Do you 'engage' with cyclists?
Discussion
walm said:
Motorrad said:
The proportion of idiots on bicycles I see with a flagrant disregard for any rules of the road is much higher than the proportion I see driving.
There are plenty of idiots on bikes for sure and RLJing is rampant.However, I have literally never in my life done a journey that didn't involve well over 50% of the drivers I encounter speeding.
It's just that as ever, drivers seem to give themselves a pass on speeding yet require cyclists to stick to the letter of the law for some bizarre reason.
BTW, RLJing is also rampant by motorists.
I commute ~10 miles through central london twice a day, through a lot of light controlled junctions.
It is more common (by a surprising amount) for motorised vehicles to jump the lights - 90% of the time a car/van/truck will sail through on red.
But that's not a problem - it's cyclists jumping reds that are the problem.
They should have registration plates - that'd stop them! Just like it stops the vehicles that have registration plates.
Oh, wait.
Anyway - the most common way that drivers try to engage with cyclists is (as this thread has proved) by trying to knock them off, which is the action of a coward. Try getting out of the car and "engaging" on equal terms.
I reckon it would be eye opening for a lot of "powerfully built company directors".
It is more common (by a surprising amount) for motorised vehicles to jump the lights - 90% of the time a car/van/truck will sail through on red.
But that's not a problem - it's cyclists jumping reds that are the problem.
They should have registration plates - that'd stop them! Just like it stops the vehicles that have registration plates.
Oh, wait.
Anyway - the most common way that drivers try to engage with cyclists is (as this thread has proved) by trying to knock them off, which is the action of a coward. Try getting out of the car and "engaging" on equal terms.
I reckon it would be eye opening for a lot of "powerfully built company directors".
Hol said:
We were trying to think of another walk of life where a minority group of people insists that everybody everybody revolve around their needs, so that they can behave like spoilt children and insult everyone.
We couldn't come up with anything else in this century.
Who is this "we" that thinks that expecting motorists to drive safely near them is the same as "insisting that everybody everybody revolve around their needs"?We couldn't come up with anything else in this century.
The only real issue I have with cyclists is when they ride two or more abreast, sometimes even in a formation of rolling leader changes of up to four riders wide, on a normal 30+ single lane road, so you can't overtake them safely.
If you want to cycle like in a competition, do it on a track.
If you want to cycle like in a competition, do it on a track.
Motorrad said:
I've also noticed that a lot of the vociferous cycling types tend to be blinkered bigots who feel free to insult others (as we've seen on this thread) and unable to look rationally at the subject.
Motorrad said:
I honestly think the place to start is the assholes who ride bikes not the utter turds using other modes of transport.
Motorrad said:
I agree with most of your comments re: car drivers.
However I was replying to the thread title in my comments- I engage with cyclists regularly because 95% of my road time is spent as one myself and the proportion of idiots on bicycles I see with a flagrant disregard for any rules of the road is much higher than the proportion I see driving.
It's common sense really- most cyclists have no training let alone having to have passed a test, they have no registration to identify them and their mode of transport isn't subject to any sort of inspection.
I've also noticed that a lot of the vociferous cycling types tend to be blinkered bigots who feel free to insult others (as we've seen on this thread) and unable to look rationally at the subject.
^^^However I was replying to the thread title in my comments- I engage with cyclists regularly because 95% of my road time is spent as one myself and the proportion of idiots on bicycles I see with a flagrant disregard for any rules of the road is much higher than the proportion I see driving.
It's common sense really- most cyclists have no training let alone having to have passed a test, they have no registration to identify them and their mode of transport isn't subject to any sort of inspection.
I've also noticed that a lot of the vociferous cycling types tend to be blinkered bigots who feel free to insult others (as we've seen on this thread) and unable to look rationally at the subject.
This individual is officially a sensible balanced and normal person.
Very well said. You have called it exactly.
Mave said:
Who is this "we" that thinks that expecting motorists to drive safely near them is the same as "insisting that everybody everybody revolve around their needs"?
We were trying to think of another walk of life where a minority group of people insists that everybody everybody revolve around their needs, so that they can behave like spoilt children and insult everyone.We couldn't come up with anything else in this century.
Dammit said:
I commute ~10 miles through central london twice a day, through a lot of light controlled junctions.
It is more common (by a surprising amount) for motorised vehicles to jump the lights - 90% of the time a car/van/truck will sail through on red.
But that's not a problem - it's cyclists jumping reds that are the problem.
They should have registration plates - that'd stop them! Just like it stops the vehicles that have registration plates.
Oh, wait.
Anyway - the most common way that drivers try to engage with cyclists is (as this thread has proved) by trying to knock them off, which is the action of a coward. Try getting out of the car and "engaging" on equal terms.
I reckon it would be eye opening for a lot of "powerfully built company directors".
But, but, but you only cycle 10 miles a day not 15000000Km every year and I bet you have never even ridden the spice roads in Chiang Mai?It is more common (by a surprising amount) for motorised vehicles to jump the lights - 90% of the time a car/van/truck will sail through on red.
But that's not a problem - it's cyclists jumping reds that are the problem.
They should have registration plates - that'd stop them! Just like it stops the vehicles that have registration plates.
Oh, wait.
Anyway - the most common way that drivers try to engage with cyclists is (as this thread has proved) by trying to knock them off, which is the action of a coward. Try getting out of the car and "engaging" on equal terms.
I reckon it would be eye opening for a lot of "powerfully built company directors".
It seems the average non cyclist in here is a basically not that concerned. Is that really what PH is about, has it ever been any different, I don't know but every week now there seems to be these sinister threads where everyone can vent about cyclists and all the harm they do in the world. Then, when these cyclists, who in the main own cars and seem to be otherwise engaged in various forms of motorsport get the hump and point a few things out they are labelled as 'militants'
Nice work.
I'm doing some jobs around the house today, then tomorrow I'm taking my car to have the intercooler replaced, all the charge pipework upgraded and the car remapped. Again.
I reckon it's probably faster than a lot of the cars owned by the Hate brigade such as the OP of this thread.
It's not, and never will be a sensible way of getting to work though. Or anywhere near as fun as the bike is.
I reckon it's probably faster than a lot of the cars owned by the Hate brigade such as the OP of this thread.
It's not, and never will be a sensible way of getting to work though. Or anywhere near as fun as the bike is.
Hol said:
We were trying to think of another walk of life where a minority group of people insists that everybody everybody revolve around their needs, so that they can behave like spoilt children and insult everyone.
We couldn't come up with anything else in this century.
You mean like joggers...a marathon for example, which closes various major routes around the world for people's enjoyment. Pavements are for walking on, why was my morning walk to the shops disturbed etc, etc, rage, rage.....We couldn't come up with anything else in this century.
Nothing like a balanced discussion
Finlandia said:
The only real issue I have with cyclists is when they ride two or more abreast, sometimes even in a formation of rolling leader changes of up to four riders wide, on a normal 30+ single lane road, so you can't overtake them safely.
If you want to cycle like in a competition, do it on a track.
If they'd have been single file you'd presumably still have to enter the opposing lane, except it'd be for 4 bike lengths, rather than 1. If you want to cycle like in a competition, do it on a track.
I saw a dowdy young woman on a cycle yesterday with two helmet cameras! One looking ahead and one behind.
I sort-of understand in one respect, in the same way that I understand how the 'Polite Slow!' horse tabards came about, but I believe that she created a lot of the drama that had led to her deciding that she needed to fit two cameras to her helmet.
This came clear as I saw her inexpertly navigate a busy and dangerous roundabout (which has cycle paths around it with crossings), causing chaos and narrowly avoiding two collisions.
In her defence the didn't shout of gesticulate at the drivers, but she was the author of her own misfortune and she had no idea that this was the case.
I sort-of understand in one respect, in the same way that I understand how the 'Polite Slow!' horse tabards came about, but I believe that she created a lot of the drama that had led to her deciding that she needed to fit two cameras to her helmet.
This came clear as I saw her inexpertly navigate a busy and dangerous roundabout (which has cycle paths around it with crossings), causing chaos and narrowly avoiding two collisions.
In her defence the didn't shout of gesticulate at the drivers, but she was the author of her own misfortune and she had no idea that this was the case.
I think a lot of people in this thread would benefit from reading Daniel Kahneman's Thinking fast and slow.
It's a great book on it's own merits, and very interesting in it's portrayal of two distinct systems of thought, which he calls system one and system two - one instinctive, the other logical.
The OP in this thread is whining about being held up by a cyclist - at rush hour.
So it's quite clear that he or she hasn't actually applied any logical thought to this - at rush hour, in London, bicycles travel significantly faster than cars, vans etc, if you look at average speeds.
Finlandia is another example of someone who hasn't actually thought about what they are typing, they just wanted to vomit a chunk of anti-cyclist invective into the thread.
If he or she had thought about it they'd realise that the time spent in the opposite lane by the car during the overtake is halved by cyclists riding two abreast - so it's actually making the maneuver significantly safer for the motorist.
It's a great book on it's own merits, and very interesting in it's portrayal of two distinct systems of thought, which he calls system one and system two - one instinctive, the other logical.
The OP in this thread is whining about being held up by a cyclist - at rush hour.
So it's quite clear that he or she hasn't actually applied any logical thought to this - at rush hour, in London, bicycles travel significantly faster than cars, vans etc, if you look at average speeds.
Finlandia is another example of someone who hasn't actually thought about what they are typing, they just wanted to vomit a chunk of anti-cyclist invective into the thread.
If he or she had thought about it they'd realise that the time spent in the opposite lane by the car during the overtake is halved by cyclists riding two abreast - so it's actually making the maneuver significantly safer for the motorist.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff