Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

brat

Tilt wrote: »

You sir, are a credit to cyclists and it's just a pity that ALL cyclists do not follow your example.

For example the woman who was escorting her (I assume) young son this very foggy morning (both riding bikes) the wrong way along a narrow one-way street without any lights on or bright clothing. As you will no doubt know, dipped headlights (which should be used in fog) aren't much good in illuminating unlit obstructions until you get near them in fog. Well you can imagine what it's like coming face to face with said cyclist who appeared out of the fog with only about 25 yards to spare on a one way street.

Fortunately for her (and her son), she came across me... an accomplished and experienced motorist who was driving to the conditions and thus able to mitigate the danger to both mother and child cyclists which the mother herself had put them both in.

God forbid the outcome if they had come across one of the less competent motorists instead.

The annoying thing is though, what a way to teach the next generation how to cycle correctly! :mad:

Point being that in this case, the mother was the biggest threat to both herself and her son.

Thanks Tilt. As usual with these types of debate, we don't debate with or against the people whose behaviours we are criticising. So the inconsiderate or drink driver, or the inconsiderate or unlit cyclist will be oblivious to our mutual dislike of their behaviour, because they don't get involved with this type of discussion.

custardy

Altarf wrote: »

Could you translate that for me.

Radio on too loud?

RichardD1970

To answer the question posed in the thread title,

Biggest Threat To Cyclists?

Impatient, arrogant, selfish, careless, inattentive, inconsiderate people who think that their rights on the road outweigh everyone else's and the rules don't apply to them. This applies to ALL road users, whether car, bus, lorry, motor bike, bicycle and even pedestrians.

In short, Biggest Threat To Cyclists? = IDIOTS

Enterprise_1701C

how about people that don't understand our rules? We have a lot of Nepalese around here, normally very nice people on the whole, those that actually speak enough English that I can talk to them anyway. There is a cycle path that I regularly use that is next to a footpath. I have a bell so ring that when people are walking right across the path and cycle path. Three times in the last couple of months I have done so behind some Nepalese. They look at me as if I am mad, point down and say footpath. I point to the sign and say cycle path. They still do not move. I have even had a half full can of coke thrown at me as I cycle past by one of the men which could easily have knocked me off my bike and into the path of oncoming traffic. I guess he was an ex-Gurka.

I have also had people stand in the middle of a toucan crossing (yes, in the middle of the crossing in the road!!) shouting to me that it is a pedestrian crossing. I generally cycle past shouting back that they should look at the signs.

So yes, I agree that the biggest threat to cyclists on the whole is idiots.

AndyBSG

One of the biggest threats to cyclists is the fact that half the drivers on the road don't seem to know the highway code.

Cycling into work this morning I was in the left hand cycle lane approaching a side turning travelling at about 15 MPH.

A car overtakes me on the right then proceeds to try and turn left, a classic example of a left hook. What is worrying though is that he knew I was there, he had to actually move out to overtake me, and I was already crossing the turning when he started turning.

This led to me slamming on my brakes and skidding off my bike and the driver pulling up.

As I got up I said to him that he must have seen me and he replied that he did but he was indicating left so I was in the wrong.

I then asked him if he was in the right hand lane and wanted to turn left across a lane of left hand traffic but there was a car in the left hand lane did that mean he was allowed to cut that car up and force it to slam on it's brakes or did it mean he had to wait until there was a safe gap for him to turn left.

He didn't reply to that as he was clearly thinking about it and I then said "because that's exactly what you've just done to me"

Hi reply? "That's different, you're not a car so you have to give way to me."

What makes this even more worrying is that this wasn't a new, foreign or inexperienced driver, this was an English guy in his forties in a taxi so someone who drives for living.

Big_G_RC

I just had my first experience of a SMIDSU.

I was just finishing up a 26 mile ride turning right (3rd exit) on a roundabout. I followed a car around the roundabout and just as I've got my left arm out signalling to exit a car coming from the 2nd exit just pulls out. his wing mirror hits my bum and I go down.

I just don't get it. I'm dressed in all the usual hi-vis gear. I have hi-vis overshoes on. 1200 lumens of front lights on too. Next I'll be wrapping christmas lights around me! The roundabout was street lit too and it was about 4pm so not pitch-black. Just on the turn really.

I called the police and they took a statement. They said he'd probably get sent on a driver improvement course since he'd admitted fault, but a letter a few weeks later said no further action.

Luckily no damage to my bike, clothing or me. My wrist hurts a little and my bum had a lovely bruise for a week.

lxpeanut

Altarf wrote: »

In the interim until you reach that state of impossibility, who do you think needs to make more care -

The car driver who has the result of hundreds of millions of pounds of road safety research encasing them in a safe cocoon of steel and airbags.

Or the cyclist with a polystyrene helmet.

The one who does most damage needs to take most care. I dont see how you cant see that. Someone driving round a potentially lethal tonne of metal has the responsibility to not kill people with it. If someone fires a gun into a crowd is it the person who is shots fault for not getting out of the way? No of course not. If someone is a dangerous driver they will eventually cause an accident and injure or kill someone. If a cyclist does everything right they can only reduce the chance that its not them that the dangerous driver kills. However if the dangerous driver starts to do everything right they can make sure they dont kill anyone.

Johno100

lxpeanut wrote: »

The one who does most damage needs to take most care. I dont see how you cant see that. Someone driving round a potentially lethal tonne of metal has the responsibility to not kill people with it. If someone fires a gun into a crowd is it the person who is shots fault for not getting out of the way? No of course not. If someone is a dangerous driver they will eventually cause an accident and injure or kill someone. If a cyclist does everything right they can only reduce the chance that its not them that the dangerous driver kills. However if the dangerous driver starts to do everything right they can make sure they dont kill anyone.

No, even the safest of drivers can kill someone if the other person is a muppet.

custardy

Johno100 wrote: »

No, even the safest of drivers can kill someone if the other person is a muppet.

and the safest cyclist can get killed by the same logic.
of course by some people on this threads logic,by merely existing the cyclist asked for it.

Johno100

custardy wrote: »

and the safest cyclist can get killed by the same logic.
of course by some people on this threads logic,by merely existing the cyclist asked for it.

Spot and it will ever be the same.:T