Cyclists fighting back against oafish drivers

andyguk

paddedjohn wrote: »

i wondered how long it would be before some clown started on 'white van man',

you're a considerate cyclist but you ride on the pavement?
is it any wonder you get bad press when you cant obey the law but you hark on at other road users

:rotfl: @ clown

if the pavement is clear at 7am and there are no houses abutting and police cars pass without so much as a second look while I'm cycling slowly and carefully, then I'd much rather take that route than have van drivers and buses trying to run me off the road and into a wall.

I've had more than one close call, just wish I'd had a camera on my cycle helmet. Maybe I would have been able to catch another instance of van man owning the road

And yes, considerate. Today I rode on the wide sections of road, dismounted when I got to the troublesome bit. I then noticed lots of pedestrians so I walked my bike until I got to the safe section of road again. Ironically, 2 chavs and an old man passed me on bikes on the pavement, whilst I was walking mine.

cheers

Coopdivi

What I like about cyclists is the way they use the pavement and pretend to be pedestrians when traffic lights are on red.

custardy

Coopdivi wrote: »

What I like about some cyclists is the way they use the pavement and pretend to be pedestrians when traffic lights are on red.

what i like about some people is they make sweeping statements across an entire group

esuhl

Coopdivi wrote: »

What I like about cyclists is the way they use the pavement and pretend to be pedestrians when traffic lights are on red.

What I like about car drivers is the way that they think they can drive without insurance or while drunk or in a stolen vehicle.

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hi everyone

This thread seems to be getting rather personal. Can you discuss the topic without taking it out on each other please?

Many thanks!

Andrea

gordikin

esuhl wrote: »

What I like about car drivers is the way that they think they can drive without insurance or while drunk or in a stolen vehicle.

All of which can certainly apply to cyclists? Why should cyclists not have to be insured?

custardy

gordikin wrote: »

All of which can certainly apply to cyclists? Why should cyclists not have to be insured?

how would you enforce/monitor/regulate it?
so all cycles in the UK would need to be registered first i assume?

gordikin

custardy wrote: »

how would you enforce/monitor/regulate it?
so all cycles in the UK would need to be registered first i assume?

That's fine by me...we do it with TV's? I've never been hit by a car on a pavement...I have been hit by a cyclist..why are they not required to be insured? Cyclists can claim on motorists insurance...why can't pedestrians do likewise with cyclists?

Azari

gordikin wrote: »

That's fine by me...we do it with TV's? I've never been hit by a car on a pavement...I have been hit by a cyclist..why are they not required to be insured? Cyclists can claim on motorists insurance...why can't pedestrians do likewise with cyclists?

And skateboarders?

And other pedestrians?

And horses?

And pushchairs?

The clue is provided by answering the question: Which is the only one of the following that is upwards of a ton of metal propelled by the power of over 50 horses? [Pedestrian, cyclist, skateboarder, horse, pushchair user]

gaz310

As a bike rider who was admitted to A&E in november due to a car driver pulling out in front of me ( i had the right of way) and then stopping !!!! to allow someone to cross the road when there was no crossing point there and causing me to go over the handlebars fracturing my wrist and cracking my ribs and then driving away

thanks


some are just as bad as others