Motorists - What annoys you most about cyclists

Tilt

brat wrote: »

Unless you know what the cyclist was aware of and alert to, you cannot know. However sheer luck only works some of the time. you woud expect red light junctions to be filled with the bones and metal of 'unlucky' cyclists, wouldn't you. :eek:
I'm intrigued that, despite your moans and groans about red light jumping, the serious collisions involving this activity is non existent. There are many more fatalities caused when the cautious cyclist is caught by the left turning large vehicle, which is why many continental countries now allow cyclists to use the red lights as a give way.

Thats probably down to us motorists being able to use our skills and avoid them. Perhaps we should hit a few to give the real picture then.

custardy

Tilt wrote: »

Thats probably down to us motorists being able to use our skills and avoid them. Perhaps we should hit a few to give the real picture then.

Who are you speaking for?

brat

Tilt wrote: »

Cyclists have a duty to. If they ride on the road then they are a road user subject to the RTA. I disagree that the cyclist was 'safe'. What about if one of us 'poor, idiotic drivers' had been driving along there and hit him? What the cyclist did was reckless, pure and simple.

But the cyclist wasn't hit, an to use your term no "idiotic driver" hit him. He would have known he was safe to make the manoeuvre, otherwise why would he make it? A collision can hurt, especially if you are a cyclist.

To be honest, most of your posts have made a lot of sense but the latter ones seem to have gone down hill.

Cheers. you will get to understand the later posts, just persevere a little .

Tilt

custardy wrote: »

Who are you speaking for?

Us motorists seeing as some keep banging on that there is little evidence that cyclists running red lights etc causes accidents. (By the way, it was a flippant remark)

derrick

brat wrote: »

You're making my point really.
The cyclist was perfectly safe there, because he was aware of what was around. He may even have taken some inobservant road users by surprise, but that won't bother him. It probably won't even bother him that the inobservant chap responsible for taking the video saw fit to rebuke him by pressing the horn.

Motorists around schools need to be extremely careful, because of the number of VRUs around. Despite that, did you notice the number of offences committed by motorists? Parking on zig-zags, parking on double yellows, crossing the centre dome of the mini roundabout twice, using the horn as a rebuke. Shameful, really, I hope you agree.

The cyclist probably only 15. Motorists have a duty to consider this, especially at schools. He won't have passed any driving test.

I fail to see how I am making your point?

Aware? If he was the he should have been aware of lots of traffic on a busy road before illegally cycling on a pavement, then flying off the pavement between pedestrians and in front of moving traffic, without looking to his right!

No one was parked on zig zags, it is not illegal to pick up or set down on double yellows.
The reason for the horn,as a warning, was to attempt to make him aware of the traffic, then maybe, (but I doubt that), he might look next time, as next time the observant driver this time, may not be an observant driver next time, and/or the vehicle maybe closer and not be able to slow or stop in time.

You don't know how old he is, as it is a secondary school he could have been 18 and if so he could have passed a driving test.

Then maybe it is time to reintroduce the cycling proficiency test or similar and make it mandatory before being allowed on the roads.

Maybe he should read the HC which all road users should adhere to, and as he was on the pavement, then "rules for pedestrians" come into play as in D from that page: -
"D. If traffic is coming, let it pass. Look all around again and listen. Do not cross until there is a safe gap in the traffic and you are certain that there is plenty of time. Remember, even if traffic is a long way off, it may be approaching very quickly. ."


Also from General rules for all drivers and riders,(cyclists fit into this): -
"145 You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency.
Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & RTA 1988 sect 34"


However for some obscure reason you, as I am assuming, a serving traffic cop, seem to think it OK for cyclists to break road traffic laws with impunity, you are employed to uphold the law, not to condone the breaking of it by a certain group of society, so either do your job or resign.


.

custardy

Tilt wrote: »

Us motorists seeing as some keep banging on that there is little evidence that cyclists running red lights etc causes accidents. (By the way, it was a flippant remark)

well you don't speak for me

Tilt

brat wrote: »

But the cyclist wasn't hit, an to use your term no "idiotic driver" hit him. He would have known he was safe to make the manoeuvre, otherwise why would he make it? A collision can hurt, especially if you are a cyclist.

Cheers. you will get to understand the later posts, just persevere a little .

But he didn't know for sure because he didn't stop before riding into the road into the path of an approaching vehicle because he was an idiot.

Tilt

custardy wrote: »

well you don't speak for me

That's good then. :j

Tilt

Derrik, I don't believe that Brat is old bill. Otherwise he wouldn't be condoning illegal cycling. If he is, maybe he is one of the type that turn a blind eye to illegal cycling which I do see a lot of. Police cars overtaking unlit cyclists at night without batting an eye lid for example.

brat

Tilt wrote: »

If and when I break the speed limit, I do not endanger myself or any other road users. I believe most accidents are caused by poor driving skills. Speeding is probably my one and only vice but I do not do it dangerously.

That is your subjective opinion, and while I'd probably agree with you, safe speeding is not an skill enjoyed by everyone. Additionally motorway speeding is one of the main causes of 2nd lane hogging - a point often lost on those who think their motorway speeding is affecting no-one.

Tilt wrote: »

I don't deny cyclists anything.

You do actually, you're denying them the right to judge the appropriateness of their law breaking in the same way as you have for your law breaking. You're judging it on their behalf on the basis of your interpretation of risk. As we've seen, excess speed, a law which you break is held to be responsible for many road deaths. Red light jumping (and cycling with no lights*) is responsible for very very few deaths, and no third party deaths. So perhaps it's your analysis and interpretation that's flawed.

Tilt wrote: »

The reason I put no lights as number 1 and mention children is that about a year ago I was turning left (at night) out of a fairly narrow road onto a hill with poor street lighting. The hill was also fairly narrow so consequently when making the turn, the front of my car would swing across the centre white line so obviously I look carefully that there is nothing coming down the hill from my left. As I turned and the front of my car crossed the middle of the road slightly, my headlights illuminated 3 cyclists, 2 side by side, all being ridden by children, travelling at speed with not one light between them and even one child standing on the back of the third bike. There was no way was the out-riding bike going to be able to avoid hitting the front of my car so I had to basically ram my car into reverse to avoid them with inches to spare. It was so close, the kids actually screamed in terror as they teared down the hill. Had I been driving anything longer than my Fiat Punto, an impact would of been inevitable.

I don't get the no lights thing either. I'm illuminated like a beacon, and I use lights at all times of the day. I probably spend less than £10 per year replacing rechargeable batteries.

Tilt wrote: »

Point being that when idiotic suicidal cyclists perform these stupid acts, thankfully (it seems) it is the motorist's skill that prevents the accident.

I think you're mostly wrong. Usually the motorist is taken a little by surprise because he has realised late that someone is where he wouldn't expect them to be. He might respond instinctively by braking or remonstrating by sounding horns or whatever, but the cyclist is going to be completely aware and in control of his safety, because, as I've said many times, he will not want to crash - it hurts!