Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
karlt
Posts: 2244
Joined: 15 Jul 2011, 2:07pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby karlt » 26 Jul 2016, 3:04pm

The problem with that is that there is naff all I can do as an individual cyclist about the behaviour of other cyclists on the road who I do not know. Part of the problem is that we are being treated as a group, all guilty for the sins of the worst of us. That makes as much sense as hating all motorists because some pass too close.

Bez
Posts: 1217
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Bez » 26 Jul 2016, 3:08pm


User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16725
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby mjr » 26 Jul 2016, 4:04pm

BakfietsUK wrote:Quite how mjr reckons observations of other cyclists' behaviour is "self loathing" mjr would maybe like to explain. Maybe some cyclists are just realistic.

Bez and karlt get it. It's not realism - it's defeatism and it does seem like self-loathng for BakfietsUK to say BakfietsUK deserves to be treated poorly by motorists because some other mythical cyclist offends... and yes, I mean mythical - I doubt that most of the people who whine about cyclists jumping red lights have seen one do it recently, unless they live somewhere where it's very very common and there aren't many places here with enough people cycling for that.

In many European cities I have seen thousands of cyclists on really well designed facilities. Their behaviour was in my experience impeccable. In this country I see a very different story. However hard it is to swallow, respect is earned and maybe mjr, your observations in France are a sign of mutual respect that appears intrinsic, but has maybe come to be, over many many years.

Blimey, that sounds like going around European with one's eyes shut! There's some total rubbish cycling infrastructure amongst the good stuff (painted stripes along pavements are widespread) and plenty of really dodgy riding (a cyclist snagging and dragging a shop display up the street comes to mind as one memorable example), but somehow they make it work. I don't remember reading anywhere in French or Belgian news that their cycling infrastructure was a reward for well-behaved cyclists getting time off the roads for good behaviour.

If we act like hooligans on bikes, we won't be respected, we'll be hated.

Yet, if we act like saints on bikes, we'll still be hated because of what fictional people do while cycling!

Just as further illustration of how flawed the earning respect approach is, consider if someone wrote "As a minority, female cyclists will have to work much harder to gain the same kind of respect from other cyclists say, that they appear to give each other. The problem in my view is that female cyclists are a minority. It is perhaps nauseatingly paradoxical that our relative scarcity makes us more visible and perhaps more prone to prejudice. ..." They'd be flamed to a well-done crisp!

So, how do we get past this? Can we redirect the anger of walkers and cyclists both towards errant motorists?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 7667
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Tangled Metal » 26 Jul 2016, 4:46pm

Do you know what, I see RLJers probably one a week if not more frequently. It annoys me when I see it without a good reason.

One example is the guy who doesn't want to sit in the ASL area for the lights to change. He prefers to creep out Into the middle of the T junction until he half turns around the corner. He then cycles across the pedestrian crossing when the green man is showing and back onto the original road straight across the junction. He saves about 10 to 15 seconds. I'm sat in the ASL area and start off on green and TBH I end up at most 10m behind him. He's across the junction when I'm setting off. No point to it and IMHO it is creating negative views of cyclists to be reinforced. Heck I'm a keen cyclist and I'm practically gritting my teeth and saying "bloody cyclist!"

There are other cases in a couple of locations you get RLJ cyclists where there is no.justification due to safety. It really does happen you know.

This idea of saints and sinners among the cyclists is exaggerating things. Saints are just people who follow common sense and safe cycling practises. Nothing special, or shouldn't be, but the exception ours the sinner. This cyclist is the one so does something wrong and is most remembered. 10 to 1. That's ten good examples counteract 1 bad example. Whilst i can't do anything about the bad cyclist I can make sure I'm not among their number. There is nothing.wrong with doing this it encouraging it in others, but IMHO denying the minority that.are "sinners" doesn't do anything positive.

I'm not an apologist for the.minority of bad cyclists just as I'm not for motorists. I'm my own driver/ cyclist making decisions for myself. The main one is to try and be a positive, safe and respectful cyclist. Not least I'm setting a good example for my young son.

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 3845
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Bmblbzzz » 26 Jul 2016, 5:08pm

Only one RLJ a week? I reckon I see at least two a day in cars and one every other day in a lorry or bus. One a week might be about right but only if you disregard all the motorized ones.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16725
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby mjr » 26 Jul 2016, 5:10pm

Tangled Metal wrote:Do you know what, I see RLJers probably one a week if not more frequently. It annoys me when I see it without a good reason.

Actually, I see at least one RLJer most times I ride the 5 miles into town - but they're motorists so don't count for some reason. :-(

I know it happens, but it's relatively rare, I'd prefer a RLJer on a bike to in a car and I really do doubt that many of the people ranting about them see them as often as you do. How can we stop such things stealing the focus of discussions about cycling?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 7667
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Tangled Metal » 26 Jul 2016, 8:36pm

Do you know what, I only remember about 1 a week based on 3 return journeys a week. TBH it's probably more because there's a few mixed use paths with combined pedestrian and cyclist crossings. There's usually about 2 or 3 cyclists waiting to cross but most days one will cross there when it's red. That stretch has 2 such crossings.

Plus there's roadworks which have a separate path for pedestrians. There's often cyclists just going up the inside of the static cars and straight onto the pedestrian footway, often at a speed above that of pedestrians so potential for accidents or conflict on.such a convoluted and narrow footway.

There used to be 3 such traffic.controls on.that stretch and cyclists often ran those lights by just going through the control, on the pedestrian footway or by going into the coned area.

Now I'm sure I'll be accused of cyclist self loathing. To me that's a comment from someone with obvious bias and blindness to anything except motorist's bad behaviour. At least I'll accept that.motorists have more examples of bad.behaviour. They're also the majority of traffic on our roads so even if RLJing happens at the same rate of occurrence as cyclists for motorists there will be a lot more examples of motorists than.cyclists.

Before you slag me off for criticising bad cyclists RLJing for me i find motorists doing it as being.more serious. I say this because I live near a dangerous junction for pedestrians. It is a staggered crossroads on an A road. This means there's 2 sets of lights that can both be clearly seen due to.it.being a downwards slope. Most motorists try to make the second lights by jumping.the first lights (that's when it's amber). They then have to brake for the second. There's a lot of regulars passing by every work day but they all still try out despite it not being possible. The first lights change with the second. Indeed if you go through the first lights on amber you'll end up going through the second on red with the pedestrian crossing already on green. It is this part of that junction that I find particularly dangerous. I've seen parents drag their kids back from under the wheels of a RLJing car. I am not joking, one case involved a parent with one hand pulling a 9 year old kid back when the car missed the kid by at most a foot distance.

That same.junction I've jumped back after a car went through a long time after they both were red then another car followed the first causing in between two cars coming out of the junction they were turning into.

IMHO the implications of cars jumping lights is serious but I believe cyclists have no place jumping lights neither. I see users of both modes of transport behave badly but due to the proportion of motorised vehicles I see more of those. Which is common sense really. Also probably makes them more noticeable. That last reason is possibly one reason cyclists need to be better than motorists.

jgurney
Posts: 1100
Joined: 10 May 2009, 8:34am

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby jgurney » 26 Jul 2016, 11:14pm

Tangled Metal wrote:
jgurney wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:These paths with cyclists on one.side of a line and pedestrians on the other are really just mixed use paths. Nobody will convince me to the contrary.


So do you also consider those roads with pedestrians on one side of a kerb and vehicles on the other to be really just mixed use roads, and walk, cycle or drive using the whole width of them?

I think the raised kerbstone kind of makes that example different to one where both sides of the narrow strip of white paint has the same level and surface.


The kerb and the painted line mean exactly the same thing: the difference in level does not change that. That said, I would certainly support more use of raised kerbs to separate cycle paths and footways, as it may be a bit more obvious to the ill-informed or unobservant, but presumably it is unpopular as it must add to construction costs.

Plus the kerb effectively marks a difference without signs to indicate which mode of transport goes where. The white line alone does not offer this difference and you're relying on infrequent signage to show which side you should be on.

Yes, failure to clearly show which side is which is a recurrent fault in cycle route design. Along the A2 through Rainham, they actually swop over from side to side occasionally: whether the painter bungled or this was intended is not clear.

Richard D
Posts: 269
Joined: 27 Sep 2011, 6:16pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Richard D » 26 Jul 2016, 11:26pm

On my morning commute there is a set of traffic lights with a particular sequence, where if I go through during a ten second window or so when the light is still red against me, there is zero chance of being hit or inconveniencing any other road user because there is no traffic that CAN move into my path at that point; others are held on reds, or no right turns. With the added advantage that when the cars behind me go through in green, they will catch up with me at a point where they can overtake me safely.

But if I wait for my light to go green, I then have to endure about 500 metres with the traffic that was backed up behind me at the lights right on my back wheel - or worse, trying to push their way past me on a normal-width single carriageway road with stationary queuing traffic on the other side of the road. I've got heartily sick of those close passes - one so dangerous that a car driver pulled over, checked that I was okay, and gave me the reg number of the car that had nearly wiped me out.

So it's devil or deep blue sea. Wait like an angel, and hasten the journey towards the day when I actually meet the angels, or jump the red light, inconveniencing or imperilling nobody and reaching a point where I can be overtaken safely, or dice with death relying on the drivers to behave if I behave and wait for the green - with the evidence being that about one driver in ten absolutely cannot be trusted to do so.

What this has to do with bells I don't know. FWIW, I've got one. I occasionally (have to) use shared use paths. But about one pedestrian in three ignores my bell, because they are too busy listening to something coming through their headphones. I just have to hope for no sudden changes of direction from that lot.

Most of the time I wait. Some of the time I don't. But I see car drivers going through those lights and other lights that have just changed to red again and again and again - usually about two a day. And although I can't injure them when I go through a red, they can surely injure me and other drivers when they do it.

BakfietsUK
Posts: 220
Joined: 4 Jul 2015, 10:35am

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby BakfietsUK » 27 Jul 2016, 8:58am

Did you actually look up what "minority stress" is mjr? If you did it seems you weren't able to get past what seems to be a reaction to feminism.

Do you think about what you say or do you just compulsively disagree with stuff. You seem to not have much time for many of the comments here, yet offer little of practical value yourself.

Me thinks you protest a little too much about bad cycling.

Come on mjr you can do better than that.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16725
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby mjr » 27 Jul 2016, 9:42am

Tangled Metal wrote:Do you know what, I only remember about 1 a week based on 3 return journeys a week. TBH it's probably more because there's a few mixed use paths with combined pedestrian and cyclist crossings. There's usually about 2 or 3 cyclists waiting to cross but most days one will cross there when it's red. That stretch has 2 such crossings.

I'm not going to reply to the rest of it (because I agree with much of it), but the red lights for the pedestrians and cyclists at most designs of such crossings are advisory not mandatory. No offence is committed by crossing the carriageway on red if it's clear and some crossing designers use that as an excuse if you complain about the unreasonably long times they are designed to show red despite a clear carriageway. (Of course, if you are cycling on the carriageway and get a red at such a crossing, you must stop.)

BakfietsUK wrote:Did you actually look up what "minority stress" is mjr?

Yes and it was what I thought. Did you actually read Bez's article and understand why the earning-respect meme is evil?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Bez
Posts: 1217
Joined: 10 Feb 2015, 10:41am
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Bez » 27 Jul 2016, 10:58am

mjr wrote:No offence is committed by crossing the carriageway on red if it's clear


QFT. I do this all the time at a large junction near work, as do most people who use it whether on cycle or on foot.

The relevant offence is, whilst dependent on the state of the lights, defined with reference to a solid stop line on the road. So it's worth also reading up on the legality of passing temporary traffic lights at red… (Spoiler: it's not a strict offence, but it could be construed as careless or dangerous driving.)

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16725
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby mjr » 27 Jul 2016, 11:59am

Bez wrote:The relevant offence is, whilst dependent on the state of the lights, defined with reference to a solid stop line on the road. [...]

...or the light itself if there no stop line on the road, so you don't get to jump a carriageway light just because the line's worn away or not repainted since resurfacing. Of course, some of them should have cycle bypasses but that's not the UK yet.

(edited to fix typo)
Last edited by mjr on 27 Jul 2016, 1:04pm, edited 1 time in total.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18750
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Vorpal » 27 Jul 2016, 12:59pm

BakfietsUK wrote: If anyone is interested (mjr) perhaps they may like to do some research on "Minority Stress" and extrapolate their findings to cyclists.

I'm not certain what you mean by this, and the way you put it certainly didn't lead me to any conclusions. I am familiar with the term 'minority stress', and whilst cylists could experience this in the UK, it's not clear to me what this has to do with this particular topic, or indeed the discussion about respect that this thread has (these types of threads always) become. The other thing is that minority stress is typical associated with a clearly identifiable group, such as an ethnic minority, or people who identify themselves as belonging to a minority (e.g. LGBTQ). Cyclists are just people when we aren't riding pedal cycles. We may not be identifiable as members of our 'group' unless we elect to be. While I can accept that (and have sometimes argued myself) that cyclists are a minority, we are in many ways unique with regards to minority attribution. We can choose it.

Whilst there may be a relationship between minority stress and respect, cyclists are just people and we can no more get all cyclists to behave universally well than we can any other group of people, furthermore, I'm not sure it would help. Cyclists are disrespected just for being cyclists, much the way some minorities are (or once were) disrespected just for what they represent. Cyclists are a socially acceptable pet hate. If a minority of us didn't jump red lights, we'd be hated merely for getting in the way. Or holding up traffic. Or running down dogs & small children. Or micturating in the hedges. Or leaving gel wrappers littering the countryside. Or all the money spent on 'cycling superhighways'. Or getting squashed by tipper lorries in London and closing roads....

I *do* agree with Bez and mjr, that respect on the roads is not something to be earned.

Disrespecting a cyclist because some cyclists jump red lights is no different than disrespecting a motorist because some motorists jump red lights, except that one is rather more likely to kill someone than the other is.

IMO, the blog that Bez linked is spot on.

Do you disrespect parents just because a small minority of them abuse their children? Child abuse is far more serious in nature and consequences than a cyclist jumping a red light, yet do abusive parents give all the others a bad name?

If you wish to argue that parents are not a minority, feel free to pick any other minority group you want. Substitute in the following phrase

All _______ deserve disrespect because some of you _________.

I challenge you to find *any* socially acceptable substitution for 'cyclists' and 'jump red lights'.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

AlaninWales
Posts: 1609
Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 1:47pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby AlaninWales » 27 Jul 2016, 1:03pm

Vorpal wrote:
BakfietsUK wrote: If anyone is interested (mjr) perhaps they may like to do some research on "Minority Stress" and extrapolate their findings to cyclists.

I'm not certain what you mean by this, and the way you put it certainly didn't lead me to any conclusions. I am familiar with the term 'minority stress', and whilst cylists could experience this in the UK, it's not clear to me what this has to do with this particular topic, or indeed the discussion about respect that this thread has (these types of threads always) become. The other thing is that minority stress is typical associated with a clearly identifiable group, such as an ethnic minority, or people who identify themselves as belonging to a minority (e.g. LGBTQ). Cyclists are just people when we aren't riding pedal cycles. We may not be identifiable as members of our 'group' unless we elect to be. While I can accept that (and have sometimes argued myself) that cyclists are a minority, we are in many ways unique with regards to minority attribution. We can choose it.

Whilst there may be a relationship between minority stress and respect, cyclists are just people and we can no more get all cyclists to behave universally well than we can any other group of people, furthermore, I'm not sure it would help. Cyclists are disrespected just for being cyclists, much the way some minorities are (or once were) disrespected just for what they represent. Cyclists are a socially acceptable pet hate. If a minority of us didn't jump red lights, we'd be hated merely for getting in the way. Or holding up traffic. Or running down dogs & small children. Or micturating in the hedges. Or leaving gel wrappers littering the countryside. Or all the money spent on 'cycling superhighways'. Or getting squashed by tipper lorries in London and closing roads....

I *do* agree with Bez and mjr, that respect on the roads is not something to be earned.

Disrespecting a cyclist because some cyclists jump red lights is no different than disrespecting a motorist because some motorists jump red lights, except that one is rather more likely to kill someone than the other is.

IMO, the blog that Bez linked is spot on.

Do you disrespect parents just because a small minority of them abuse their children? Child abuse is far more serious in nature and consequences than a cyclist jumping a red light, yet do abusive parents give all the others a bad name?

If you wish to argue that parents are not a minority, feel free to pick any other minority group you want. Substitute in the following phrase

All _______ deserve disrespect because some of you _________.

I challenge you to find *any* socially acceptable substitution for 'cyclists' and 'jump red lights'.

Worth repeating again.