Stupid cyclists

Status
Not open for further replies.

Buffer68

Member
Joined
3 Jun 2009
Messages
256
Location
Bovey Tracey, Devon
Before I start, I am not anti-cycling - I used to spend most of my younger days out on bikes. However a few valid points here:

1. Why when I was at a red light today did a cyclist come down the left hand side and keep going through the red light?

2. Why when half of a pavement has been given over to the cyclists that winged because there wasn't a cyclepath do they still ride on the road alongside the cyclepath?

3. If motorcyclists have to wear helmets by law why don't push bikers have to?

It seems that there is one law for motorists and another for bikes.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

richa2002

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,142
1) The rules are that a cyclist can't pass a red light so the rules are the same regarding motorists and cyclists there.
2) Hasn't noticed there's a cycle path, wasn't a convenient place to join it?
3) Motorbikes generally travel a lot faster than a bicycle?
 

devon_metro

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2005
Messages
7,563
Location
London
2. Why when half of a pavement has been given over to the cyclists that winged because there wasn't a cyclepath do they still ride on the road alongside the cyclepath?

Many cyclepaths are completely inadequate and end at the most stupid places, and don't get me started on the gates across the path every few hundred metres meaning you must slow down <(<(<(<(
 

90019

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2008
Messages
6,642
Location
Edinburgh/Leeds
1. Why when I was at a red light today did a cyclist come down the left hand side and keep going through the red light?
The rules are the same for cyclists about going through red lights but it can be much safer to run a red light when there's nothing coming than to be starting off at a junction with a load of traffic behind you.

2. Why when half of a pavement has been given over to the cyclists that winged because there wasn't a cyclepath do they still ride on the road alongside the cyclepath?
I dont know, but cyclists have every right to be on the road.
Often people walk in them as well, meaning that you have to try and avoid them, it's worse if they;r going the same way as you and you don't know what they're about to do.

3. If motorcyclists have to wear helmets by law why don't push bikers have to?
In countries where it is against the law to not wear a helmet, it has been shown that the number of injuries and fatalities have actually increased.
You can't really compare the two either, motorbikes generally have a much higher top speed, and are also allowed inplaces the bicycles aren't, like motorways.

An interesting fact too, is that mototrbikes are not allowed in the ASL for cyclists, and any that use them are technically breaking the law.
 

devon_metro

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2005
Messages
7,563
Location
London
2. Why when half of a pavement has been given over to the cyclists that winged because there wasn't a cyclepath do they still ride on the road alongside the cyclepath?
Forgot to mention the seemingly blind people who do not move out of the cycle path despite approaching a bike travelling in the region of 20mph (who is late for work :lol:)
 

Daimler

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,197
Location
Hertfordshire
I should point out that I enjoy cycling a lot, so my view may be somewhat blinkered, but here goes!

Before I start, I am not anti-cycling - I used to spend most of my younger days out on bikes. However a few valid points here:

1. Why when I was at a red light today did a cyclist come down the left hand side and keep going through the red light?
I do have sympathy for the motorist irritated by this. I personally never run red lights, but as 90019 said, sometimes it's a wise move - as anyone at a set of traffic lights with cars behind wanting to turn left will know.

2. Why when half of a pavement has been given over to the cyclists that winged because there wasn't a cyclepath do they still ride on the road alongside the cyclepath?
Many reasons. As has been said above, it's often hard to join them, they're often narrow, start and end in pointless, impractical places, and - worryingly often - suddenly start/end somewhere where rejoining the road to continue on your journey is frankly dangerous. Furthermore, pedestrians often walk in them (and I sympathise with this too - bikes should be on the road!). Cyclepaths also often end up leading you where you don't want to go - or prevent you from turning off where you want - not to mention they're often full of the gravel, broken glass, etc. that has been pushed to the side of the road by cars - risking punctures.

3. If motorcyclists have to wear helmets by law why don't push bikers have to?
As has been said above, it is a contentious issue whether or not they actually improve safety. I personally always wear a helmet, but if someone doesn't want to, I won't stop them. This always seems to me like an argument brought out by motorcyclists who don't want to wear a helmet themselves, or motorists who just want to moan at cyclists.

It seems that there is one law for motorists and another for bikes.
Well, quite. They are very different vehicles...
 
Last edited:

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,448
Location
South Wales
Try having a cyclist come up along side you when you are driving a large bus.

This recently happedned to me in cardiff, idiot came right up on my blind spot as i was just going to pull off at the traffic lights near cardiff central station, then had the nerve to shout at me, even though it was his fault.

He was lucky i hadnt started moving otherwise i may have crushed him
& yes i have seen cylists go through red lights
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
5,602
Location
Somewhere
I havent got a problem with cyclists passing a red light just get infront of the queue, as others have said, it is probably safer.

However, those that pass a red light AND the junction or crossing it protects, or those that ride on the path to avoid the lights is out of order and gets right on my wick!
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,448
Location
South Wales
Try being a cyclist when a bus overtakes you then immediately pulls into a ****ing bus stop.
I have seen a bus in front of mine do that , certainly i had a thought in my head hoping he had seen the cyclist and wouldnt crush him.

I do enjoy cycling and normally ride to local stations or spots where i can get some good pictures of trains.
 

Tom B

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Messages
4,509
Yes some cyclists break rules and motorists get all annoyed by it.

These are the same motorists who hate being held to account - just look at the reaction to speed cameras!
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
47,540
Location
Yorkshire
Before I start, I am not anti-cycling - I used to spend most of my younger days out on bikes. However a few valid points here:

1. Why when I was at a red light today did a cyclist come down the left hand side and keep going through the red light?
Because they broke the Highway Code, just as some car drivers do.
2. Why when half of a pavement has been given over to the cyclists that winged because there wasn't a cyclepath do they still ride on the road alongside the cyclepath?
What a stupid question. The short answer is: because they are entitled to, and don't you dare suggest otherwise. For the long answer, see posts by others already on this topic.
3. If motorcyclists have to wear helmets by law why don't push bikers have to?
Because they go at about 3 to 4 times the speed?
It seems that there is one law for motorists and another for bikes.
There are many laws, but remember that cars are lethal and cause far more damage than bikes in a collision.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
5,602
Location
Somewhere
but remember that cars are lethal and cause far more damage than bikes in a collision.
Well that depends on how you look at it. Car Vs cyclist then yes, the biker will more than likly come off worse.

Bike Vs pedestrian then it is usually the pedestrian that fairs worse...and in some cases has been proved to be fatal to the pedestrain.

These are the same motorists who hate being held to account - just look at the reaction to speed cameras!
If you ask mosts motorists, you will see that they have no objections to speed cameras per sae, but rather than the placement of them.
 

theblackwatch

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
15 Feb 2006
Messages
10,369
One thing I've noticed in recent years is the increase in the number of cyclists who seem to veer onto, or permanently ride on, pavements rather than sticking to where they should be. It seems that nowadays this is perfectly acceptable behaviour and that I, as a pedestrian, am expected to get out of their way. Well I hate to disappoint you, but next time I won't. The law is quite specific:
64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.
[Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129]

(See http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069837 )

Is cycling proficiency still taught at schools?
 

90019

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2008
Messages
6,642
Location
Edinburgh/Leeds
How about a few observations from the other side:

1. Why are many motorists happy to drive along taking up space in bike lanes?

2. Why do almost all motorists think that they have more right to be on the roads than cyclists, and see no problem in cutting them up, pulling across them at junctions, pulling out in front of them, etc.

3. Why do so many motorists sit in the ASLs when they are provided at junctions? As these are for cyclists only.
 
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,008
Location
Milton Keynes
I went cycling with a friend yesterday and I was pulling out of a station car park (we were meeting there) a van driver let me go out, immediately after I got out of the car park, there was a miniture roundabout with proper traffic islands, the van driver just drove past me as I was at the traffic island, I had to do an emergency stop for fear of getting killed, so as the saying goes "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" we can be complete d**k-heads to them for douing that to us
 

devon_metro

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2005
Messages
7,563
Location
London
Roundabouts are always fun on bikes. I take great pleasure in emerging when I am supposed to despite the person coming from the right thinking it is ok for them to charge over.

They get a nice abusive comment from me. Have a nice day :)
 

Tom B

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Messages
4,509
If you ask mosts motorists, you will see that they have no objections to speed cameras per sae, but rather than the placement of them.
Surely motorists should be adhering to the speed limit all the time, so where the cameras are located is irrelevant.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,520
I'm sure that bikes can be consdiered as either pedestrians or vehicles, which is why they skip red lights; they're effectively "crossing with the green man". However, I am positive that they are not in fact allowed to do this. It's dangerous to pass a red light,and I've witnessed many near-injuries caused by this irresponsible behaviour.

I think they should be forced to wait at the red light like every other vehicle. I have full respect for cyclists; they have the right to use the bus/cycle lanes, they get to sit in front of you at some traffic lights, they have as much right to be on the roads as everyone else. I'd be lying if I didn't get a bit annoyed with them at times (I always encounter them in places you can't overtake them safely :( ), but they have the right to be there. However, they shouldn't be putting people at risk, which is what they do when they cross a red light.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Surely motorists should be adhering to the speed limit all the time, so where the cameras are located is irrelevant.
Correct. Don't get me started on the anti-speed camera crusade, people who support this tend to be people who've been caught out!

You should adhere to the speed limit at all times, so cameras shouldn't actually make any difference.
 

90019

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2008
Messages
6,642
Location
Edinburgh/Leeds
However, they shouldn't be putting people at risk, which is what they do when they cross a red light.
But it can also be the case that cyclists put themselves at risk in certain situations where they don't run the red light.
If you've ever had to try and get through a narrow section with motorists determined to get past, you'll know what I mean, it's even worse when it's at a junction with traffic lights.
Or the people who sit right on your back wheel when you're starting off at lights, or who come within inches of you with their mirrors in their determination to get past.
 

Daimler

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,197
Location
Hertfordshire
If you ask mosts motorists, you will see that they have no objections to speed cameras per sae, but rather than the placement of them.
:D Nonsense! The 'oh, they should only be in certain places' argument is the one used by those who speed as a matter of course. As others have already pointed out, if you're always sticking to the speed limit, who cares where they are?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
One thing I've noticed in recent years is the increase in the number of cyclists who seem to veer onto, or permanently ride on, pavements rather than sticking to where they should be. It seems that nowadays this is perfectly acceptable behaviour and that I, as a pedestrian, am expected to get out of their way.
It does seem to have become quite common in London - I recall a particularly...erm...hair-raising encounter with one on Euston Road on Friday - between St. Pancras and Euston at rush hour. Hardly the quietest time on the pavement!
 
Last edited:

theblackwatch

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
15 Feb 2006
Messages
10,369
It does seem to have become quite common in London - I recall a particularly...erm...hair-raising encounter with one on Euston Road on Friday - between St. Pancras and Euston at rush hour. Hardly the quietest time on the pavement!
Following on from earlier, I even saw some idiot on his bike this afternoon whilst I was round at my parents house helping with the gardening. Some teenage youth came tearning down the footpath (probably breaking the 20mph speed limit which applies on the road, but there again he would no doubt argue that he wasn't actually on the road), then went right across the road onto the footpath on the other side. There was no explanation for this ridiculous behaviour, other than perhaps he thought the girl of a similar age who was cycling behind him might be impressed by the way he was riding. Fortunately, the road was quiet otherwise he could have easily been mown down the way he cycled right across from one side of the road to the other.

Having commuted to work over the years by both bike and car, I would say there are both idiot car drivers and cyclists out there. One time at work I was that furious about one guy cutting me up that I found out who the car belonged to and rang him up and gave him a mouthful - he was very apologetic! Eually, driving home from work last winter in the dark on an unlit busy A road, I encountered a cyclist riding on there dressed in dark clothes and with no lights - suicide attempt perhaps?
 

Lesjordans

Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
353
Location
Glasgow
Correct. Don't get me started on the anti-speed camera crusade, people who support this tend to be people who've been caught out!

You should adhere to the speed limit at all times, so cameras shouldn't actually make any difference.
Bah im not for speed cameras, but ive not been caught either, i just feel its a bit money-making! Down here they point it to the motorway cut off where the limit goes 70 - 40 even though there is no need for it to be 40 at that particular bit. I think its more that car drivers drive at a speed safe for the conditions, for example a speed camera will flash at 31mph despite it being completely safe to do that speed, but wont flash at 29mph where the conditions are awful and 29mph is too fast for it. This whole 60-50 on country roads is irrelevent anway, and I doubt it will make a difference to anybodies driving (except at the speed cameras) - and will just mean they are going to be breaking the limit by an extra 10mph. Sometimes I do wish cyclists would just use the pavement, especially if its clearly empty, rather than having to go into the right lane with the fast drivers to overtake them :(
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
5,602
Location
Somewhere
For the record, Ive been driving for a number of years now and my record is pretty spot less. Ive never had any points, never been pulled over and Ive never even had a parket ticket! So its certainly not a case of me being "caught out".
 

Daimler

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,197
Location
Hertfordshire
I would say there are both idiot car drivers and cyclists out there.
Absolutely - just this afternoon we were driving down a dual carriageway near the town centre with another car beside us (more or less). The roadside is marked with quite a high hedge. As we were driving along (40mph), a bike suddenly emerged from the hedgerows, causing both us and the other car to brake sharply. The 'cyclist''s (not that he could be called that) reaction? He basically stopped in the middle of the road in front of us. Not impressive.
 

gingerheid

Member
Joined
2 Apr 2006
Messages
1,001
I regularly ignore a particular cycle path and go on the road because

- I can go faster on the road than I can on a pavement were everyone ignores the cycle path anyway
- I feel safer on the road because people coming out driveways can see me
- I don't have to stop and and wait to cross all the side roads pedestrian style
- In the road I do not have to swerve round the big trees that are in the middle of the cycle path

There's another place where there's a very expensive cycle bridge cyclists only use one direction because to get at it going the other direction you have to make two dangerous crossings, one partially blind.

The council were told before they spent the money that it was unlikely anyone would use it...
 

whoshotjimmi

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
340
Location
Drighlington, West Yorkshire
In my opinion, cyclists have very little regard for their own safety. They often cause more danger to themselves than cars ever could. I do think that there are inconsiderate drivers who make life difficult for them - you will always get that in life - but cyclists rarely respect the rules of the road and seem blinkered to the fact that they are vulnerable. If they do not want to wear helmets then fair enough. But I will say that I had a crash on a scooter with another motorist at low speed - a speed that a cyclist could easily attain - and my helmet saved my life that day. I'm pretty sure I would not be here now were it not for that.

Anyway - it could be worse. They could be on horses. Now there is a group of people who really do need to bugger off.
 
Last edited:

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,520
Bah im not for speed cameras...
Of course, you have that lovely camera on the way into Glasgow, but at least it's well signposted and easily visible.

Actually, I think there is an allowance for cars entering a reduced speed limit. But the area where you're referring to, with the 40mph limit off the M8 is because traffic coming from the A8 is subject to the same 40mph limit for the whole length of the road.

I'm also opposed to this 50mph on rural roads, as it's really unnecessary. I have a lot of rural roads on my back door, and I can't think of one where it's safe to travel in excess of 50mph. Indeed, I can think of many where driving in excess of 30mph is unsafe! People should be using their judgement where the national speed limit applies; no speed limit should be a target.
 

156499

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2007
Messages
185
Location
Glasgow
Speaking of stupid cylist, I was at Stirling on sat whilst the 1011 1H09 Glasgow Queen Street-Inverness pulled in, train was already full from Queen st. and standing from Stirling thanks to Scotrails 158 playing hide and seek, anyway.... the 4 Cylist were papped off the train and told to get the next train and make a reservation... Next train would of been the 1611 1H15 Glasgow Queen Street-Inverness, that 1011 to Inverness has always been a discrace
 

Lesjordans

Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
353
Location
Glasgow
Of course, you have that lovely camera on the way into Glasgow, but at least it's well signposted and easily visible.

Actually, I think there is an allowance for cars entering a reduced speed limit. But the area where you're referring to, with the 40mph limit off the M8 is because traffic coming from the A8 is subject to the same 40mph limit for the whole length of the road.

I'm also opposed to this 50mph on rural roads, as it's really unnecessary. I have a lot of rural roads on my back door, and I can't think of one where it's safe to travel in excess of 50mph. Indeed, I can think of many where driving in excess of 30mph is unsafe! People should be using their judgement where the national speed limit applies; no speed limit should be a target.
Yes but at the same point, some 30 zones are ridiculous and its probably safer and more efficient to be doing 40mph in 5th gear than 30mph in 4th gear (safer in that you wont have some frustrated driver tailgaiting you - i hate that!). the 70-40 bit i was talking about is the M8 coatbridge exit where its left lane then immediate left into Bargeddie. The police hide there which makes you think its more revenue generating than safety! It should be more a case of common sense - surely its better to drive at a safe speed for the conditions rather than just aiming for the speed limit (which never ususally takes into account the road conditions). Some cyclists should definitely use the pavement though, especially coming up to roundabouts where its annoying to slow down to their speed, and dangerous (or impossible if its a right only lane for example) to overtake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top