Man rides bike with child in trailer down dual carriage way

[IroningMan]

5-Oh said:

I couldn't imagine towing the most important person in my life behind me in a flimsy trailer no higher than a car's bumper, the fact that drivers should avoid me would not provide much comfort.

Reading cycling threads on PH doesn't offer much comfort as to the standards you can expect, either.

[lostkiwi]

5-Oh said:

I couldn't imagine towing the most important person in my life behind me in a flimsy trailer no higher than a car's bumper, the fact that drivers should avoid me would not provide much comfort.

And if you had no choice because you lived on that section of road and had no alternative transport? Does that make you a bad/foolish/irresponsible parent?

[skyrover]

BGarside said:

skyrover said:

These stupid child trailers for bikes are utterly irresponsible IMO.

Fine for country cycleways or holiday parks, but mixing with regular traffic on main roads at wheel height?

Madness

Funny how people in civilised countries like Holland, Denmark and Germany don't think anything of transporting their kids by bike yet in Britain this is unthinkable.

Civilized people can still do idiotic things.

Why put your child at unnecessary risk?

[Diderot]

Mave said:

DoubleSix said:

Mave said:

DoubleSix said:

lostkiwi said:

And its people like you who can't accept vehicle drivers have a responsibility to other road users that make the roads unsafe for squishy objects in their way. FFS accept some responsibility for the fact you drive a metal killing machine, drive responsibly and encourage others to do likewise.

You are a moron.

Sorry, I just can't believe you can be this stupid. Once more....

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I DO, I CANNOT CONTROL THE ACTIONS AND BEHAVIOUR OF OTHERS, I CAN ONLY CONTROL MY OWN ACTIONS AND SEEK TO LIMIT MY OWN EXPOSURE TO DANGER.

So in a thread where the op comments on the behaviour of the cyclist (who's action and behaviour he cannot control), why not equally call for more care attention by the drivers (who's action and behaviour he equally cannot control)?

You can call for whatever you like, you can also piss in the wind if you so chose. Meanwhile those of us with our heads screwed on will accept the status quo with regards to road safety and not make an example of ourselves using our most precious loved ones as the ultimate talisman.

Plug yourselves in please, the lights are off at your place.

Are you unable to recognise that it is possible to do what's safe whilst calling for what's right? I don't cycle with my kids in their trailer on DCs because it would scare the crap out of me. But the reason DCs are dangerous is because of motorists, not cyclists. So as driving enthusiasts our efforts and commentary should be at least as much about addressing poor driving standards as mitigating the threat they pose.

I think that argument is flawed Mave. Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride on the motorway network? Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride through the Southwick Tunnel on the A 27 or the Hindhead Tunnel on the A3?

[saaby93]

Diderot said:

I think that argument is flawed Mave.
Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride on the motorway network? Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride through the Southwick Tunnel on the A27 or the Hindhead Tunnel on the A3?

Or the corollary
Why are cyclists, horses, most anyone, allowed to use most dual carriageways?
Because it's always been the way
Due care other road users

[ORD]

This thread could be used to explain the concept of 'missing the point'.

'I should be able to cycle safely on a DC. I'll use my child as a bumper while I am at it. If it's unsafe, that's not my fault, so I shall pretend it is safe. Bloody drivers'

[DoubleSix]

ORD said:

This thread could be used to explain the concept of 'missing the point'.

Astonishing isn't it...

[lostkiwi]

DoubleSix said:

ORD said:

This thread could be used to explain the concept of 'missing the point'.

Astonishing isn't it...

Say those who have missed the point and failed to answer the question posed earlier.....


So to give you another chance (and spelling it out for you)...
The OP has stated there are houses that join the road
If the cyclist and child live in one of those houses and has no car or licence what else is he supposed to do?
Can we call him irresponsible/bad parent/foolish in that circumstance? If not then who are we to castigate him without knowing the facts?

[drivin_me_nuts]

It would certainly make e think wtf of I saw a cyclist and trailer riding along a dc. If only because driving standards are so poor. On several occasions recently I've seen cyclists in places where they expose themselves and others to the most unnecessary of risks. For example, joking the A27 at the river Adirondack crossing flyover at shoreham-by-sea.

I realise we all make our own risk assessments, but I wonder how oftensome don't factor in the environment and the actions of those around them.

[Diderot]

saaby93 said:

Diderot said:

I think that argument is flawed Mave.
Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride on the motorway network? Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride through the Southwick Tunnel on the A27 or the Hindhead Tunnel on the A3?

Or the corollary
Why are cyclists, horses, most anyone, allowed to use most dual carriageways?
Because it's always been the way
Due care other road users

The question needs to be answered rather than sidestepped Saaby . BTW I've never seen a horse rider on a DC thankfully, though I am partial to horse steak once in a while.

[DoubleSix]

lostkiwi said:

DoubleSix said:

ORD said:

This thread could be used to explain the concept of 'missing the point'.

Astonishing isn't it...

Say those who have missed the point and failed to answer the question posed earlier.....


So to give you another chance (and spelling it out for you)...
The OP has stated there are houses that join the road
If the cyclist and child live in one of those houses and has no car or licence what else is he supposed to do?
Can we call him irresponsible/bad parent/foolish in that circumstance? If not then who are we to castigate him without knowing the facts?

Every time you post you say some less intelligent than before. Where this ends I'm unsure, perhaps you will just start pressing your face against the keyboard soon....

[lostkiwi]

Diderot said:

The question needs to be answered rather than sidestepped Saaby . BTW I've never seen a horse rider on a DC thankfully, though I am partial to horse steak once in a while.

Bikes aren't allowed on motorways for the simple reason that motorways were designed and purpose built for motor vehicles whereas dual carriageways are (in the main) traditional routes open to all traffic (including pedestrians). Motorways were designed in this way to provide a safer way for motorists to travel distances due to all traffic travelling in the same direction and with no side roads/laybys to create accident points. Dual carriageways are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination as they are merely ordinary roads widened to take additional traffic.
Whilst it may be considered unwise by some to use dual carriageways if on a horse/bike/foot its only the attitudes and lack of ability of motor vehicle users that has made it that way. As has been stated other countries in Europe (and elsewhere) cope with varied traffic on dual carriageways with very little difficulty (Scandinavia, Belgium, France, Germany to name a few).
Having ridden a heavily laden bike whilst touring Belgium/Germany a number of years back I can only say I never had any agro from any other road users whereas in this country its almost a certainty that if you do 30 miles someone will complain/toot/shout or cut you up. That to me is where the problem lies. Its the attitudes of motorists towards other road users and a lack of tolerance to anyone who may slow them down by a minute or two over their journey.

[lostkiwi]

DoubleSix said:

Every time you post you say some less intelligent than before. Where this ends I'm unsure, perhaps you will just start pressing your face against the keyboard soon....

I've been saying that for the past 3 or 4 pages (but then with a double six IQ I guess you find it difficult to comprehend the written word and remember that far back).

[saaby93]

Diderot said:

saaby93 said:

Diderot said:

I think that argument is flawed Mave.
Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride on the motorway network? Why aren't cyclists allowed to ride through the Southwick Tunnel on the A27 or the Hindhead Tunnel on the A3?

Or the corollary
Why are cyclists, horses, most anyone, allowed to use most dual carriageways?
Because it's always been the way
Due care other road users

The question needs to be answered rather than sidestepped Saaby . BTW I've never seen a horse rider on a DC thankfully, though I am partial to horse steak once in a while.

I don't know why not the A27 or A3 tunnels, maybe there's something about tunnels and maybe the old road still exists along a different line for cyclists to use.

But driving a typical rural DC you know there'll be a cyclist somewhere along it, and so long as they're reasonably over to the left, they're easy enough to deal with. Even if theyre not, it's not that difficult. I think I saw a horse and cart once.
It's only the same as looking out for whats around the next bend on a B road (or any other road)

[TankRizzo]

lostkiwi said:

Say those who have missed the point and failed to answer the question posed earlier.....


So to give you another chance (and spelling it out for you)...
The OP has stated there are houses that join the road
If the cyclist and child live in one of those houses and has no car or licence what else is he supposed to do?
Can we call him irresponsible/bad parent/foolish in that circumstance? If not then who are we to castigate him without knowing the facts?

How many houses in the UK have absolutely no other way of getting to point B than joining a dual carriageway on a bicycle?

Or are you just picking the most obscure example you can to prove a point?

[ORD]

It doesn't prove a thing, either.

The hypothetical cyclist would, unles he was an idiot, choose another house or learn to drive.

[anonymous-user]

DoubleSix said:

You are a moron.

Sorry, I just can't believe you can be this stupid. Once more....

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I DO, I CANNOT CONTROL THE ACTIONS AND BEHAVIOUR OF OTHERS, I CAN ONLY CONTROL MY OWN ACTIONS AND SEEK
TO LIMIT MY OWN EXPOSURE TO DANGER TO ENSURE I DO NOT PLACE ANY OTHER ROAD USER IN DANGER...

is what you should have typed...

[saaby93]

What they've done in some places to help allay concerns of the perceived danger, is convert the inside lane of 2 lane DCs to hatching and a cycle lane.
How would that go down?

[DoubleSix]

ORD said:

It doesn't prove a thing, either.

The hypothetical cyclist would, unles he was an idiot, choose another house or learn to drive.

The question was so risible it was unworthy of a response. I admire your charity though chaps.

[TankRizzo]

saaby93 said:

But driving a typical rural DC you know there'll be a cyclist somewhere along it, and so long as they're reasonably over to the left, they're easy enough to deal with. Even if theyre not, it's not that difficult. I think I saw a horse and cart once.
It's only the same as looking out for whats around the next bend on a B road (or any other road)

You could call the A31 between Southampton and Ringwood a "typical rural dual carriageway" - it goes right through the New Forest. I had to try and cross it on my bike once with one of my sons on his child seat, and there is absolutely no way I would cycle along it with a child, not even with a child seat, let alone a trailer. Little to no hard shoulder, poor sighting around corners and fast closing speeds from all sorts of drivers. Perhaps on a road bike, on my own, but even then I would be bloody scared.