Nasty Selfish Cyclists who don't give way to pedestrians

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Patsy

Nasty Selfish Cyclists who don't give way to pedestrians

Postby Patsy » 18 Oct 2007, 4:34pm

I am so angry I could scream.

This morning en route to work (London) I stopped, along with a couple of cars, to give way to a woman and young child on a zebra crossing. A cyclist came wizzing through and almost collided with the woman and child.

He just carried on, leaving the terrified woman plus all other witnesses in a state of disbelief and disgust.

Yet another reason for people to hate ALL cyclists and do their utmost to give us ALL a hard time.

I hope the selfish, SELFISH, nasty, ignorant [rude word removed] appreciated getting to his destination 3 nano seconds sooner.

:x

I feel better now

diapason
Posts: 475
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 7:13pm
Location: West Somerset, UK

Postby diapason » 18 Oct 2007, 6:09pm

It's idiots like that who give us all a bad name. But there are plenty of drivers who do exactly the same .............. and some of those are the same people who complain about cyclists :?

N
Advena ego sum in Terra

glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Postby glueman » 18 Oct 2007, 8:20pm

If we deny responsibility for such cyclists - and I think it's reasonable to do so, then motorists can call RLJ cars bad eggs too. We can't brand motorists as a group and not expect to be labelled ourselves. It's important we both put our houses in order. My sense is there are a lot of anti-social people out there and an increasing number are using bikes to break the rules, legal and moral.
It's getting cyclists a bad name and unfortunately there are too many apologists within our ranks.

eileithyia
Posts: 8120
Joined: 31 Jan 2007, 6:46pm
Location: Horwich Which is Lancs :-)

Postby eileithyia » 18 Oct 2007, 9:57pm

Problem is there is also the "them and us" cyclists. The majority of cyclists I see, on my daily commute, who use the pavement to get round red lights, jump across pedestrian crossings, do not use lights etc etc., are "utility" cyclists, using a bike until another form oftransport comes along etc. They habitually interpret traffic laws to suit themselves (if they even bother to find out what's what), riding as and where they want.
Generally I do not consider they are in the same class as most serious cyclists. Rather like the boy (and girl) racers who are out there being total d**k heads, showing off, speeding, jumping red lights etc. are not generally in the class as most car drivers.

Unfortunately like bad drivers, these bad cyclists get all of us tarred with the same brush as joe public cannot differentiate...

I might add I also plenty of other cyclists daily, who stick to the rules...

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Postby meic » 19 Oct 2007, 12:13am

These cyclists are putting themselves at risk but I dont have any sympathy for them. It would be quite reasonable for any pedestrian to push them away in self defence and a good place to push would be around one of their handlebar ends or arms which would unfortunately cause them to loose balance and come off. Then aware of how dangerous it is they would be less keen to repeat the game.
Unfortunatly this doesnt work on cars or lorries and I wouldnt put it past the Police charging the pedestrian with criminal damage to the car!

ransos
Posts: 247
Joined: 28 Jan 2007, 12:29pm

Postby ransos » 19 Oct 2007, 11:44am

Whether we like or not, cyclists are lumped together as a group, and so behaviour like this does reflect badly on us all. I've lost count of the number of times I've pointed out to motorists that pavement riders are no more my fault than drink drivers are their fault, but it makes no difference.

pigman
Posts: 1730
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:23pm
Location: Sheffield UK

Postby pigman » 19 Oct 2007, 11:48am

glueman wrote:If we deny responsibility for such cyclists - and I think it's reasonable to do so, then motorists can call RLJ cars bad eggs too. We can't brand motorists as a group and not expect to be labelled ourselves. It's important we both put our houses in order. My sense is there are a lot of anti-social people out there and an increasing number are using bikes to break the rules, legal and moral.
It's getting cyclists a bad name and unfortunately there are too many apologists within our ranks.


well put GM, can't think of a better way of saying it

ronyrash
Posts: 251
Joined: 28 Jan 2007, 1:11pm

cycling

Postby ronyrash » 19 Oct 2007, 2:48pm

i wonder how"stick to the rules cyclist".will cope with "naked streets"
next tory government promise,gets my vote.if by safely mounting the pavement i can let a lorry thru that is what i shall do.
rules are for the obediance of fools
and the guidence of sansable people

2Tubs
Posts: 1272
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 8:35pm
Location: Birmingham
Contact:

Re: cycling

Postby 2Tubs » 19 Oct 2007, 2:54pm

ronyrash wrote:i wonder how"stick to the rules cyclist".will cope with "naked streets"
next tory government promise,gets my vote.if by safely mounting the pavement i can let a lorry thru that is what i shall do.
rules are for the obediance of fools
and the guidence of sansable people


Are you saying that the example set by antisocial idiot who nearly run over someone crossing the road is how we should all ride, each selfish idiot out for themselves and it's tough if you get in the way.

It does sound very much like a Tory concept . . .

Gazza
Why not Look at Sheila's Wheelers E2E Journal
Or My Personal Site
Or My Tweets
Whatever you do, buy fair trade.
And smile.

eileithyia
Posts: 8120
Joined: 31 Jan 2007, 6:46pm
Location: Horwich Which is Lancs :-)

Postby eileithyia » 19 Oct 2007, 6:54pm

But how do we educate the masses that antisocial cycling is just that and gets all a bad name, try to say something and you get a mouthful of abuse.

camerongordon

Re: cycling

Postby camerongordon » 19 Oct 2007, 8:04pm

2Tubs wrote:
ronyrash wrote:i wonder how"stick to the rules cyclist".will cope with "naked streets"
next tory government promise,gets my vote.if by safely mounting the pavement i can let a lorry thru that is what i shall do.
rules are for the obediance of fools
and the guidence of sansable people


Are you saying that the example set by antisocial idiot who nearly run over someone crossing the road is how we should all ride, each selfish idiot out for themselves and it's tough if you get in the way.

It does sound very much like a Tory concept . . .

Gazza


Naked Streets is not a Tory idea - it came from the Netherlands.

No signs and minimal difference between road and pavement creates confusion and causes people to slow down. Excellent idea.
Still get idiots - but no amount of rules will get rid of them.

m

glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Postby glueman » 19 Oct 2007, 8:18pm

Been arguing for de-cluttered roads with the pointy corners put back in for years and been called a nutter. It's pleasing to see the idea has come of age.

Oracle
Posts: 415
Joined: 27 Feb 2007, 11:59pm

Postby Oracle » 19 Oct 2007, 8:57pm

eileithyia wrote:But how do we educate the masses that antisocial cycling is just that and gets all a bad name, try to say something and you get a mouthful of abuse.


Sadly, you will probably never educate some, as they know best and do not consider themselves in need of educating. Indeed, in their opinion, it is probably those that complain about such behaviour that need to ‘get a life’!. Perhaps in later life they may embrace more responsibility, perhaps not. I don’t think pressure from their peer group (ie fellow cyclists) will make much difference as they probably don’t associate with the values of others who consider such behaviour unreasonable.

Perhaps the best we can do is to dissociate ourselves with such people and campaign as hard as we can for zero tolerance of law breakers on 2 wheels. Ooops, must get reflectors for my Look pedals, as despite my very bright lights, very bright luminous jacket, luminous ankle bands and reflective patches/piping on my shoes, I’m breaking the law and as such I am an outcast!

eileithyia
Posts: 8120
Joined: 31 Jan 2007, 6:46pm
Location: Horwich Which is Lancs :-)

Postby eileithyia » 19 Oct 2007, 10:35pm

Likewise Oracle, likewise, so I'll be joining you as an outcast. Just surprised that someone else had suggested that we should put our own house in order, I doubt there are many people on here, or who are genuine tourists in the ranks of CTC, that would ride across a zebra crossing terrorising women and children.

glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Postby glueman » 19 Oct 2007, 10:57pm

eileithyia wrote:Likewise Oracle, likewise, so I'll be joining you as an outcast. Just surprised that someone else had suggested that we should put our own house in order, I doubt there are many people on here, or who are genuine tourists in the ranks of CTC, that would ride across a zebra crossing terrorising women and children.


I'm sure you're right but would be prepared to bet there's a swathe of commuters who indulge in low level stuff like crossing before peds have cleared/begun to enter zebra. And red light jumping is seen as a victimless crime by many cyclists, CTC members included.

The one that gets me is the status switch - one moment fully fledged road vehicle with expectation of legal rights, the next pavement hopping to pedalling pedestrian bristling with get real indignation at the first adverse comment. Like drivers, too many cyclists are secure in their own reaction speeds which tell you nothing about those of the vulnerable party.