The End of the 'Punishment Pass'?

[heebeegeetee]

Mr Snrub said:

Johnnytheboy said:

S10GTA said:

Bingo

Oh if only I had the time and patience to make one up for cyclists. I'll start with a box saying "primary position".

"There is no legal requirement for me to use that cycle lane"

You could also call it the 'Things Motorists Don't Know But Should' bingo.

[Mr Snrub]

heebeegeetee said:

Mr Snrub said:

Johnnytheboy said:

S10GTA said:

Bingo

Oh if only I had the time and patience to make one up for cyclists. I'll start with a box saying "primary position".

"There is no legal requirement for me to use that cycle lane"

You could also call it the 'Things Motorists Don't Know But Should' bingo.

Half the ones in that picture are legitimate points and concerns anyway

[Johnnytheboy]

heebeegeetee said:

Mr Snrub said:

Johnnytheboy said:

S10GTA said:

Bingo

Oh if only I had the time and patience to make one up for cyclists. I'll start with a box saying "primary position".

"There is no legal requirement for me to use that cycle lane"

You could also call it the 'Things Motorists Don't Know But Should' bingo.

"Things cyclists feel the need to say repeatedly on a car forum" bingo?

[Disastrous]

mybrainhurts said:

Afraid you're going to have to put up with it, you do look ridiculous in that get up.

If you MUST wear it, take up ballet...

Do you like men in Lycra doing ballet?

Proper Narnia case here, methinks...

[George111]

PHmember said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

It's high time cyclists were required to pay for their use of the roads.

Go on then. I'll bite. I cycle on the roads, I also drive a car. My car is taxed, fully comp insured & has a current MOT. I have insurance that covers 3rd party claims for cycling ( https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/thirdpartyliabil... ), I pay NI contributions & Council Tax every month. Please tell me what else I need to pay to cycle on your precious roads.

If you own two cars, but only drive one at a time, you still need to tax, insure and MoT both cars at the same time . . . just saying

[PHmember]

George111 said:

If you own two cars, but only drive one at a time, you still need to tax, insure and MoT both cars at the same time . . . just saying

True. Can you give us a link to where I can MOT my bicycle & one for where I can tax it. Is it the same place you pay for zero emissions cars?

[George111]

PHmember said:

George111 said:

If you own two cars, but only drive one at a time, you still need to tax, insure and MoT both cars at the same time . . . just saying

True. Can you give us a link to where I can MOT my bicycle & one for where I can tax it. Is it the same place you pay for zero emissions cars?

I didn't say his argument was valid either, you're assuming.

There's also no such thing as a zero emissions car.

[spaximus]

I have no issue with giving cyclists room but this using the cameras is fraught with problems and prosecution based on a one sided view cannot be right.

We have cameras in all our vans. A few years ago a cyclist posted footage on Youtube claiming our driver had nearly killed him and from the footage he had uploaded it looked bad.

When we veiwed the footage from our van, the cyclist without indicating in any way just turned right our van did a wonderful job of swearing and missing him.

We sent him the footage and he agreed that it was his fault. His Youtube feed just said he had received a satisfactory outcome following speaking with our MD.

If the police had just had his footage they would have probably done our driver.

This does nothing to educate people, it does everything to further the dislike between car drivers and cyclists.

[IroningMan]

spaximus said:

I have no issue with giving cyclists room but this using the cameras is fraught with problems and prosecution based on a one sided view cannot be right.

We have cameras in all our vans. A few years ago a cyclist posted footage on Youtube claiming our driver had nearly killed him and from the footage he had uploaded it looked bad.

When we veiwed the footage from our van, the cyclist without indicating in any way just turned right our van did a wonderful job of swearing and missing him.

We sent him the footage and he agreed that it was his fault. His Youtube feed just said he had received a satisfactory outcome following speaking with our MD.

If the police had just had his footage they would have probably done our driver.

This does nothing to educate people, it does everything to further the dislike between car drivers and cyclists.

When educating the general public a clear, simple message, consistently presented is the key: what could be clearer than 'don't pass cyclists too close'?

You might find this WMP blog entry an interesting read; they have encouraged officers to fit cameras to their bikes, but the door is open to third-party footage of any driving standards incident, whatever the modes of transport involved; it's not about car vs. bike.

[PHmember]

George111 said:

I didn't say his argument was valid either, you're assuming.

True, hard to tell though from the way you replied.

George111 said:

There's also no such thing as a zero emissions car.

Exactly. Yet apart from my own gasses my bike is zero emmisions.

[ukaskew]

Smitters said:

As a keen cyclist, I'm with you. I really hate seeing a club out for a run and completely taking over a road. Clubs that don't think/care about route planning, or who don't educate their members on how to cycle and communicate in a group really don't help the bike/big metal boxed roaduser situation. Its give and take on the roads for sure, but a bloody great big peloton rolling along at a distinctly non-Tour de France 20 kph is just as bad as elephant racing or MLM.

As an aside, there's got to be a good collective noun for a bunch of MAMIL cyclists.

I pass the local club every Sunday morning, loads of them and it can take quite some time to pass. However, I fully appreciate this is pretty much the best possible time for them to be out (normally dead quiet) and they take a relatively obscure route where few cars are likely to be following them for long.

I'm surprised nobody has kicked off at running races yet, most I've entered are on public roads at least some of the time (albeit quiet ones) and hold up traffic a bit longer than a few bikes.

[55palfers]

Where are Plod going to find all the resource to process all these videos?
They don't even come out to burglaries any longer

[spaximus]

IroningMan said:

spaximus said:

I have no issue with giving cyclists room but this using the cameras is fraught with problems and prosecution based on a one sided view cannot be right.

We have cameras in all our vans. A few years ago a cyclist posted footage on Youtube claiming our driver had nearly killed him and from the footage he had uploaded it looked bad.

When we veiwed the footage from our van, the cyclist without indicating in any way just turned right our van did a wonderful job of swearing and missing him.

We sent him the footage and he agreed that it was his fault. His Youtube feed just said he had received a satisfactory outcome following speaking with our MD.

If the police had just had his footage they would have probably done our driver.

This does nothing to educate people, it does everything to further the dislike between car drivers and cyclists.

When educating the general public a clear, simple message, consistently presented is the key: what could be clearer than 'don't pass cyclists too close'?

You might find this WMP blog entry an interesting read; they have encouraged officers to fit cameras to their bikes, but the door is open to third-party footage of any driving standards incident, whatever the modes of transport involved; it's not about car vs. bike.

I agree in the message of not passing too close, but I still feel that this does force a wedge between two factions that already have issues. By saying send us your footage and saying 78 have been prosecuted gives the appearance that cyclists are getting special treatment against an enemy, but respect on the road and safety is a two way thing.

I cycle but too many who do cycle have no consideration for others as. This is not a anti cyclist rant, however, what does gaul is when cycle lanes are built but not used. Yes they have a right to use the road but when there is a path is it not courteous to use it?

A road I use regularly has a good condition cycle path, at the side of a two way road which is busy. So you get people on bikes not using it who then are causing a queue, especially in the evening when they are wobbling up the hill, this does cause people to try to squeeze past. Just one example of what I mean if the facility that has been built was used there would be less issues there.

Same as riding two abreast, I do it but if traffic comes up behind one of us will tuck in to make more space, simple and reasonable.

My biggest issue is the way the police are using footage from cyclists and other road users to seek prosecution. In the case I mentioned without our own footage any police officer could have sought a prosecution and I feel would have got one. Turning the public against each other in this way is what the establishment used to object to with the Stasis spying on and reporting each other.

It is a slippery slope.

[spaximus]

55palfers said:

Where are Plod going to find all the resource to process all these videos?
They don't even come out to burglaries any longer

Depending on how they punish it could be a good earner for them. If it is by an awareness course the police get a share from the safety partnerships.

[DoubleD]

IroningMan said:

spaximus said:

I have no issue with giving cyclists room but this using the cameras is fraught with problems and prosecution based on a one sided view cannot be right.

We have cameras in all our vans. A few years ago a cyclist posted footage on Youtube claiming our driver had nearly killed him and from the footage he had uploaded it looked bad.

When we veiwed the footage from our van, the cyclist without indicating in any way just turned right our van did a wonderful job of swearing and missing him.

We sent him the footage and he agreed that it was his fault. His Youtube feed just said he had received a satisfactory outcome following speaking with our MD.

If the police had just had his footage they would have probably done our driver.

This does nothing to educate people, it does everything to further the dislike between car drivers and cyclists.

When educating the general public a clear, simple message, consistently presented is the key: what could be clearer than 'don't pass cyclists too close'?

You might find this WMP blog entry an interesting read; they have encouraged officers to fit cameras to their bikes, but the door is open to third-party footage of any driving standards incident, whatever the modes of transport involved; it's not about car vs. bike.

Not passing cyclists too closely is a good message. Another good message is don't suddenly turn right in front of a van.

[heebeegeetee]

Johnnytheboy said:

"Things cyclists feel the need to say repeatedly on a car forum" bingo?

Is it it "house" though every time a motorist says "road tax" or "pay for the roads"?

On second thoughts no, 'cos every game would be ruined as they say it so much .

[heebeegeetee]

George111 said:

I didn't say his argument was valid either, you're assuming.

There's also no such thing as a zero emissions car.

You're right, he should have said zero vehicle tax. That's the thing that motorists never complain about when applied to cars but do so bitterly when applied to bicycles, and that's despite the pollution that all cars emits:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/11...

[Johnnytheboy]

heebeegeetee said:

Johnnytheboy said:

"Things cyclists feel the need to say repeatedly on a car forum" bingo?

Is it it "house" though every time a motorist says "road tax" or "pay for the roads"?

On second thoughts no, 'cos every game would be ruined as they say it so much .

Oh we have another box filled, raising the straw man of "road tax" before anyone else actually says it.

[heebeegeetee]

Johnnytheboy said:

Oh we have another box filled, raising the straw man of "road tax" before anyone else actually says it.

Eh? We nearly had full house on one short post yesterday, there was only 'lycra' missing.

Ozzie Osmond said:

Many cyclists ride like tw@ts yet expect motorists to drive like saints.

It's high time cyclists were required to pay for their use of the roads (after all, more and more of the carriageway is being taken over by cycle lanes) and to have clear registration numbers. Enforcement is completely one-sided at the moment.

[Mr Snrub]

heebeegeetee said:

George111 said:

I didn't say his argument was valid either, you're assuming.

There's also no such thing as a zero emissions car.

You're right, he should have said zero vehicle tax. That's the thing that motorists never complain about when applied to cars but do so bitterly when applied to bicycles, and that's despite the pollution that all cars emits:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/11...

I think you'll find a lot of us are unhappy someone could do 40,000 miles in a Prius and pay less tax than someone doing 400 miles in a 911, although at least it will level out somewhat next year