British Cyclists

The BBQ Pit
61

Ahhh… a salient point. It’s worth noting that at the level of training and racing that guys like myself do, well you guys never see us. We’re up at 4:45am in the dead of winter, on the bike by 5:05 and meeting up at some gas station in the leafy suburbs somewhere and then doing 50 + miles in the country. The only time (most normal folk) see guys like us is during that narrow window as we’re headed back into the suburbs and going home to a nice warm shower before work.

And yep, when you do the sport 6 days a week, 500km per week, it’s totally 100% good manners to give hand signals, and wave thanks, and acknowledge good manners to other road users. It’s called “disseminating good will”, and any genuinely serious training bunch will show a level of discipline and etiquette towards vehicle drivers to make the pass by a nice experience.

My point is this - the really good guys, the guys who seriously do the sport at a near “representative” level - well, you hardly ever see those guys. They’re long gone by the time you’ve woken up. They’re out in the country, on the quiet country roads, doing the miles where it’s safer by veritible orders of magnitude.

And I’m one of those guys. Still, it makes me sad that such a wonderfully healthy, and efficient form of transportation is treated by town planners with such woeful afterthought. I genuinely believe that if we could provide a safe means for just 10% of the working population to commute to work via cycling, our fuel consumption and pollution and road congestion would plummet. And our communal health costs would probably plummet too.

In that context, it’s a shame, a crying shame, that cyclists are so easily demonised.

62

Ride a bike, used to ride a lot, one 13 month stretch it is all I had. run over once, deliberately aimed at 3 times, almost hit - hundreds, asshats crowding and attempting to dump me - hundreds.

Ride a motorcycle, still do a lot. *been run over once real bad, bumped from the back trying to harm me - 3 times, asshats trying to crowd me or run me off, 5 times on my rice burner, only once on my chopper, *

Been driving with a license over 46 years, * maybe a hundred deliberate attempts to run me off the road*

Driving a truck and pulling mobile homes. * many people try to mess you up, 100+, and many pissed because you are slow.*

Flying airplanes. *several close calls and a few were my fault. mostly mistakes by ATC believe it or not. never believe anybody when you can look out the window. *

My point. In order of unearned anger by others of any mode of transport, by far the worst and most aggressive are against me on a bicycle
next is motorcycle,
then trunks,
then cars and
flying is last , only a few times when I was pipeline patrolling and they would shoot at us. we stayed away from them until we could get the sheriff after them.

This is in Oklahoma, USA
Giant city bicyclist are a totally different breed.

I have used a 30" piece of pool cue for many things and an aggressive stance on my daily walking learned all the regular bicyclist to steer clear and I was always listening and looking. A sudden stop and taking up ‘The Stance’ was always productive.

It also prolly helps that I an 6’4" and 280 - 320 lbs depending. Most folks are polite to me. :wink:

63

I’m actually slightly taller, heavier than that, but I don’t use it in traffic situations. Yet, I was basically accused by the pro-cycling lobby in this thread of having anger managenent issues. Umm… right.
Woah. I give up.

64

I can’t be arsed with this thread for the most part, but this bit I just loved so much I had to comment.

One. Have you ever tried reporting to the police a traffic incident you have seen, by reporting a rego number?

Try it sometime. I have. I gave up after the first few times. It’s pointless. The police can’t be bothered because they know what is going to happen. At most, if they do contact the other party, that other party will deny what you say, and the policie will say “well there’s no objective evidence, we won’t be able to get a conviction, sorry”.

Further, if we are going to discuss motorists and traffic incidents, do you want to name the last time you head of a cyclist doing a hit and run and leaving a motorist for dead? Hmmm, no, I can’t think of an example either. Now, do we want to think about vice versa? No, I’m sure you don’t want to think about that at all.

The suggestion that cyclists aren’t fined because they are not registered is also total bullshit. I know cyclists who’ve been fined. Road users who commit offences noted by police are warned or fined. Whether in cars or on bikes.

So your suggestion that motorists are the epitomy of accountability generally or because they bear registration plates is a crock of shit.

Two. The finance argument. Cyclists should pay rego and licensing and should thereby support the infrastructure. Do I laugh or cry? Where do I start?

1/ Registration schemes cost more to run than they rake in. In other words, they are revenue negative. They do not support roads. If cyclists paid rego, they would detract from the revenue available to maintain roads

2/ Registration is necessary because cars are such dangerous brutes that they need to be registered. They are used in crime, they are often in accidents, they are worth a lot and are often stolen etc. The money lost on car registration schemes detracts from the money available for road infrastructure.

3/ I, like most adult cyclists, also drive. Only I drive less because I’m often on my bike. But I don’t get a discount for that off my car registration or license. So I pay more per mile for driving my car than people who drive their cars all the time, because I mostly ride a bike. Doesn’t life suck?

So get fucked.

65

Same old Princhester, I see. (Boo Boo Foo, does this count as “projected aggression”?)

66

I always find that if one has no substantive response, it’s best to ignore what you can’t deal with.

67

Oh for fuck’s sake. Where do I start? I have to spend about a thousand dollars per annum on rail tickets, for which some feel-good state govt should give me enviro-credits against my car rego? Life sucks, etc? You ride a bike. I catch a train. We both own cars. And?

68

You should start with something relevant. I’m not trying to suggest that I should get credits because I ride a bike. I’m merely illustrating the utter nonsense that is the suggestion that motorists pay some greater proportion of road funding because they pay rego. They don’t.

69

Brilliant. And more fool me for getting my sorry arse strawmanned into a debate about road funding.

So…

Under the current (quite likely imperfect) road funding arrangements (about which I am no longer going to argue in this thread), are cyclists more cavalier about the road rules than motorists? Yes, I think so. In the end, that is what I’m arguing. Neither more nor less (with the possible exception that licencing and registration is about more than state revenue. I find your claims of revenue negativity interesting though).

70

Phfft. Strawmanned indeed. You mean you tried out an argument that didn’t work, got your arse handed to you, and now want to drop it like the dead dingo it is.

71

Huh? You’ve picked a non-core part of my argument regarding the OP, and tried to hammer it. You’ve tried to refute it with cite-less claims about revenue… blah fucking blah. And you claim victory. Hmm…

Now then. We have a situation where everyone hates motorists. Heck I hate motorists, and I am one. So you would think cyclists would be the darling of the general public. But they’ve got that same general public offside. That is quite a feat.

Personally, I think that if you deny cyclists treat the road rules with contempt, you must be from another planet. I’m sick of arguing this point. If you want to claim some sort of spurious victory, go right ahead.

72

As with all things, there’s a range of behaviours among cyclists. The worst offenders are those who treat the whole world, roads, pavements, pedestrian areas, whatever, as a BMX obstacle course. They are comparitively rare, but god you remember them. I hate cycling anywhere near them - never know what they’re going to do. Plus they never have mudguards, and throw road shit all over you if its wet.

Then there’s greeny/sporty types. Cyclist with a chip, for one reason or another. Greeny types regard the road as theirs and cars as evil. Sporty types like to combine their commute to work with a time trial. I have had a lycra-clad triathelete wannabe on £2000 worth of titanium mount the curb to get past me while waiting at a red light. One of my little pleasures is passing these people on my 8-speed hub geared commuter bike - quite often they’re not actually any good.

Then there’s your general clueless cyclist. Someone who learned to ride as a kid, on a kids bike, but never on the road. As adults they simply acquired a bike and got on it. It’s their only transport, so they don’t have a driver’s perspective. Their saddles are too low, they pedal with their heels, they don’t know how to signal, don’t know how to manage their gears, never think to shoulder check. It leaves me aghast to see cyclists with helmets on simply pull across right for a right turn without even looking. The helmets indicate some safety consciousness, but they just haven’t a clue.

Finally, there’s the considerate cyclists. Partly generational, you can still find a few magnificent 80-year olds sedately peddling heavy roadsters with full chaincases. They do a really wierd-looking get-off/get on manouver at junctions. They know how to signal, and to shoulder check, and wouldn’t dream of running a light or cycling on the pavement. Otherwise considerate cycling tends to run in families - my mum and dad used to take us cycling on the road every week, since I was about six. Learn to cycle properly at that age and it sticks.

The answer, as I said before, is education. British schools at least try and teach everyone to swim, why not try and teach everyone to road cycle as well? The’re both basic life skills. A proper cycling proficiency qualification could include the Theory section of the Driving Test, and be arranged to more than offset the cost of it when people learn to drive. Also, British universities are full of first-time road cyclists, which would be another great target area. (Steve Wright - you have my sympathy! I wonder if I notched up any on your count? ('90-'94))

73

No to all of the above. I’m the one who, after waiting patiently for the little green man, like my mother and the green cross code taught me, starts to cross the road and then has to dive into the gutter as some twat in lycra shorts wizzes past me and nearly knocks me off my feet. An older, slower or frailer person than I would not be able to get out of the way in time.

And I’m not slamming someone’s lifestyle choice. I’m not anti-cyclist - I actually think there should be cycle paths all over London to enable those who wish to cycle to do so without endangering themselves or others. I am however, anti-bad cyclists. And bad motorists. And bad pedestrians - I’m well aware they exist too.

74

The primary thrust of the OP is a crock. Have a look at these UK stats.

Any pedestrian who would pit cyclists alleging they are the main concern is just plain out of touch with reality. They are pitting people who cause 0.6% of pedestrian casualties, ahead of those who cause the other 99.4%.

If you wonder why cyclists whinge about being picked on unfairly and of irrational prejudice against them, wonder no more.

And as to cyclists not following traffic laws, consider this: for all that cyclists may be bad, bad dangerous outlaws, in 2003 bike/motor vehicle and bike/pedestrian accidents there were 83 deaths or serious injuries (42 pedestrians, and 41 motorists). That year in vehicle/vehicle and pedestrian accidents generally there were 24,274 deaths or serious injuries (16,970 in vehicle/vehicle accidents, 7304 pedestrians). So those law abiding motorists were responsible for a tiny 99.7% of death and serious injury on roads and footpaths, and those damn irresponsible dangerous pests, cyclists, were responsible for a whopping 0.3%.

I say pillory those peddling arseholes, pronto.

75

Yes, indeed.

In light of those sobering statistics, I get back to my original assertion that cyclists are somehow dangerous, from a motorists point of view. But before I do so, I would add that I agree inarguably that any cyclist riding at speed on a pedestrian footpath is a prick.

Anyways, I find it really interesting that it’s motorists who make the assertion that cyclists are dangerous, when it’s actually the cyclist who stands to get REALLY hurt if the two ever have a bingle. I mean, honestly, if you’re a motorist a cyclist honestly can’t do much damage to your car - maybe a shattered windscreen at worst - but unless you seriously drive off the road and over the edge of a cliff, hitting a cyclist in a vehicle is almost always gonna damage the dude on the bike a hundred fold over the damage you’re gonna receive as a driver.

And yet, the common sentiment I often hear amongst many (but by no means the vast majority) of motorists regarding cyclists is “Get off the road you pricks. If I fuckin’ hit ya it’s YOUR fault!”

Now, I want everyone who’s reading this thread to stop right there and ponder that for a second. Think about that. We’ve all thought it, but think about the TRUE consequences of such a sentiment. Think about the worst, most hideous war injuries from stray laser guided ordnance onto human bodies with limbs torn off and ghastly wide open flesh wounds with innards hanging out.

Well guys, THAT is what happens to a cyclist when an autombile hits you at speed. And worse yet, there’s at least a 50% chance that a driver will drive off unaware of the carnage they’ve just done. That cyclist might have brain damage, or might not ever be able to play with their kids again. All because of a desire on the vehicle driver’s part to “drive close by and teach 'em a lesson”.

Trust me people… riding a bike in traffic as a form of commuting is arguably the most dangerous thing a typical member of Western society can do on a normal, regular basis. And yet, bizarrely, it’s motorists who feel put out.

In closing, I would never run a red light in front of a pedestrian. That’s incalculably rude. My training buddies and I always stop at lights in traffic. We always wave a sign of thanks to other motorists when courtesy is shown our way. Nonetheless, at least once a week something physically hard is thrown at us as a form of sport. Last week, it was a 12 inch spanner which went right into the shin of a young 18 year old guy in the national junior team.

I don’t care what anyone says, in the grand scheme of things, cyclists are treated like shit. Cowardly strangers literally try to kill them for cheap thrills by throwing shit at 'em or trying to miss at 100kph by 5cm. The outrage in the OP in this thread is sorely misplaced I’m afraid.

76

Princhester is surely correct. Whatever has sensitised you folks it isn’t the reality of the accident statistics.

Regarding objective evaluation of road user behaviour (not just accident statistics), this report from TRL is one example of a survey of cyclist behaviour in areas where pedestrians and cyclists mix.

“Conclusion. The data show that the majority of cyclists modify their behaviour in response to pedestrian flow. Most cyclists at all sites dismounted or reduced their speeds as the flows of pedestrians increased. … However a minority (mainly in Cambridge) still cycled relatively fast … in high pedestrian flows. These cyclists tended to be young males.”

It’s only one survey, but it adds weight to the impression that pedestrians and motorists are sensitised to the poor behaviour of a noticeable minority.

We’d have a better street environment if ALL road users were better trained and more courteous, including cyclists. Objectively, cyclists are a LOWER risk to both pedestrians and motorists than motorists. I think we have an x-rage problem in all groups of road users, and I see that in the invective of this thread. This is a bigger worry for me as a multi-mode road user.

77

It gets worse than fines.

78

Fuck. That’ll colour your perspective. Never had anything like that happen to me. Well, one cigarette packet, in twenty-odd years.

The OP is about British cyclists. I’m thankful the situation here isn’t nearly as bad as what you’re describing. Or maybe I’ve been lucky.

79

Thanks for that Mr Miskatonic.

I had been idly thinking about making particular comment on this:

but your cite prompted me to action.

Stryfe you live in fairy land. Your comment comes from the other side of the looking glass. In the real world where I live

  • the police are motorheads who tend not be too keen on cyclists,

  • you’re lucky if a jury has a single cyclist on it, and

  • every jury is likely to have some irrationally prejudiced fuckhead on it who thinks that the real threat to pedestrians is the type of road user that causes (let me mention that figure again) 0.6% of pedestrian injuries

Not that I’m thinking of anyone in particular.

80

A quick point regarding funding of infrastructure: British cyclists certainly do pay their way. Road tax goes to central government, and central government only has responsibility for major highways (including motorways and many others from which cyclists are banned). All other roads are a statutory responsibility of local authorities, therefore mainly funded through council tax.