3 abreast, 4 abreast, 5 abreast more?

motorguy

custardy wrote: »

So the OP is wrong and they are all on the footpaths?

Oh they're all over the place.

Which bemuses me - they want to be treated as road users, but when it suits them they'll happily ride down footpaths, walkways, skip round traffic lights, jump traffic lights, jump pedestrian crossings, ride across pedestrian crossings, etc, etc.

They're just the gift that keeps on giving.

custardy

motorguy wrote: »

Oh they're all over the place.

Which bemuses me - they want to be treated as road users, but when it suits them they'll happily ride down footpaths, walkways, skip round traffic lights, jump traffic lights, jump pedestrian crossings, ride across pedestrian crossings, etc, etc.

They're just the gift that keeps on giving.

Or simply it suits some peoples agenda to believe so.......

silverwhistle

almillar wrote: »

I think it's from iOS 'smart punctuation' that the forum can't handle - you (qwert yuiop) could turn it off on your device and I think they'd stop appearing.

Or turn off the device completely. Might do wonders for his state of mind.

guiriman

custardy wrote: »

So the OP is wrong and they are all on the footpaths?

No, not sure how you'd make that conclusion. But in the morning when walking to school there's often a lone cyclist or two using the footpath

custardy

guiriman wrote: »

No, not sure how you'd make that conclusion. But in the morning when walking to school there's often a lone cyclist or two using the footpath

Well we have that 'cyclists' are a problem on the footpaths (most describing shared paths no doubt) and 'cyclists' are a problem on the roads.
Wheres left?

motorguy

custardy wrote: »

Well we have that 'cyclists' are a problem on the footpaths (most describing shared paths no doubt) and 'cyclists' are a problem on the roads.
Wheres left?

It would be a start if they decided which they wanted to use.

I've had circumstances where i've been using a pedestrian crossing and a cyclist has deemed he doesnt need to stop for pedestrians and came on through the pedestrians and whilst avoiding him, i've had a cyclist coming at me across the pedestrian crossing. :eek:

custardy

motorguy wrote: »

It would be a start if they decided which they wanted to use.

I've had circumstances where i've been using a pedestrian crossing and a cyclist has deemed he doesnt need to stop for pedestrians and came on through the pedestrians and whilst avoiding him, i've had a cyclist coming at me across the pedestrian crossing. :eek:

Who is 'they', Is this some homogeneous group Im unaware of?

esuhl

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

I keep close to the edge...

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

As a youngster, I was told cycling two abreast was risky...

Sounds like you need some basic cycle training. Round here there are signs reminding cyclists to "Ride away from the kerb". And cycling two-abreast can be safer. It depends on the road.

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

So there we have it. Four and more - entitled , arrogant, selfish, greedy - and breaking the law.
Thank you.

Giving the rest of us a bad name.

Cyclists have nothing to worry about until motorists drastically improve their reputation. The number of dangerous drivers is incredible. The majority admit to routinely breaking the law! And just look at how many people they kill each year.

If stupid, selfish, arrogant drivers didn't behave so recklessly, cyclists wouldn't be forced to put their safety first. With so many terrible drivers on the road, (and their "bad name" in general) cyclists can't afford to take risks.

esuhl

And I wish motorists would use the infrastructure I've paid for.

Motor facilities are hugely expensive, while cycle tracks are cheap. Every year my Council Tax goes up, with a fortune being spent on the roads with no consideration to cycling!

Motorists continually damage the road surface with their heavy vehicles, yet do they pay the repairs? No -- cyclists get taxed at the same rate, so we all heavily subsidise the motorists' choice to add to the traffic and pollution. There really ought to be a separate motor tax to pay for road repairs.

Years back, they built an multi-million pound bypass -- four lanes in places, to avoid traffic coming through our quaint 20mph limit village. And what do motorists do? Veer off the A-road, blast through the village at 40mph, only to rejoin the A-road a mile later. This makes the village noisy, smelly, polluted and dangerous. Periodically a selfish rat-running driver mows someone down on the zebra crossings. There are two schools (primary and middle) and retirement homes.

Most of the time, rat-running through the village is no faster anyway, and the traffic rejoining the A-road causes huge tailbacks along both roads. If motorists all used the bypass, everyone would get where they're going faster and the village wouldn't be so dangerous and unpleasant.

It's not helped by the fact that motorists park on the side of the road, and drive as far to the right as possible, leaving no room for cyclists to overtake.

Trying to overtake two cyclists riding abreast in a car is easy -- just wait for a safe gap. Trying to overtake a pack of a hundred rat-running motorists stuck bumper-to-bumper, when they've selfishly refused to use the purpose-built bypass is a nightmare!

motorguy

custardy wrote: »

Who is 'they', Is this some homogeneous group Im unaware of?

Yes - cyclists!