Motorists - What annoys you most about cyclists

custardy

derrick wrote: »

Doesn't matter what it is called, it was originally brought in to finance/upkeep the roads, and was paid by the motorist, and still is.

Whilst all taxes go into one pot, with very little ring fenced, the motorist pays in excess of 40 BILLION pounds per year in various taxes, (the cyclists next to nothing), and only around 10 billion is spent on roads, so yes the motorist more than pays for the road network, as you say, we all pay taxes, just that the motorist pays 40 billion pounds more!






Then the cyclists should damn well pay for them with some form of tax, at the very least they should have some form of compulsory insurance and have to pass a test resulting in a licence that could then be endorsed as with motorists, at the moment they have very little respect or consequence of the tarffic laws!

.

So how would you enforce this test?
Still not grasping the way road networks are funded I see

vikingaero

I think the politics and funding issues of cycling are a red herring the the motorists v cyclists argument.

Most motorists are courteous towards cyclists. They wait and pass with an exaggerated arc to give the cyclist room. Most motorists comply with red light and speed limits. More often than not motorists are constrained by the lowest speed of their fellow driver. Some drivers and I imagine these are mainly alpha male van and rep drivers behave inappropriately towards cyclists because they are held up. This is unacceptable.

Most cyclists do not obey red lights. Yes some of you on here claim to do so, but you are definitely the minority. Riding two abreast antagonises motorists so why do it? Popping off the pavement onto the road without looking and expecting the motorist to avoid you is unacceptable. Hitting/barging/pushing back mirrors of correctly placed vehicles that are waiting at lights is unacceptable. Cycling without lights in the dark is illegal. I think the problem that motorist have with cyclists boils down to the cyclists lack of respect for the Highway Code, lack of respect for road laws and ultimately lack of self respect for their own safety.

The recent Think Cyclist campaign shows a picture of a man standing by his bike his double image standing by his car. The tagline is: Let's look out for each other: Drivers and cyclists are more alike than you think. It made me think: "Why does a reasonable driver turn into a monster at the handlebars of a bike?"

custardy

vikingaero wrote: »

I think the politics and funding issues of cycling are a red herring the the motorists v cyclists argument.

Most motorists are courteous towards cyclists. They wait and pass with an exaggerated arc to give the cyclist room. Most motorists comply with red light and speed limits. More often than not motorists are constrained by the lowest speed of their fellow driver. Some drivers and I imagine these are mainly alpha male van and rep drivers behave inappropriately towards cyclists because they are held up. This is unacceptable.

Most cyclists do not obey red lights. Yes some of you on here claim to do so, but you are definitely the minority. Riding two abreast antagonises motorists so why do it? Popping off the pavement onto the road without looking and expecting the motorist to avoid you is unacceptable. Hitting/barging/pushing back mirrors of correctly placed vehicles that are waiting at lights is unacceptable. Cycling without lights in the dark is illegal. I think the problem that motorist have with cyclists boils down to the cyclists lack of respect for the Highway Code, lack of respect for road laws and ultimately lack of self respect for their own safety.

The recent Think Cyclist campaign shows a picture of a man standing by his bike his double image standing by his car. The tagline is: Let's look out for each other: Drivers and cyclists are more alike than you think. It made me think: "Why does a reasonable driver turn into a monster at the handlebars of a bike?"

why would you think that?

Dave_C_2

Some points:

Both as a driver and a cyclist , I agree fully about what has been said about the ninja cyclists riding round at night without any lights. However, the boys in blue don't seem too keen to enforce this. Sadly I think that the ninja cyclists are the least likely people to read this MSE forum

As regards motorists paying more tax than cyclists, there are a lot of non-road costs to the country associated with motoring that are not associated with cycling. For example:

• Congestion, caused by too many motor vehicles. In fact commuting cyclists ease congestion as they are not driving to work in their cars in the rush hour.
• Pollution. As well as using the planet's resources at a staggering rate. Motoring also reduces air quality , especially in cities. This increases the cost to the NHS.
• Lack of exercise. As the adage goes, cars run on money and make you fat, bikes run on fat and save you money. Again obesity has a direct impact on the NHS.
• Rates of accidents causing death and serious injury is far higher for motoring. Once again a huge cost to the NHS

Finally may I recommend ipayroadtax.com which touches on a lot of issues mentioned here, but tends to be a bit paranoid about the use of "Road Tax" .:)


Dave

Norman_Castle

It made me think: "Why does a reasonable driver turn into a monster at the handlebars of a bike?"

Try riding a bike, you'll find out.

Bangton

I don't mind cyclists. It's ignorant gits on the road full stop whether they be cyclists, pedestrians or motorists..I think alot of road users are guilty of stupid actions. At the same time plenty of cyclists are responsible (and no I'm not a cyclist - I don't even own a bike!)

brat

This PDF offers quite a useful insight from both sides of the apparent divide.

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/safety-cycling-and-sharing-the-road-qualitative-research-with-cyclists-and-other-road-users/rswp17.pdf

Marvel1

pr0berts wrote: »

Hi,

To give a balance view I thought I'd start covering the other side of the fence.

Cyclists - Pay no road tax but expect the same rights as motor vehicle users

This table example shows how daft this is:
http://carfueldata.dft.gov.uk/new-vehicle-tax.aspx

or the first year rates:
http://carfueldata.dft.gov.uk/new-vehicle-tax.aspx

warwick_hunt wrote: »

Not annoying, more worrying.

I've seen a couple of times lately (especially at the weekend) cyclists on 70mph dual carriageways. Riding in lane 1, surely this is suicidal.

Even worse when there is a cycle path to use.


Anyway mine are:
- No lights at night.
- Jumping red lights.
- Not giving away when coming out from a side road.

Paradigm

brat wrote: »

Perhaps I didn't word it carefully enough. If the driver is unsure whether the cyclist has seen her, she needs to assume that he hasn't until he somehow acknowledges her intent. She mustn't turn left if that forces him to brake harshly or collide, despite the fact that she feels he shouldn't be there.

To be honest you haven't made it any clearer.

If indicating in good time approaching a turn why must anyone think for the cyclist? Isn't the flashing orange thing enough to make a cyclist think for themselves? Seems not!

brat

Paradigm wrote: »

To be honest you haven't made it any clearer.

If indicating in good time approaching a turn why must anyone think for the cyclist? Isn't the flashing orange thing enough to make a cyclist think for themselves? Seems not!

So what would you do if you see a cyclist in your nearside rearview, who clearly looks like he isn't responding to your left hand indicator and is now in a position where you would clip him if you turned left? Would you brake or would you take him out?