cyclists at night
Discussion
Gweeds said:
As are horses and pedestrians. Because they don’t have speedos.
Also the vast majority of cyclists aren’t regularly exceeding 20mph anyway.
This absence of speedo argument is not convincing. That's not how the law works.Also the vast majority of cyclists aren’t regularly exceeding 20mph anyway.
Also I'm not convinced that the number of cyclists regularly exceeding 20mph is statistically insignificant.
Some amazing and silly dialogue on here.
I cycle and drive.. here are my observations.
Very few cycles don't use lights on rural roads, as they would be hit eventually. In fact very few people cycle in the dark on rural roads.
There are lots of casual commuters ( a couple of hours pottering to work at a snails pace, wearing black on and off pavements, wrong way, no lights at night). They are stupid or kids and are a risk to themselves and others. But they are not the majority, not a reason to hate them.
There are plenty of cars who do not give cyclists enough room. I would say 50%. Ther are loads who blindly follow the car in front, passing a bike without making a decision and closer than the car they follow. This is about 90%. There people are just stupid but not agressive.
The council paints cycle lanes on the road, which act as an instruction on how close to get to a cyclist. Obviously this is too close but the vast majority of cars pass close to the edge of the cycle lane, even when it is narrow.
A tiny minority of people are aggressive to cyclists..pass too close, shout abuse etc. I would say less than 1%. But they remains a serious problem if you cycle much.
I will experience stupidity derived danger about 10 times a week and outright aggression about once every 2 weeks.
This is in rural areas and never at night.
When I ride/drive in cities, I see that the majority of scary car/cycle incidents are caused by the cyclist. Just because they can often get away with breaking the rules, doesn't make it a good idea.
Stupid people are stupid people.
Cyclist should remember they are vulnerable and so should drivers.
I cycle and drive.. here are my observations.
Very few cycles don't use lights on rural roads, as they would be hit eventually. In fact very few people cycle in the dark on rural roads.
There are lots of casual commuters ( a couple of hours pottering to work at a snails pace, wearing black on and off pavements, wrong way, no lights at night). They are stupid or kids and are a risk to themselves and others. But they are not the majority, not a reason to hate them.
There are plenty of cars who do not give cyclists enough room. I would say 50%. Ther are loads who blindly follow the car in front, passing a bike without making a decision and closer than the car they follow. This is about 90%. There people are just stupid but not agressive.
The council paints cycle lanes on the road, which act as an instruction on how close to get to a cyclist. Obviously this is too close but the vast majority of cars pass close to the edge of the cycle lane, even when it is narrow.
A tiny minority of people are aggressive to cyclists..pass too close, shout abuse etc. I would say less than 1%. But they remains a serious problem if you cycle much.
I will experience stupidity derived danger about 10 times a week and outright aggression about once every 2 weeks.
This is in rural areas and never at night.
When I ride/drive in cities, I see that the majority of scary car/cycle incidents are caused by the cyclist. Just because they can often get away with breaking the rules, doesn't make it a good idea.
Stupid people are stupid people.
Cyclist should remember they are vulnerable and so should drivers.
bigothunter said:
This absence of speedo argument is not convincing. That's not how the law works.
Also I'm not convinced that the number of cyclists regularly exceeding 20mph is statistically insignificant.
Who cares?Also I'm not convinced that the number of cyclists regularly exceeding 20mph is statistically insignificant.
You hate cyclists.
You resent that they're not as accountable as motorists.
You want to break the laws you think don't matter but hold cyclists to the ones you think do.
Oh and you make up stories of 40% lightless cyclists on unlit rural roads. How weird is that.
Edited by monthou on Sunday 7th August 22:45
bigothunter said:
Gweeds said:
As are horses and pedestrians. Because they don’t have speedos.
Also the vast majority of cyclists aren’t regularly exceeding 20mph anyway.
This absence of speedo argument is not convincing. That's not how the law works.Also the vast majority of cyclists aren’t regularly exceeding 20mph anyway.
Also I'm not convinced that the number of cyclists regularly exceeding 20mph is statistically insignificant.
monthou said:
Who cares?
You hate cyclists.
You resent that they're not as accountable as motorists.
You want to break the laws you think don't matter but hold cyclists to the ones you think do.
Oh and you make up stories of 40% lightless cyclists on unlit rural roads. How weird is that.
Oh Monty you've not noticed my previous post You hate cyclists.
You resent that they're not as accountable as motorists.
You want to break the laws you think don't matter but hold cyclists to the ones you think do.
Oh and you make up stories of 40% lightless cyclists on unlit rural roads. How weird is that.
bigothunter said:
I am not anti-cyclist. Actually quite the opposite. I've completed the London to Brighton Bike Event on three occasions and frequently ride 40 mile trips. I give fellow cyclists a great deal of respect when I'm driving. Would be helpful if they reciprocated with a similar attitude of responsibility, not foolhardiness.
bigothunter said:
AlpineWhite said:
Unless you are a keen cyclist, you won't be travelling above 20mph on the road for very long, unless going downhill.
These London cyclists were exceeding 20mph, which seems fairly common. And yes the police were misguided...That one may have been riding furiously ?
James6112 said:
Rarely come across a cyclist at night, let alone with no lights.
Seems a complete non-issue
Whereas: Seems a complete non-issue
The Scotsman said:
Philip Pullman, author of His Dark Materials, was criticised for tweeting to its 200,000 followers last month: “The number of cyclists speeding through Oxford at night, with no lights, wearing dark clothes, is astonishing. Damn fools.” But he’s got a point – cyclists have been killed or injured cycling with no lights, like a 26-year-old in Sunderland in May.
Vizirider co-founder Simon Sibia said he could not believe the amount of cyclists riding at night without any lights, describing the experience, on a recent trip to London, as “absolute madness”.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/p...
Vizirider co-founder Simon Sibia said he could not believe the amount of cyclists riding at night without any lights, describing the experience, on a recent trip to London, as “absolute madness”.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/p...
bigothunter said:
monthou said:
Who cares?
You hate cyclists.
You resent that they're not as accountable as motorists.
You want to break the laws you think don't matter but hold cyclists to the ones you think do.
Oh and you make up stories of 40% lightless cyclists on unlit rural roads. How weird is that.
Oh Monty you've not noticed my previous post You hate cyclists.
You resent that they're not as accountable as motorists.
You want to break the laws you think don't matter but hold cyclists to the ones you think do.
Oh and you make up stories of 40% lightless cyclists on unlit rural roads. How weird is that.
bigothunter said:
I am not anti-cyclist. Actually quite the opposite. I've completed the London to Brighton Bike Event on three occasions and frequently ride 40 mile trips. I give fellow cyclists a great deal of respect when I'm driving. Would be helpful if they reciprocated with a similar attitude of responsibility, not foolhardiness.
I just don't believe you, because it doesn't tally with anything else you post.
k 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff