A cyclist's rant to incompetent road users...

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Not just one cyclist... all of them.

Despite their 'inalienable' rights (and no, it's not a motorway).

You're either a troll, or incredibly stupid.

Either way, it makes no difference.

sequence

muckybutt wrote: »

None but her back wheel is burgered.

Cant post video as that is with my companies insurers as evidence if she ever tries to make a claim against me.

Now you know the reason why cyclists aren't required to have insurance! The chances of a cyclist causing any significant damage to a car or anything is almost zero.

Don't forget to post the video when you feel you can, you only have one copy ?

sequence

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

You're either a troll, or incredibly stupid.

Either way, it makes no difference.

Do you feel like you've been talking to a brick wall ?

It's very difficult to understand the difference between being under licence to drive, and having the right to do something :rotfl:

It's good to see nobody has learned a thing since the last cyclist bashing thread! :cool:

rev_henry

Strider590 wrote: »

Face it folks, those who hate cyclists, hate them because they're "queue jumpers". You hate being sat in traffic when they tootle on past unhindered, why should they be able to "jump the queue"!?!?
When a bus comes down the bus and cycle lane, do you moan at the bus for overtaking the traffic? no of course you don't! But when the bus is closely followed by a cyclist, you scream obscenities like there's no tomorrow!!

Because they don't have the anonymity or look as intimidating as a motorcyclist with all the leather gear and full face helmet, you believe you have the right to treat them like dirt!

It's big theory, nothing more nothing less..... Your bigger, they're smaller, therefore you have the right to invade their space as much as you see fit!

Undertaking up the cycle lane in a long queue of traffic is without doubt the most wonderful feeling one can have on a bicycle. Mmm, that clutch not being knackered, that fuel not being wasted, that not getting annoyed, that FREE AND QUICKER TRANSPORT!

rev_henry

withabix wrote: »

Actually, it would be far more sensible to forget about lights on bikes altogether (because 99% of cyclists already have) and make the wearing of high-viz waistcoats compulsory.

They cost virtually nothing (£2 typically) and will survive a year's worth of washing quite easily.

Construction workers wear them to make themselves VISIBLE. Cyclists should be forced to as well.


BREAKING NEWS: DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT ANNOUNCES NEW CYCLE LANE SIGN:

Amen, and amen to your other post. For the record I always wear an aforementioned hi hiz vest, except mine cost £1.50.
It doesn't look naff because you stuff it in your bag along with your lights, clips etc when you get there.

rev_henry

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Show me an example where, in this country, a cyclist has been banned from cycling on the roads.

Just one. Go on.

I see what you're getting at. A cyclist could cause the most horrific accident and get fined £1m (well, yes I know that wouldn't happen) but could still cycle home from court. A motorist who did the same thing would be disqualified for a few years.

rev_henry

Billy-no-Money wrote: »

Instead of a simple single set of rules for all, cycling has become a mish-mash; I loathe cyclists who jump red lights, and I also loathe those who hop onto the pavement to go round the lights - yet at some junctions our council has obligingly installed drop kerbs to facilitate cyclists doing just that!
Why is it OK to share a footpath with pedestrians just because someone's painted a picture of a bicycle on it?

Because the law says it is.

mikey72

rev_henry wrote: »

I see what you're getting at. A cyclist could cause the most horrific accident and get fined £1m (well, yes I know that wouldn't happen) but could still cycle home from court. A motorist who did the same thing would be disqualified for a few years.

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/Violent-cyclist-freed-jail-8211-long-does-ride-city/article-1365045-detail/article.html

Maybe Pew Pew will shut up now.
If I'm still on ignore, someone copy it for him will they.

Quinny_2

ginnersinner wrote: »

This is an HGV. Cyclists would be well advised to steer clear, and not think it's a good idea to sneak up their nearside as they approach traffic lights, or junctions, or roundabouts.

Like the one in Hull 5 years ago, who decided to sneak up my nearside at a crossroads with traffic lights on it, but was totally oblivious to the fact I was turning left as she failed to observe the 3 indicators on my combination (Trailer rear, n/s/r on unit, and step indicator.) up until the point she was in my blind spot.

When I turned left, she got flattened under the mid axle on the tractor unit. It's a good job for her that I was virtually unladen, and that the mid axle was in the up position otherwise she would have been killed. Silly cow.

So to the original poster of this thread.

Get your own house in order you muppet, before you crticise others.

rev_henry

Quinny wrote: »

Like the one in Hull 5 years ago, who decided to sneak up my nearside at a crossroads with traffic lights on it, but was totally oblivious to the fact I was turning left as she failed to observe the 3 indicators on my combination (Trailer rear, n/s/r on unit, and step indicator.) up until the point she was in my blind spot.

When I turned left, she got flattened under the mid axle on the tractor unit. It's a good job for her that I was virtually unladen, and that the mid axle was in the up position otherwise she would have been killed. Silly cow.

So to the original poster of this thread.

Get your own house in order you muppet, before you crticise others.

Erm, I never do that, unless I know the traffic light timings give me time to get into the ASL, or unless I go round the offside into the ASL, so my own house is in order, you muppet.