SUV driver attempts to kill cyclist, smashes into salon

[anonymous-user]

Mave said:

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that we should be hypocrites as well! People who are condoning RLJ on bikes are just making all of us look bad and keep providing ammunition to keep the anti-cyclists complaining.

I can't ride/drive through red lights. Something stops me...oh yeah...#becausenotatt

I'd be the first to pull a rider who did, saving a few seconds for what exactly?

[Mr2Mike]

heebeegeetee said:

Well, overall 87% of those cyclists will be motorists, outside of London it'll be much nearer to 100% so yes, I do.

So you believe that cyclists that blatantly ride through red lights behave in exactly the same way when driving a car? You don't think, for example, that red light cameras would modify their behavior, or the fact that it's rather difficult to jump a red light in a car if there is already traffic waiting?

[oyster]

snoopy25 said:

Today for example:

Heading up towards Kings College Hospital in London going up the hill. Several Cyclist coming down my side of the road have the audacity to think I shouldnt be were I am....errrr this is my side of the road.....I come to a stop and then im told to 'get out of the f***ing way' as they cycle past.

I beg your pardon? were you not on my side of the road going to fast to stop?! As soon as i got out of my car matey boy didnt want a discussion and scarpered very quickly. I wasnt looking for a fight or anything i wanted to know why he genuinely believed he had right of way on my side of the friggin' road!

Honestly getting sick and tired of the cyclist/motorbike brigade always thinking they are in the right. Every day now turns into an avoidance exercise of cyclists on my way out of London to Croydon as they believe none of the rules of the road apply to them. Redlights, Zebra crossings roundabouts....nothing applys to them. The cyclists who still continue to ride through crowds of people crossing like they own the place.....cyclist who go up the insides of buses and huge trucks and then moan when the bus/truck wants to turn left and they cant see them.....

Dont get me wrong there are some very decent riders who do obey the rules of the road and i honestly dont have any argument with them at all. But in my opinion, especially in London, it seems this is very few and far between.........

The problem is that the below is also true.
Dont get me wrong there are some very decent motorists who do obey the rules of the road and i honestly dont have any argument with them at all. But in my opinion, especially in London, it seems this is very few and far between.........

And law breaking motorists can kill people. Law breaking cyclists are highly unlikely to.

[oyster]

Mave said:

heebeegeetee said:

Mave said:

Yep. How can we complain about the law breaking behaviour of some motorists whilst condoning the law breaking behaviour of some cyclists?

'Some' motorists? Try virtually all motorists. Try and find a motorist who condemns parking on the pavement.

It doesn't matter whether its "some" or "all". If you condone a behaviour, surely you condone it for everyone. So my question still stands; how can we complain about motorists breaking the law whilst condoning cyclists breaking the law?

Is anyone condoning cyclists breaking the law?

I see people suggesting it's not crime of the century, but that's a different thing.

What you're suggesting is that somehow a car crossing a red light is the same crime as a bicycle doing it. If you think that then you're plainly not thinking straight as you're deliberately excluding consequence.

[oyster]

Steve vRS said:

As a cyclist I firmly follow the protocol that if I want to behave like traffic, I should behave like traffic. Well like good traffic anyway.

Steve

I totally agree. And I stop at every single traffic light.

Although acting like traffic also means taking the lane and not hugging the gutter.

[walm]

Mave said:

It doesn't matter whether its "some" or "all". If you condone a behaviour, surely you condone it for everyone. So my question still stands; how can we complain about motorists breaking the law whilst condoning cyclists breaking the law?

Absolutely not.

We should take THE CONSEQUENCES of law breaking into account.

(This is why we have different sentences, different CPS priorities, decriminalised parking enforcement etc...)

As a result, it is simply laughably hypocritical when a regularly speeding driver complains about RLJing from cyclists.

From the laws of physics, the accident statistics, the attitude of law enforcement and common sense we know that the consequence of RLJing is utterly de minimis.

On the other hand, speeding, careless driving and dangerous driving kills people every day.

I condone speeding and so does the ACPO guidelines: 10%+2mph.
80mph on the motorway is morally and socially acceptable.

And because I am not an irrational hypocritical idiot, I also condone harmless RLJing at a walking pace with no one around etc...
(Unlike speeding, I don't RLJ though because unfortunately the vast majority of the motoring public ARE a bunch of irrational hypocritical idiots as demonstrated by this thread.)

TL;DR Consequences matter, cyclists don't need to obey every traffic law to deserve respect from motorists, speeding is fine.

[Mave]

oyster said:

What you're suggesting is that somehow a car crossing a red light is the same crime as a bicycle doing it. If you think that then you're plainly not thinking straight as you're deliberately excluding consequence.

No, what I'm suggesting is that a bicycle justifying crossing a red light is condoning individuals driving to what they feel is an acceptable level of safety, rather than to a set of rules that everyone works to.

[walm]

Mave said:

No, what I'm suggesting is that a bicycle justifying crossing a red light is condoning individuals driving to what they feel is an acceptable level of safety, rather than to a set of rules that everyone works to.

Which is essentially the stock PH attitude to speed limits.

[WinstonWolf]

doogz said:

WinstonWolf said:

How close would you pass a drunk stood in the road?

I'd give them a wide berth.

Same as I give cyclists a wide berth.

I also stop for red lights.

Good man

[Mave]

walm said:

Which is essentially the stock PH attitude to speed limits.

Yes, but you need to consider what we as cyclists are trying to achieve. If it is simply to reaffirm that we are less of a problem than motorists then fine, keep on doing the same. But if we want to influence motorists' behaviour then we need to stop giving them evidence that supports their existing bias.

[Mave]

walm said:

TL;DR Consequences matter, cyclists don't need to obey every traffic law to deserve respect from motorists, speeding is fine.

I think a significant proportion of motorists don't actually know what showing cyclists respect actually is, so in motorist / cyclist interactions it is especially important that laws / highway code is adhered to rather than "I think 6" clearance is more than enough"

[anonymous-user]

Mave said:

I think a significant proportion of motorists don't actually know what showing cyclists respect actually is, so in motorist / cyclist interactions it is especially important that laws / highway code is adhered to rather than "I think 6" clearance is more than enough"

Great so it's ok to be an ignorant driver but not cyclist? I think its nonsense anyway. Most people have ridden bikes and know what a pain cars can be if they're driven poorly. Basically it's ok to 'have a bit of oppo', practice left foot braking and drive 'enthusiastically' on the road in cars and on motorcycles but as soon as a cyclist does anything that can be picked up, it's all over.

[Mave]

yonex said:

Mave said:

I think a significant proportion of motorists don't actually know what showing cyclists respect actually is, so in motorist / cyclist interactions it is especially important that laws / highway code is adhered to rather than "I think 6" clearance is more than enough"

Great so it's ok to be an ignorant driver but not cyclist? I think its nonsense anyway. Most people have ridden bikes and know what a pain cars can be if they're driven poorly. Basically it's ok to 'have a bit of oppo', practice left foot braking and drive 'enthusiastically' on the road in cars and on motorcycles but as soon as a cyclist does anything that can be picked up, it's all over.

Unfortunately, unfair as it is, cyclists are an "out" group compared to other road users, and we happen to have the most to lose when things go wrong. Whether or not we are statistically safer than motorists is far less important than perception, and behaving in a way which is in conflict with the accepted behaviour of the "in" group is simply going to reinforce any confirmation bias that cyclists are unruly and consider themselves outside the law. Most motorists, in seeing a cyclist going through a red light, won't actively consider whether it is unsafe or not and excuse the transgression, especially if they themselves are "law abiding" and waiting at the same red light. They'll just think "lawless cyclist" and let it reinforce the impression without thinking any deeper about it.

[static2010]

0markymark0 said:

I'm a cyclist and I have insurance.

If cyclists cycled as badly as car drivers drove they'd need insurance. Just read today about a driver who, you know, drove according to the conditions etc etc mounted the pavement and killed school kids walking to school.

In fact, by the time the day is out, some more people will be killed today by drivers. Probably more today by drivers than this decade by cyclists. That's why the government is learning to love us and the 'war on motorists' is increasing.

Loving the way it is going

So you are clearly "Anti motorist"... Why are you on this forum?

[IroningMan]

static2010 said:

So you are clearly "Anti motorist"... Why are you on this forum?

Why should anti bad driving = anti motorist...?

[heebeegeetee]

Mr2Mike said:

So you believe that cyclists that blatantly ride through red lights behave in exactly the same way when driving a car? You don't think, for example, that red light cameras would modify their behavior, or the fact that it's rather difficult to jump a red light in a car if there is already traffic waiting?

Put it another way then: I've never heard of an RLJing cyclist hurting anyone. I dare say someone has been, somewhere, but it is very, very rare.

Motorists who drive at the wrong speed however, or motorists driving badly, kill thousands per year.

So by all means do all you can to stop cyclists jumping red lights but it'll jack st difference to annual casualty figures.

So why do we worry about it, why are we even talking about it?

(And whilst on the subject I'll just say again that for 30-odd years i've been watching on average 10 cars a month cross red lights, and possibly hundreds a month cross amber stop lights).

IroningMan said:

Why should anti bad driving = anti motorist...?

Exactly. What the hell is going on with this thread?

[otolith]

Tribalism.

[heebeegeetee]

otolith said:

Tribalism.

Yep, I guess.

[J4CKO]

You know when you see another driver do something cockish and you shake your head, well, us who ride bikes do the same when we see someone else on a bike do something cockish.

It isnt a club, its a mode of transport, we dont have an AGM where we all agree to jump every red light and ride six abreast to piss drivers off.

There are a couple of guys at work who decide to harass me for any problem they have with a cyclist, like I am the bloody Shop Steward for cyclists, apprantely they are "Your lot", whats that then, humans, British people, Road Users, members of the public, males, Lynx Africa Users ?

[WinstonWolf]

doogz said:

WinstonWolf said:

doogz said:

WinstonWolf said:

How close would you pass a drunk stood in the road?

I'd give them a wide berth.

Same as I give cyclists a wide berth.

I also stop for red lights.

Good man

What?

I'm Satan, I ride a bike that has no tax disc or insurance.

Meh, I also do that AND wear Lycra!