That's it, I am no longer defending Cyclists!

[rxe]

AllyBassman said:

Funny thing is,

With the state of the roads in the UK, cycle lanes even with broken glass, used Condoms and branches strewn across them must still be a better option!

I still go back to the argument of, if it were me, I would be taking myself off the road at every oppurtunity from a safety point of view. We can all agree that the standard of driving on our roads is pretty poor, everyone is in a rush to be somewhere and vunlerable road users like cyclists needs to remember that you'll never win in a fight against a car.

TL:DR - Use the bloody paths we all paid for you tw@'s!

Problem is that cyclists are not a homogeneous group.

The people campaigning for cycle lanes largely represent the interests of people toddling around on bikes, generally very slow, short journeys. Most of the people you see riding fast on roads don't fit that stereotype. I commuted 300 miles a week by bike a few years ago - up the A4 into London, and I'd beat a car on that journey by about 45 minutes. On the flat, a steady cruise was about 28 mph, max (without drafting a lorry) was about 35 mph. For a good chunk of the journey, there was a cycle lane - loads of glass (unswept), parked cars on it, give way to every side road, people pulling out of driveways, not expecting someone to be doing 30 mph.... I'd get occasional verbal from some prong in a car - but in all cases the appropriate response was to vanish in the distance as they sat in traffic.

So I hate bloody cycle lanes, they're awful things, and I wish they didn't exist. But I'm out of step with the goons that do planning these days.

[RowntreesCabana]

I used to commute pretty much daily for a couple of years, back before the cycling thing really kicked off. I started off using the cycle lanes and no word of a lie, was getting punctures pretty much daily. I moved to the roads and literally had one puncture every 6 months, if not longer. The cycle lanes are built and then forgotten about. Roads are swept, and all the little shards of glass are seemingly swept onto the cycle lanes. Either that or the little and not so little chavs smash bottles on them as they're walking along.

That said, I wouldn't be holding up traffic if there wasn't enough room to overtake and would move onto the cycle lane for that section.

I now live several miles down country lanes with some decent hills, and I'm forever being held up by cyclists not using the pull-ins to let motorists pass, which is a right pain in the arse. It happens so fgrequently, I'd say its less than 50% who will actually pull in and let you on your way. Plus the endless bottles and packs of empty energy drink/gel containers thrown into hedgerows (I live along a very popular cycle route in South Wales). Cyclists aren't doing themselves a lot of favours, but then motorists can be just as bad.

[AllyBassman]

rxe said:

Problem is that cyclists are not a homogeneous group.

The people campaigning for cycle lanes largely represent the interests of people toddling around on bikes, generally very slow, short journeys. Most of the people you see riding fast on roads don't fit that stereotype. I commuted 300 miles a week by bike a few years ago - up the A4 into London, and I'd beat a car on that journey by about 45 minutes. On the flat, a steady cruise was about 28 mph, max (without drafting a lorry) was about 35 mph. For a good chunk of the journey, there was a cycle lane - loads of glass (unswept), parked cars on it, give way to every side road, people pulling out of driveways, not expecting someone to be doing 30 mph.... I'd get occasional verbal from some prong in a car - but in all cases the appropriate response was to vanish in the distance as they sat in traffic.

So I hate bloody cycle lanes, they're awful things, and I wish they didn't exist. But I'm out of step with the goons that do planning these days.

Thats great, but if you could not sustain that 28mph up the hill in question, I would expect you to use the cycle lane thus not holding up the busy road.

No shame in it, we're all just trying to get to where we need to be as quickly and safely as possible.

[RowntreesCabana]

Tuvra said:

Byker28i said:

We met a couple of lycra clad road terrorists at the weekend riding side by side with the outside one riding on the centre white line. 3 cars in convoy, the first overtakes on the other side of the road, which seems to infuriate said riders who then decide to ride down the center of each lane, only moving over when a car comes in the opposite direction. They kept this up for a few miles until the road widened and the others also got past.

I'm not sure how I'd react to that to be honest. Pretty sure the red mist would come down and I would go full mode.

Its so infuriating. An example I recall recently, 2 cyclists riding side by side along a main road with a steady flow of traffic in the opposite direction. I was waiting at a T Junction for a gap to join the convoy being held up by the cyclists. Now, cyclist will claim that this is done for safety purposes, which I do understand (within reason). However, a mile up the road the lanes split into two for 400 yards before a roundabout. Now with the cars queuing 3 or 4 deep (waiting for an opportunity to pull onto the roundabout) the two cyclists now decide that they can actually ride single file and filter down through the small gap between the kerb and the cars approaching the roundabout. Safety is apparently not a major concern now. They seem to want it their own way every time.

[giantdefy]

super7 said:

Simple answer to all this......
If a cyclist is caught in the road abusing such a law, then the bike is confiscated unless a fine is paid.

So, if there is a motorway provided do we have to confiscate all cars using the nearby A roads?

[Mave]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

And he's the lout?

[SlackBladder]

giantdefy said:

super7 said:

Simple answer to all this......
If a cyclist is caught in the road abusing such a law, then the bike is confiscated unless a fine is paid.

So, if there is a motorway provided do we have to confiscate all cars using the nearby A roads?

Good analogy.


Simple answer is YES, especially if you're doing 20mph as causing other motorway users undue delay and congestion.

[super7]

giantdefy said:

super7 said:

Simple answer to all this......
If a cyclist is caught in the road abusing such a law, then the bike is confiscated unless a fine is paid.

So, if there is a motorway provided do we have to confiscate all cars using the nearby A roads?

What? really poor analogy!!!!

I'm suggesting a cyclist using a road where a cycle lane exists should be illegal. Not talking about cars!

Edited by super7 on Wednesday 18th July 12:59

Edited by super7 on Wednesday 18th July 13:01

[WinstonWolf]

Mave said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

And he's the lout?

Exactly!

[Greenbot35]

AllyBassman said:

Thats great, but if you could not sustain that 28mph up the hill in question, I would expect you to use the cycle lane thus not holding up the busy road.

No shame in it, we're all just trying to get to where we need to be as quickly and safely as possible.

Expect what you like, if you move to a cycle lane cars won't allow you re join the road again. Car drivers are generally aggressive bellends to bikes. I used to pull into bus stops to allow cars to pass and it just held me up. most bikes have a higher average speed in traffic that a car anyway so they will always pass again.

Should cyclists sit in traffic with cars so the lazy drivers can feel better?

[Atomic12C]

TwistingMyMelon said:

blimey you over dramatic tart

one bad cyclist doesn't mean you can hate them all

Go and ask your mum for a cuddle and get on with life

But also on that note.... "it only takes one" is a common mantra pushed out by many lobby groups on various issues which often forces everyone to pander for the lowest common denominator.

Only one, yes, so how can the message get out to more of them to use the fecking cycle paths that the taxpayer has forked out for?

[anonymous-user]

Greenbot35 said:

Should cyclists sit in traffic with cars so the lazy drivers can feel better?

What about the non-lazy ones though?

[aclivity]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I don't believe you. Cyclists have been "carriages" under UK law since 1888.

As for the second part ... You are a lout.

I ride to and from home every day, always stop at amber and red lights. Lots of cars don't.

I spend about half of my time in a cycle path. Except when a car has parked on it. Or is turning left a hundred yards up. For the rest of the time there is no path.

I also turn right at one set of lights. So should I follow the cycle path down the left of motons and then pull into the right at the very end - obviously avoiding the cars that are turning left at that point? No, that would be stupid, only a fatty motorist would suggest that.

[Earthdweller]

I appreciate this thread is very London and urban centric

But up here in the wilds of the rural north there has been a massive rise in the number of cyclists killed or injured in recent years and North Yorkshire County Council and Highways England are seriously considering banning cyclists from some of the more scenic and popular routes

A lot of the concern is about riders in “Peletons” and riding double and more abreast and refusing to move over and allow other road users to pass on narrow country roads

So just in balance problem cyclists is not just an urban issue

[budgie smuggler]

super7 said:

giantdefy said:

super7 said:

Simple answer to all this......
If a cyclist is caught in the road abusing such a law, then the bike is confiscated unless a fine is paid.

So, if there is a motorway provided do we have to confiscate all cars using the nearby A roads?

What? really poor analogy!!!!

I'm suggesting a cyclist using a road where a cycle lane exists should be illegal. Not talking about cars!

It's a great analogy, because even if the A-road is worse than using the lanes, motorists would still be forced to use it.
Much like forcing cyclists on to wholly unsuitable cycle lanes.

[funkyrobot]

super7 said:

Simple answer to all this......

Where there is a Cycle lane made available, make it illegal for a bike to be on the road.

If a cyclist is caught in the road abusing such a law, then the bike is confiscated unless a fine is paid.

If the cycle lane is used, then it will self clean, like a normal road. If all the MAMAL's still use the road it won't.

It's a complete ahole mentality that cyclist refuse to use supplied lanes... just f***king prima-donnas!!!!

Oh and whilst were at it..... make every one of them insure themselves and their bikes, and make them all carry an indetifying marker, so they can be scanned and prosecuted if need be.

Just fine them. They'll soon learn!!!!

If we are ensuring all cyclists are insured and have identifying markers, can we also do the same for vehicles and drivers?

Funny thing is, it's a legal requirement for a vehicle to be insured and have a number plate. How many drivers are uninsured, have illegally placed or stupid little number plates and how many don't event have a licence? Have motorists learned?

Let's also state that if there is a main road nearby, vehicles are banned from using country lanes or less major roads. Fed up with bellend drivers treating the country lanes I ride on as a racetrack. Why can't they all fk off and use the A roads.

[yellowjack]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Wow! You're so fking awesome, dude! Could I have your autograph, please?

Just the other day I was hobbling home from the shop on my crutches when I came to a car parked half on the FOOTWAY. Since the new "toytown" estate was built at the other end of the road, this busy bus route has become even busier, with many road hogs ignoring the speed limit, and generally driving as they please with little regard either for the law, or the advice in the Highway Code. The biggest irony was that cars had to wait to pass this illegally parked car when there was traffic oncoming anyway, so blocking the FOOTWAY achieved the sum total of FK ALL, save for preventing vulnerable and disabled ROAD USERS from legitimately using the FOOTWAY.

Unable to (or at least unwilling to run the risk of) going into the CARRIAGEWAY to get around the car, I simply dragged my shopping bag up the side of it, and twted the door mirror out of the way with a crutch handle because it was just at the right height to accidentally catch on it...

..."I just trust that the idiot learnt the lesson"

[funkyrobot]

yellowjack said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Wow! You're so fking awesome, dude! Could I have your autograph, please?

Just the other day I was hobbling home from the shop on my crutches when I came to a car parked half on the FOOTWAY. Since the new "toytown" estate was built at the other end of the road, this busy bus route has become even busier, with many road hogs ignoring the speed limit, and generally driving as they please with little regard either for the law, or the advice in the Highway Code. The biggest irony was that cars had to wait to pass this illegally parked car when there was traffic oncoming anyway, so blocking the FOOTWAY achieved the sum total of FK ALL, save for preventing vulnerable and disabled ROAD USERS from legitimately using the FOOTWAY.

Unable to (or at least unwilling to run the risk of) going into the CARRIAGEWAY to get around the car, I simply dragged my shopping bag up the side of it, and twted the door mirror out of the way with a crutch handle because it was just at the right height to accidentally catch on it...

..."I just trust that the idiot learnt the lesson"

Don't even get me started on vehicles abandoned across pavements, vehicles blocking cycle lanes and idiots blocking driveways.

[DonkeyApple]

super7 said:

What? really poor analogy!!!!

I'm suggesting a cyclist using a road where a cycle lane exists should be illegal. Not talking about cars!

Edited by super7 on Wednesday 18th July 12:59

Edited by super7 on Wednesday 18th July 13:01

Let’s be honest. The real problem is the number of cars on the road. Double the price of fuel, quadruple VED and halve the number of cars that are clogging up the roads. Get bus wkers back on their buses and the problem goes away.

[funkyrobot]

DonkeyApple said:

super7 said:

What? really poor analogy!!!!

I'm suggesting a cyclist using a road where a cycle lane exists should be illegal. Not talking about cars!

Edited by super7 on Wednesday 18th July 12:59

Edited by super7 on Wednesday 18th July 13:01

Let’s be honest. The real problem is the number of cars on the road. Double the price of fuel, quadruple VED and halve the number of cars that are clogging up the roads. Get bus wkers back on their buses and the problem goes away.

It would help to get more people on bicycles. Public transport around where I live is utter tripe and isn't that cheap anyway.

Getting more people cycling would mean more healthy people and less strain on the NHS. The numbers would probably make cycling safer. Traffic would be less of a problem and people would save money.