Motorists, what to do about cyclists who constantly break the high way code???

trinidadone

Strider590 wrote: »

If there was a training course, then cyclists would annoy drivers even more than they do now, for example:

-Avoiding door zones.

-Taking the middle of the lane sometimes to prevent drivers squeezing through where it could be dangerous, blind bends, over hump back bridges and through pinch points.

Which is why I don't think it would ever be made mandatory.

If compulsory training wold not work, any suggestions on improving cycle riding on our carriageways?

Johnmcl7

trinidadone wrote: »

Hey fellow motorist, I wanted to ask, with a minority of cyclist using the roads in a bad manner, would a compulsory training course for cyclist work, or would this be a waste of time, especially (as some cyclists on this thread have suggested), most cyclist are car drivers anyway???

By far the worse cyclists around here are the secondary school pupils who at times seem completely suicidal and they're the ones that have had cycle proficiency training so clearly it doesn't work well there. Also I don't believe for a second cyclists who go through red lights, on the pavement, poorly lit etc. are doing it because they don't know any better and know fine they shouldn't be riding that way but they still choose to.

I have both car and motorbike licenses and while I find some aspects of the latter useful for cycling, neither have changed the way I cycle in that I stopped for traffic lights, didn't cycle on the pavement etc. before I had my licenses.

John

[Deleted User]

trinidadone wrote: »

If compulsory training wold not work, any suggestions on improving cycle riding on our carriageways?

There already is training available for those who want it, the problem is that motorists don't like what's being taught:

"Cycle facilities are of varying quality. The choice of whether to use facilities should always lie with the cyclist."

"Upon encountering queuing traffic, the trainee may pass it (on the right or left) or may choose to wait in the queue."

"The trainee must demonstrate confident use of the primary position"

trinidadone

jack_pott wrote: »

There already is training available for those who want it, the problem is that motorists don't like what's being taught:

"Cycle facilities are of varying quality. The choice of whether to use facilities should always lie with the cyclist."

"Upon encountering queuing traffic, the trainee may pass it (on the right or left) or may choose to wait in the queue."

"The trainee must demonstrate confident use of the primary position"

is the primary positioning for cyclist, is in the middle of the road?

custardy

trinidadone wrote: »

The thread is aimed at motorists, and to look at why cyclists choose not to follow the highway code, its not about cars crashing into a cafe, sorry you miss understood the first thread.


In regards to tax and insurance, this is also unrelated, so that is why i did not "jump" as you quoted.

So you jump in as you deem my point unrelated. The other point was unrelated,so you didnt. Well that makes sense............ Wibble.
Neither person in those links is following the highway code.

Enterprise_1701C

trinidadone wrote: »

is the primary positioning for cyclist, is in the middle of the road?

Actually, the primary position for cyclists IS the middle of the lane.

Norman_Castle

trinidadone wrote: »

is the primary positioning for cyclist, is in the middle of the road?

Proving that you're not capable of judging cyclists behavior.

You should change the thread title to, I've passed a test and bought a car but I still don't know whats going on.

NBLondon

jack_pott wrote: »

You need to be careful with road injury stats, the number of injuries recorded is not as reliable as the number of deaths because the definition of an injury is more subjective and the expertise and number of people available for filling in paperwork varies.

Yes, that's why all those "near misses" due to cyclist behaviour don't get counted and are then discounted by some posters. The one time I have actually been hit by a cyclist, it was never recorded because I just called him a blind {bleep}ing {bleep} as he rode off and took my bruises home. The sort of riding displayed in the link from jimjames above is what I'm objecting too - I see similar behaviour around 3 times a week - on the zebra crossings outside the British Museum or the pelicans on Theobalds Road just north of Holborn. In a previous job, the pelican outside City Thameslink was a hotspot. I've never actually turned round and grabbed a cyclist as in the link - but I've been close enough to do so many times.


Bad road design can be blamed in some cases - like the junction at the northern end of Waterloo Bridge. Cyclists coming southbound get a dedicated cycle lane and signal to allow them into the junction but are then confronted with a red light to exit the junction onto the bridge because pedestrians have a green man. Many totally fail to see this second light (or don't realise it applies to them as well as motor traffic) and thus try and ride through a phalanx of pedestrians. I initially thought the cyclists were all being arrogant gits (and they were probably thinking stupid pedestrians) until I walked the other side of the road and realised they were being misled by unclear signalling.

Nasqueron

trinidadone wrote: »

Hey fellow motorist, I wanted to ask, with a minority of cyclist using the roads in a bad manner, would a compulsory training course for cyclist work, or would this be a waste of time, especially (as some cyclists on this thread have suggested), most cyclist are car drivers anyway???

Sure, and compulsory retesting of all drivers every 5 years - see how many drivers are off the road within a handful of years of passing their test

custardy

NBLondon wrote: »

Yes, that's why all those "near misses" due to cyclist behaviour don't get counted and are then discounted by some posters.

Are motoring near misses counted?