is the very cause of the anti cyclist venom that we see in this forum.) Well, I guess that's your opinion and however niaeve it seems to me, I respect your right to hold it. Please afford me the same courtesy.
And with that aahm oout before we start going round in circles.
Merkypast said:
rohrl said:
How tedious. Can't you, NigelWorcs and the other anti-cycling tts go elsewhere?
Might be an idea to look at your address bar a little more closely, old chap. The site's called 'Pistonheads' not 'Pedalheads' ts go elsewhere?
JagXJR said:
CaptainSlow said:
oh dear
BGarside said:
Curiously this side of the debate is hardly ever mentioned in the press, which instead devotes column inches to drivers complaining about traffic congestion, fuel prices and parking problems. If you think life is difficult in your car, try cycling in UK traffic...
My comment was relevant to this post, not sure what your comment even means never mind its relevance?Fed up of hearing cyclists winging if I'm honest. I pay a lot of money to use the roads, if I had a moan every time I'm inconvenienced I would not have time to sleep. Despite the difficulties of getting around you don't see me taking to the pavements in my car.
CaptainSlow said:
Unless you use the M5 toll alot I don't see how you do?
Unless you are stupid or rich, I take it you understand how much it costs to run a car?The VED is a legal tax required to run a car and is (a small part) of the running costs.
But we digress, the topic is about cycling on the footpath, perhaps you could comment on that?
Edited by JagXJR on Tuesday 17th September 14:03
JagXJR said:
CaptainSlow said:
oh dear
BGarside said:
Curiously this side of the debate is hardly ever mentioned in the press, which instead devotes column inches to drivers complaining about traffic congestion, fuel prices and parking problems. If you think life is difficult in your car, try cycling in UK traffic...
My comment was relevant to this post, not sure what your comment even means never mind its relevance?Fed up of hearing cyclists winging if I'm honest. I pay a lot of money to use the roads, if I had a moan every time I'm inconvenienced I would not have time to sleep. Despite the difficulties of getting around you don't see me taking to the pavements in my car.
You don't pay any money to use the roads, except for that bridge into Wales, the Dartford Tunnel, that bit on the M6, and so on. "Road tax", as many car drivers used to shout at me, is actually a car tax, "vehicle excise duty". The VED plus the tax on petrol wouldn't cover the cost of roads. You all pay for roads, whether you like it or not, whether you drive or not, whether you have one car or ten. That includes cyclists. So you might be fed up of hearing them whinging, but they pay for the roads on exactly the same basis as motorists (if cyclists were part of the VED scheme, they'd be zero-rated, like prius drivers. There are so many cyclists it would cost a small fortune to give them all zero-rated tax discs. Lots of cyclists have cars and motorbikes, and pay VED on those, but leave them at home for the commute, thus reducing traffic, and cutting YOUR commuting time).
Hence the "oh dear".
Declaration of interest: I pay no taxes in the UK, I have a motorbike, two cars, and five bicycles.
(Edited a typo)
Edited by A common lawyer on Tuesday 17th September 14:13
JagXJR said:
CaptainSlow said:
Unless you use the M5 toll alot I don't see how you do?
Unless you are stupid or rich, I take it you understand how much it costs to run a car?The VED is a legal tax required to run a car and is (a small part) of the running costs.
But we digress, the topic is about cycling on the footpath, perhaps you could comment on that?
Edited by JagXJR on Tuesday 17th September 14:03
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff