[Mark.]

Originally Posted by nanscombe

Sending videos of an identifiable vehicle to the company involved is fine, but what would you do about video of a badly behaved cyclist?

If you put them up on YouTube, so they could be subject to worldwide humiliation, they would possibly still be unidentifiable.

And if you could see who they were, and they found out about it, they would probably get YouTube to remove it anyway.

Use DailyMotion.

[Doctorb]

Originally Posted by jsmith99

This afternoon, I was on a bus which had to stop at a temporary traffic light, at red, put there because of roadworks.

Within seconds, two adult cyclists appeared on the pavement, riding abreast.

A few seconds later, a cyclist rode between the bus and the pavement, past the red light, and then hopped up onto the pavement. Thereby breaking two separate laws in a fraction of a second.

We're constantly being told, in this forum, that the vast majority of cyclists are law abiding .... not much evidence of that sometimes.

Personally, I see the majority of drivers breaking the law more so. Honestly, hands up those who don't break the law driving?

You can't complain of other people not being law abiding if you ignore laws yourself.

[Mark39London]

Originally Posted by Doctorb

Personally, I see the majority of drivers breaking the law more so. Honestly, hands up those who don't break the law driving?

You can't complain of other people not being law abiding if you ignore laws yourself.

You can complain and you can’t really equate different laws.

As a cyclist, I never ride on pavements and I never go through a red light, they are both stupid things to do.

As a pedestrian on the pavement, the only people on bikes I move for are small children.

[Tassium]

Some people are using the "it's all relative" defence.

As in, "cars kill/maim far more people than cyclists". Basically suggesting that the existence of a worse situation somehow lets cyclists of the hook for decent behavior.

(Of course, motorists themselves are sometimes known for using this defence. Speeding motorist pulled over: "why aren't you chasing after murderers!")

-------
Relative standards are no standards at all. We should apply a fixed standard of behavior to any road user that is appropriate for that user. Cars are more dangerous it's true, but they rarely drive on pavements at 15mph.

[crazyjohn]

They get moaned at for being on the road they get moaned at for being on the payment.Cant blame them for going on the pavements its either that or getting wiped out by some tosser in a audi or 4x4 playing with his iphone SMIDSU.

[HenryBane]

Originally Posted by crazyjohn

They get moaned at for being on the road they get moaned at for being on the payment.Cant blame them for going on the pavements its either that or getting wiped out by some tosser in a audi or 4x4 playing with his iphone SMIDSU.

Use public transport instead, quite simple really. If you aren't confident on the roads riding a bicycle, don't ride a bicycle.

[Mark.]

Had an interesting encounter with a white van man today (which sounds slightly creepy, but anyway).

Apparently, as a "small cyclist" I should "always keep to the left".

He informed me of this shortly after I had turned right, and was currently sitting in the middle (straight ahead) lane at the next junction (he was in the left, turn-left, lane).

[DoctorQui]

Originally Posted by blueblade

There won't be. You're expected to move aside, as (in their own minds) they have automatic right of way.

I'm a regular cyclist and adhere to the RTRA and do not ride on a pavement unless its a cycle lane.

When I'm a pedestrian and a cyclist rides toward me, I simply wont move. Ultimately, if they're riding at you hell for leather, they're the ones that will come off worse as they tend to realise that I'm not going to move and squeeze on the brakes,followed by their @rse flying into the air. Only once has a cyclist squared up to me for doing this but he soon realised the error of his ways

[Mark.]

Originally Posted by DoctorQui

I'm a regular cyclist and adhere to the RTRA and do not ride on a pavement unless its a cycle lane.

Now you've done it -- we'll have umpteen pages of the pedants saying that if it's a pavement, it's not a cycle lane, despite they and everyone else knowing full well what you meant.

[DoctorQui]

Originally Posted by Mark.

Now you've done it -- we'll have umpteen pages of the pedants saying that if it's a pavement, it's not a cycle lane, despite they and everyone else knowing full well what you meant.

I suppose thats DS for you

[paulbrock]

(on wearing head-mounted cameras)

Originally Posted by AnnaliseZ

Oh no wait - that's right - ive got better things to do.

That's because you're safe and sound in your metal cage. It's a bit different when you have tossers in cars capable of killing you because they want to update their facebook status while driving.

It makes less difference if its a private individual driving, but someone driving professionally - bus driver, taxi driver, delivery driver should and do get disciplinary action following dangerous driving captured on youtube vids. I approve wholeheartedly.

Originally Posted by nanscombe

Sending videos of an identifiable vehicle to the company involved is fine, but what would you do about video of a badly behaved cyclist?

I agree things would be better all round of misdemeaning cyclists were more easily identifiable. Perhaps facebook could offer their face-recognition technology. (semi-tongue in cheek; we can't be that far off matching up a photo of a cyclist and bike with an indivdual. The Boris Bikes *do* have registration numbers on them, but they're pretty small and you'd never manage to take them down unless the cyclist had stopped anyway)

Originally Posted by HenryBane

then they should offer training to people on how to ride a bicycle on the roads.

ummm...they do. As do private orgs. A friend of mine recently used these guys
https://www.facebook.com/CycleWithMe

Originally Posted by Tassium

As in, "cars kill/maim far more people than cyclists". Basically suggesting that the existence of a worse situation somehow lets cyclists of the hook for decent behavior.

I think if a thread was started on DS everytime we saw a car driver doing something stupid, the resultant mass of threads might noticeably reduce the Daily Mail webtraffic. Hmmm...not a bad idea!

Drivers can be dicks too isn't a justification for bad cycling. of course not. But the moaning on here and elsewhere is disproportionate to both the number and seriousness of the incidents of bad cycling vs bad driving, and it is not wrong to highlight this.

for example

Originally Posted by Zero gravitas

Are the London ones those that wear a cam strapped to their helmet to capture the 'aggressive behaviour' of motorists (that they have wound up)?

the suggestion that the only motorists acting like dicks are the result of cyclists 'winding them up' (presumably by daring to be on 'their' roads) is incredibly ignorant.

Originally Posted by HenryBane

Use public transport instead, quite simple really. If you aren't confident on the roads riding a bicycle, don't ride a bicycle.

Plenty of confident, law abiding and competent cyclists get hit by cars in London.

[HenryBane]

Originally Posted by paulbrock

Plenty of confident, law abiding and competent cyclists get hit by cars in London.

I have mentioned that I don't own or ride a bicycle in London because I don't think it's safe. If I have made that decision based on what I see around me, then I'm sure others can...or they must see it as a good risk to take, saving them the price of a weekly or monthly bus pass.

[Picto]

As with most things, you don't notice the good ones, it's the bad ones that tend to stick in your mind.

I'm sure i passed a few cyclists today that didn't register with me. The one i did notice was the one that ran in to me on the pedestrian crossing. He was riding the wrong way up a one way street and he went through the red lights (which he wouldn't have known was on red because he was riding the wrong way). He never even apologised, just rode off.

[tghe-retford]

Originally Posted by d'@ve

Number of cyclists killed in 2010 on UK roads: 111.

Average number of pedestrians killed a year by cyclists (UK roads): 2.

Number of pedestrians killed in 2009: 405.

Better ban pedestrians.

[paulbrock]

Originally Posted by HenryBane

I have mentioned that I don't own or ride a bicycle in London because I don't think it's safe. If I have made that decision based on what I see around me, then I'm sure others can...or they must see it as a good risk to take, saving them the price of a weekly or monthly bus pass.

sure there's risks involved. but either you can say, oh well, lets all stop cycling and get in cars and buses, or you can encourage changes in behaviour and attitude in all road users (inc cyclists) to reduce that risk.

Not only is it cheaper, it lessens the load on the struggling public transport/roads (just wait till the Olympics - cycling could well get its 2nd london renaissance if the weather is good), its healthier and its often quicker. Yay cycling

[tghe-retford]

Originally Posted by crazyjohn

They get moaned at for being on the road they get moaned at for being on the payment.Cant blame them for going on the pavements its either that or getting wiped out by some tosser in a audi or 4x4 playing with his iphone SMIDSU.

Unlike the pedestrian playing with his iPhone or listening to music on headphones, at the moment, both perfectly legal (although the UK may follow the lead of some American towns and ban both), who should not be subjected to constantly having to worry whether they are going to be side-swiped or made to give way to a cyclist. The majority of whom I am sad to say have a superiority complex and have no regard for pedestrians as anything other than "cycle lane" furniture which should be taken off the paveme... sorry, "cycle lane" as they cycle at up to 30mph.

[paulbrock]

Originally Posted by tghe-retford

The majority of whom I am sad to say have a superiority complex

No they don't. Unless you have a survey you can publish for us?

Where do these bizarre generalisations come from?

"I can tell you, that most cyclists hate bunnies"

"Nearly all cyclists in my town wear masks so you can only see their evil eyes"

the closest we've got to any sort of attempt to justify it was someone that counted maybe 5 cyclists once and extrapolated their generalisation from that.

[Hieronymous]

Originally Posted by d'@ve

Number of cyclists killed in 2010 on UK roads: 111.

Average number of pedestrians killed a year by cyclists (UK roads): 2.

The 2 pedestrians killed by cyclists aren't necessarily on the pavement, it includes pedestrians on cycle tracks and crossing the road. The cyclist carnage on the roads is why most cyclists who ride on pavements do it, and why the police let them, unless it's the minority of cycling maniacs who ride fast and furiously in amongst pedestrians.

With those sorts of death toll figures, long may the majority of sensible cyclists continue to ride on pavements (in an appropriate manner). I most certainly will, when busy or 'difficult' roads make it advisable.

The trouble with this is it's just figures.

What/who caused the accident?

Cyclist?

Motorist?

Bit of both?

[A321]

Originally Posted by AnnaliseZ

Some cyclists are complete mentalists. I overtook one the other day - who was cycling in the middle of the road - and he lost the plot, chased after my car and smacked the roof.

Mow him down.

[Homer`]

I personally don't have a problem with cyclists, providing they don't draw my attention to them.

The thing that really pisses me off is when the idiots decide they are going to do really stupid things (now don't get me wrong I know car/van drivers are just as often at fault here) which in turn puts their life in danger.

I live in a pretty rural area as far as outskirts of London goes, and we have 4 main roads into our village and all of them are unlit, 3 of them are national speed limit narrow roads with lots of hills/blind corners and the like. Do you think these idiots will wear reflective gear in the dark? Like hell. Don't even bother with lights or reflectors on the bike, and don't even get me started on the lack of helmets which is a far too common sight.

While a car/van user is much more likely to cause harm to somebody/something by not paying due care and attention, which should not be forgotten here, a cyclist is much more likely to kill themselves by doing something stupid. This is what really ****s me off as other road users tend to get blamed for their actions if their spleen ends up under a bus because they couldn't wait at a red light.

Riding a bike is fine, and makes good sense, however much more needs to be done to control how people use them and behave while in control of them, there needs to be ways of identifying adults on bikes, and more done to train people how to ride them properly. At the same time as this other road users do need to remember to check their mirrors to make sure the cyclist which is actually obeying the rules of the road, doesn't get knocked down.

As far as I am concerned though, do something intentionally stupid, and you deserve to be an organ donor. The road is a dangerous place to be no matter what you are riding/driving/walking on.

If you don't value your own life, I am sure somebody else will value your mortal remains.

[juliancarswell]

A fare portion of cyclists are assholes but so are drivers, the difference being the vast, VAST majority of the time, drivers do faaaaarrr more damage than cyclist.
Yet you rarely see posts on here going on about what assholes drivers are, yet there is a thread like this one nearly every week.
Doubtless some cyclists do get angry when careless, irresponsible and aggressive motorists put their lives at risk. When a ton of car passes you illegally at 30-40mph a few inches from your elbow' when there is plenty of room to move out and pass safely, you tend to take it personally. However, when it comes to so-called 'road rage' it is motorists who are overwhelmingly the perpetrators and cyclists the victims. What's more the courts are notoriously lenient when it comes to dealing with motorists who attack or deliberately run down cyclists.

Consider the case a few years back of Carl Baxter, who deliberately drove over a cyclist called Stephen Kirwin and his six-year-old daughter, Emily, who was in a trailer. The cyclist was seriously injured, whilst the girl was in coma for six days and left with brain damage.
Baxter, 36, had used the vehicle "as a weapon", the court heard after chemical engineer Stephen Kirwin, 52, shook his fist when the driver first sped past, narrowly missing the group. Baxter then reversed at speed, dragging Mr Kirwin's daughter Emily under his car in the mangled wreckage of her bike tow-trailer.

Baxter, who has two previous convictions for attacking other motorists, then drove off, leaving Mr Kirwin and his distraught wife Maureen with their badly-injured child. Emily lost five teeth and suffered a broken nose, jaw and palate while Mr Kirwin was left with a broken leg and pelvis after the Range Rover hurled him off his bike.

The driver was sentenced to a paltry 2 years (i.e. less than 12 months) and astonishingly given only a 2 year driving ban effectivly losing access to his car for one year. The same as he would have got if he had been caught just over the limit driving home from the pub.


In another case another motorist called Andrew Hart came up behind a 62-year-old cyclist called Alan Scott whilst driving his'4x4' down a narrow lane. With nowhere safe to let him pass the cyclist held his place for about 30 seconds until they reached a passing point where he pulled over to let the driver past. The drive then stopped, went back to the cyclist and attacked him for 'getting in his way', leaving him with a broken shoulder. This injury caused a blood clot and as a consequence the cyclist died a few days later. Another driver who witnessed the attack said that the cyclist was 'slightly built' and had done nothing to provoke the attack. Hart was found guilty of manslaughter but incredibly the judge gave Hart only a 9 month suspended sentence. That is, effectively no penalty at all.

Google "Stephen Kirwin and his six-year-old daughter, Emily" or "62-year-old cyclist called Alan Scott" to see what the judiciary think of cyclists.

A while back a young man got a fine and community service for mowing down a cyclist at 30mph and killing him.
His defence was that the sun was low and he was blinded. This didn't stop him still driving on blindly at 30mph.

Sentencing on road deaths in this country, especially of cyclist deaths, are a joke.

[acoolwelshbloke]

Originally Posted by cjsmummy

We were trying to overtake one a couple of weeks back, but he just stayed smack-bang in the middle of the road! I told the OH to run the bugger over

Obviously we didn't.

I don't get it a thread about people moaning about cyclists on the pavements yet when they use the road it's let us run them down?

Let's hope CJ isn't riding a bike one day with some fool like you behind him karma and all that!

Riding a bike in the gutter can be dangerous for several reasons, one your riding in all the crap that gets thrown there like loose gravel and glass as well as the other various hazards like drains and puddles.

If you want cyclists off the pavements and on the roads then fine, but don't start complaining when they are holding up traffic.

[Vodka_Drinka]

As far as I'm concerned most cyclists ask for all that they get. They have an attitude and it's always everyone else's fault, drivers, pedestrians but never their own. I've lost count of the number of times I've nearly been hit by a cyclist riding on a pavement. Why can't they get it onto their thick heads pavements are for pedestrians?

[Mark.]

The biggest problem is that anyone can buy a bike then act like a moron on it, which is what results in the "hatred" from pedestrians and motorists.

But I'm not sure what the answer to that is, because cycling is very different to driving and so I don't think a practical test is realistic.

[acoolwelshbloke]

Originally Posted by Vodka_Drinka

Why can't they get it onto their thick heads pavements are for pedestrians?

Given some of the responses by people in this thread I can understand why they would choose the pavement over the road!

I don't ride a bike myself.