How does this compare to the many hundreds of thousands of motorists that do this every single day?
It isnt in the same league, the motorists are a much bigger problem.
However the cyclists remain a problem and should also be dealt with, the punishments being imposed should reflect the severity of the risk and the outcome. Give the motorists £100 fine and 3 points, give the cyclists a £25 fine. But dont acquiesce to vehicles imposing priority where it doesnt exist.
The utility cyclist wrote:What was the speed of the 'blasting' through 15mph/20/30/50/100mph? How does this compare to the many hundreds of thousands of motorists that do this every single day? Here's an example, were the pedestrian's overriding feeling “*&£*#£& MOTORISTS" how much potential harm would they have done HAD they struck them, we already know that not a single death in the last 6 years at least on pedestrian crossings were at fault people riding bikes, we do know that isn't the case with motorists driving their weapon of choice https://twitter.com/abperson_cycle/stat ... 5165749249
Traffic doesn't have to stop until someone is actually on the crossing.
But it is illegal to overtake a vehicle that has stopped to allow somebody to cross, so all those on "our" side of the road are breaking the law, even if those on the other side are not.
Putting aside the criminal aspects, the cars on the other side certainly should have stopped to allow the pedestrian to cross, even if not legally forced to do so.
Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing
look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
meic wrote: I agree it is disgusting conduct but it is still far more likely to be a car killing somebody on a zebra crossing than a cyclist, even a club cyclist.
You hear this point a fair bit.
It's not really relevant in my opinion. Prattish dangerous selfish behaviour is independent of what you are riding/driving. Both can cause serious injury or worse. If one of these idiot cyclists had hit and injured/killed the poor woman, it would be irrelevant if at the same time in another part of the country there were two/three or whatever incidents with cars. Sounds to me as if these cyclists can't wait to jump in the car and do more serious damage.
On the brixton road a couple of weeks ago I saw a careful considerate driver, mindful of cyclists, clearly signalling to go left into a side road. A clear signal. But hesitating. Three cyclists went through on her inside.
If a thread is discussing inconsiderate club riders (cyclists) is it a natural thread progression or digression to divert it to how bad motorists are? Is it really the case that there's not enough "motorists are so bad threads" to allow a discussion about the bad behaviours of cyclists?
I think it is a fair point to raise issues with cyclists. I think it is also fair to allow discussion if those issues. Perhaps it is possible to discuss them one day when we are enlightened enough to be able to focus on bad motorists in one thread and bad cyclists in another.
I hope to learn from an enlightened discussion about bad cyclists one day without it descending into a discussion about a) bar drivers do worse, b) motorists can do more damage (not obvious that), c) don't prosecute cyclists until all motorists transgressions are prosecuted fully first, d) it's not a serious transgression because it's a carried out on a bike, e) cyclists are not the same, f) don't pick on cyclists... Ppppllllleeeeeassssseeee!!
Tangled Metal wrote:If a thread is discussing inconsiderate club riders (cyclists) is it a natural thread progression or digression to divert it to how bad motorists are? Is it really the case that there's not enough "motorists are so bad threads" to allow a discussion about the bad behaviours of cyclists?
I think it is a fair point to raise issues with cyclists. I think it is also fair to allow discussion if those issues. Perhaps it is possible to discuss them one day when we are enlightened enough to be able to focus on bad motorists in one thread and bad cyclists in another.
I hope to learn from an enlightened discussion about bad cyclists one day without it descending into a discussion about a) bar drivers do worse, b) motorists can do more damage (not obvious that), c) don't prosecute cyclists until all motorists transgressions are prosecuted fully first, d) it's not a serious transgression because it's a carried out on a bike, e) cyclists are not the same, f) don't pick on cyclists... Ppppllllleeeeeassssseeee!!
Because it wasnt just the behaviour being called out by the OP it was targeted at one group of users.
I am fully behind the OP in calling out the behaviour but not just specifically for cyclists.
I am all for a bit of inconsiderate git/ dangerous idiot bashing but not when it is being limited to cyclist bashing.
Normally I agree but I think on this forum there is a need for a full discussion about behaviour of cyclists. I don't think there's been a proper discussion about the state of cycling behaviour in this country, good and bad. Any time criticism of one case of bad cycling behaviour a defensive wall appears to stifle discussion or criticism of cyclist behaviour.
There is a need to discuss club attitudes, probably minority but as someone who doesn't ride with a club group I do see problems with identifiable club riders at times.
If CUK forum isn't the place to talk about issues then where is? Perhaps cyclists should discuss good and bad cycling behaviour to learn from such discussions. Perhaps as possibly more interested / knowledgeable / educated cyclists at should call out bad cycling behaviour when we see it. As in on the road and online. Just an idea.
Perhaps as possibly more interested / knowledgeable / educated cyclists at should call out bad cycling behaviour when we see it. As in on the road and online. Just an idea.
I fully agree, and I think that we do so on this forum apart from a few extremists.
That doesnt mean that we should go along with selective, targeted criticism aimed specifically at cyclists when they are not even the main problem.
@Sweep Am I right in assuming from your post that I am not alone on this site in wanting a discussion about cycling behaviour issues as a way that we can learn and improve? That it is a benefit to openly discuss bad cycling behaviour as well as bad motoring behaviour? That there is benefit from solely discussing one or other separately when a thread is started on one or the other mode of transport?
If so then are we the only ones? Anyone else happy with a focused discussion on cycling or motoring behaviour when such a thread comes up?
A quick look at page one of this thread shows pretty overwhelming condemnation of the acts reported about these cyclists.
In the OP were the words
Such behaviour like this only serves to give all cyclists a bad name.
That opens up the debate to include other road users, it would seem worthwhile pointing out the inequity of giving one group a bad name when a far greater offender remains with their name intact.
meic wrote:I fully agree, and I think that we do so on this forum apart from a few extremists.
That doesnt mean that we should go along with selective, targeted criticism aimed specifically at cyclists when they are not even the main problem.
Is it bad idea to selectively look at issues raised about one type of transport with an aim to improve cycling or motoring behaviour?
Poster says cyclist did this act that I think was bad because... Cue discussion of what the "bad cyclist" did wrong, what they should have done, what highway code rule / law broken, etc. We all learn.
Alternatively discussion starts then activist argues strongly motorists do that too let's just go after them. Discussion descends into nothing productive. I for one don't get little gems of highway laws or cycling best practice like I often get in similar discussions on other sites. I don't always get these positive gems if a discussion, but I get more from other cycling forums than the forum if the CUK. Missed opportunity to use the forum positively.
meic wrote:A quick look at page one of this thread shows pretty overwhelming condemnation of the acts reported about these cyclists.
In the OP were the words
Such behaviour like this only serves to give all cyclists a bad name.
That opens up the debate to include other road users, it would seem worthwhile pointing out the inequity of giving one group a bad name when a far greater offender remains with their name intact.
Page one fit through before the extremists found the thread perhaps?
I don't see why discussing the bad name given to cyclists means it opens the discussion to motorists too. It's still focused on cycling and cyclists surely?
@Sweep Am I right in assuming from your post that I am not alone on this site in wanting a discussion about cycling behaviour issues as a way that we can learn and improve? That it is a benefit to openly discuss bad cycling behaviour as well as bad motoring behaviour? That there is benefit from solely discussing one or other separately when a thread is started on one or the other mode of transport?
If so then are we the only ones? Anyone else happy with a focused discussion on cycling or motoring behaviour when such a thread comes up? >>
tangled.
agree with the sense of your post.
The other approach I don't understand at all.
Strikes me as "my country right or wrong".
If I criticise a cyclist for bad "roadcraft" (polite term) it doesn't imply for a second that I am somehow giving bad car drivers some sort of free pass.
Just because someone rides a bike it doesn't make them above criticism.
Even less so these days when cycling has (incredibly with the perspective of a few decades) become so popular.
It attracts/encompasses all sorts.
Many (and the vast majority on this forum) seem to be thoroughly decent sorts.
Some, it must be said, are complete ****s.
I ride in London and there are some (I stress only some) awful cyclists.
Overtaking on the inside is one of my particular gripes.
Or even overtaking very close on the outside without so much as a bell or call.
Which is ironic as the London Cycling Campaign is currently running a campaign about close passes (by cars).
If you dare to call some of these cyclists out they can become very aggressive and entitled.
I have spent fair bits of time away from London over the last few years.
And need to adapt to more aggressive riding whenever I return.
In London I spend a lot of time looking over my LEFT shoulder - for ****s coming up the inside. Twice from my memory I have been overtaken on the inside when I was on the inside of an HGV. My riding was safe because of the traffic conditions but decidedly not when some *** comes up the inside of me.
Maybe it's because I'm a northerner, but I think a *** is a ***, no matter what they are riding/sat on/clothed in.
Last edited by Sweep on 11 Jul 2018, 12:13am, edited 1 time in total.
