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

rev_henry

Strider590 wrote: »

If he'd been a middle class wankstain in a 6 litre V8, it would have cost him a lot more petrol (and carbon emissions, if you believe all that crap) to stop, wait and then move on.... Does that mean I should stop on a main road to allow him to do so?

Conversely if it had been a knackered old 2CV that takes over 60s to reach 60mph, would you stop and encourage it to drive out in front of you? I've got work to get to, so I sure as hell wouldn't.....

We all have to drive by a set standard, a code of driving practice... When you get on a bicycle you must still go by this code of practice, something both drivers and cyclists seem all too keen to forget.

I would probably have let both out for driving awesome cars. But you're quite right, there's a difference between the law and being polite. Sometimes being polite becomes dangerous, i.e. letting someone out stupidly etc.

muckybutt

sequence wrote: »

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.

What about damage to goods in transit ? who's gonna pay for that then ? :mad:

Like wise mobility scooters have to have insurance if used on the roads so why not cyclists ? if they cause an accident whos gonna pay ?

thelawnet

muckybutt wrote: »

What about damage to goods in transit ? who's gonna pay for that then ? :mad:

Like wise mobility scooters have to have insurance if used on the roads so why not cyclists ? if they cause an accident whos gonna pay ?

Cars frequently cause tens, hundreds of thousands of pounds in damage to property as well as personal injury costs, and cyclists, plainly, do not.

Pedestrians don't need insurance either.

You might as well say 'why is it ok to drive onto a cross-channel ferry with a bootload of wine but not ok to drive on with a boot full of fireworks?'

Besides there's an obvious public policy aim to promote cycling, which has no depedency on Middle Eastern oil, and has significant health benefits, over motoring, which doesn't.

Again, 'why do we tax cigarettes but not vegetables?'

Obviously a cyclist is liable if he damages someone else's property, and he's free to insure himself against that liability, it's just not a legal requirement, any more than I am legally required to insure my house, in case the postman trips over a step, or whatever. In terms of a public liability risk, there's no reason to suppose that bicycles are in greater need of insurance than houses. Unless you make insurance for everything a legal requirement there's simply no reason to make it a requirement for cycling, other than, obviously, certain car drivers wanting to force as many bicycles off the road as possible (and they've done a pretty good job so far, just compare the situation in this country with holland or belgium).

sequence

muckybutt wrote: »

What about damage to goods in transit ? who's gonna pay for that then ? :mad:

Like wise mobility scooters have to have insurance if used on the roads so why not cyclists ? if they cause an accident whos gonna pay ?

Is you car made out of tin foil or something ?

How does a cyclist damage goods in transit?

sassy_one

This thread is quite a laugh reading through.

I think half of cyclists are to blame, take recent media attention to note regards them, they not only cause a danger to drivers but also commit acts of Road rage themselves!

sassy_one

One recent case to note:

http://www.autowindscreens.co.uk/windscreen-and-motoring-news/auto-windscreens-consumer-news/enraged-cyclist-damages-womans-windscreen-800237665.aspx


SO please, cyclists, take note, you are to blame a lot of the time, don't pass the buck!

Renya

I understand that there are some real idiots who drive these days, but ever since I've moved to London I've seen cyclists who undertake lorries, cycle on narrow pavements and cause obstructions, wear no lights or hi-vis at night and I too have seen people cycle through red lights when pedestrians are crossing, I think both sides are as bad as each other.

Strider590

sassy-one wrote: »

One recent case to note:

http://www.autowindscreens.co.uk/windscreen-and-motoring-news/auto-windscreens-consumer-news/enraged-cyclist-damages-womans-windscreen-800237665.aspx


SO please, cyclists, take note, you are to blame a lot of the time, don't pass the buck!

"Ms Powell said that a cyclist cut across the roundabout without giving way to other traffic."

So..... Cyclists unlike cars must give way on traffic islands? hmmm

sassy_one

Strider590 wrote: »

"Ms Powell said that a cyclist cut across the roundabout without giving way to other traffic."

So..... Cyclists unlike cars must give way on traffic islands? hmmm

I am not blaming anyone or saying the other party to blame or such, nor am I pointing any fingers.

I am merely stating that both drivers and cyclists are to blame, not one or the another.

I see on a daily basis the way cyclists use the roads, going through red lights thinking they can avoid the Highway code, along with this riding on pavements, undertaking buses and lorries and cutting in front of cars at the last minute as well as banging the cars mirror when they can't fit through a space!

On the other hand I have seen some stupid drivers do stupid speeds lately, jump Red lights and cut people up, as well as a number of Road rage incidents, all of which resulted in either verbal abuse or minor contact with the cars.

I'm annoyed the OP started a thread claiming it's drivers, when it is quite easy for someone to start one over cyclists!


Ona last note, to cyclists, next time you jump a Red light and get knocked off, when the Police ask you what happened, admit you jumped it, unlike I have read people saying they lied saying they didn't!

Stop jumping Red lights, otherwise, take what comes !

thelawnet

sassy-one wrote: »

I'm annoyed the OP started a thread claiming it's drivers, when it is quite easy for someone to start one over cyclists!

No he didn't. The OP offered some advice for non-cyclists about the rights of cyclists. Cyclists are very vulnerable road users, but there's a lot of hatred and disrespect towards them.

We are all going somewhere, we can all use some advice, and you don't need to respond to that with 'tit for tat', 'cyclists shouldn't be on the road' nonsense. Cyclists are on the road, and let's just have a little consideration.