Bl**dy cyclists! (Pt 2)

yep those are the bastxxxs!! And of course one doesn't wear a helmet because...........!

It reminds me of the film of someone driving through Paris, I think, at 90mph!

james

Nerves of steel, and the brains of an amoeba!

Very cool. What a great way to get about, eh?

haha city cyclists vs lemmings, nice video

ps. Some how it seems as tho some of them are riding on the right side of the road.. (London cyclists that is )

Us car drivers spend 2 mins on a yellow line we are fined. Cyclists run red lights ignore the road rules and nothing is done. Then they complain when they get hit. They get what they deserve. licence them make them take a test and make them pay for their co2 emmissions. Also make sure these numpties have insurance.

I await the abuse.

quote:

I await the abuse.

Or support, tax caravans too.

quote:

Originally posted by Don Hooper:
Us car drivers spend 2 mins on a yellow line we are fined. Cyclists run red lights ignore the road rules and nothing is done. Then they complain when they get hit. They get what they deserve. licence them make them take a test and make them pay for their co2 emmissions. Also make sure these numpties have insurance.

I await the abuse.

Insurance doen't seem to stop UK drivers killing 2,500 people every year, including around 600 pedestrians.

You have missed the point. Cyclists cause death injury and damage on the roads too and they do not to take financial responsibility for their actions. A cyclist damages your car due to their lack of care or skill and you try getting the numpties to pay for the damage. Inurance does not stop death, damage etc but at least it pays for it.

Pedestrians - If they are stupid enough to walk/run infront of cars,bikes etc without looking then it's their fault. All I want is for all road users to take responsibility for their actions.

Please note I take my driving responsibilities seriously. I have passed the Institute of Advanced Motorists test and train advance driving skills on a voluntary basis. The actions of the cyclist in the video are appauling. They should be locked up.

As a pedestrian, a driver, and a cyclist, and one who makes use of the road, mostly as a cyclist, daily, I think that the evidence is that you can see careless drivers, cyclists and pedestrians in equal measure.

The probable reason for requiring motorists to have third party insurance is that motorised transport has the potential for considerably greater damage to others than cyclists or pedestrians.

The law governing each of these three road-using groups should be upheld by the Police, but in reality it takes some doing to get them interested in pedestrians or cyclists.

Not a conclusion, but a fact of life. Anyone using the road should walk, drive, or cycle with regard for the fact that they share the road with some people who do not take enough care for the consequences of their actions, be they drunk pedestrians, anti-social cyclists, or careless vehicle-drivers. The careless will always be with us ...

ATB from George

Totally agree. All road users should understand their responsibilities. The authorities should treat all road users the same also. Just in case the anti speed lobby starts. Accients are not caused by speed they are caused by inappropiate use of speed. But I dare say that is another thread.

Speed is indeed a vexed question. Drivers and cyclists are both capable of going fast enough to really fox other road users. A cycle can easily manage thirty miles an hour on a good mettled road, and this can lead to pedestrians making incorrect judgments of how fast the cyclist is approaching, not least because most cyclist tend to go nearer ten miles an hour, so the expectation is ... The trouble is that if the cyclist crashes he may do the pedestrian a serious injury, but is likely to do himself a much greater one.

Speed in respect of cars and motorbikes is related. Not all motorists are equally capable and some will be less effective at judging the speed of other road users. It may well be that the speed of the other road user is legal and safe for the capabilities of that other road user. Now this is the point about saying what is a safe speed to adopt. Is it the speed that the driver adopts within his or her own capability [and considering the capability of the vehicle as well] or the speed, which accounts for other less able drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians?

An interesting observation is that some sorts of cars have much lower insurance groupings than others. The Volvo 240 is a large and very strong car with the capacity to do massive damage to others in the event of a crash, and yet it is very cheap to insure. Is this because Volvo drivers as a set are simply better drivers, or because the safety of the vehicle is notoriously fine in practice [if not Euro-crash-tests]?

I suspect that the answer is to be found in the fact that Volvo 240s are so slow that they discomfort other abilities of other road users rather less than cars with greater speed performance!

The debate about speed is very complex, and cannot be summed up in one line, or even quite in one paragraph!

ATB from George

One aspect of speed that the anti speed lobby do not take ino account is that if speed limits are strickly enforced then drivers will spend too much time looking at their speedos and not the road. A technique I teach is getting drivers to learn the engine note of their cars variouse speeds and gears. That way drivers don't need to look at their speedos they can concentrate on the road. Another issue for safe driving whilst maintaining good progress is to teach drivers to look further ahead than they do naturly. This gives them more time to plan their driving. Maybe I should start a thread on advanced driving techniques, I will go and find my anorack with the fury hood and orange lining.

A technique I teach is getting drivers to learn the engine note of their cars variouse speeds and gears.

I drive in 30 mph zones in third gear on the Volvo and the tuning engine note has allowed me to avoid the speed cameras attention for over twelve years of driving the model! Great minds think alike. I rarely attend to the speedometer in built up areas, because I drive by ear, and can leave my eyes to work the road!

As for cycling, one learns to ride with eyes in the a**e as well, and certainly considering a long forward view, and even the possibility of stationary cars' doors being opened without a proper look first, and so on.

Part of driving instruction might well include a days' tution riding a cycle in heavy traffic, whilst maintaining useful progress! I am sure that cycling has usefully informed my own car driving.

ATB from George

George, Maybe you could consider doing the IAM advance driving cource. Details can be found on iam.org web site. It is an eye opener and has improved my enjoyment of driving. On a plus point it reduced my insurance costs. For example I pay £400pa to insure a Mazda RX8 fully comp with full busines use. Without the IAM ticket I would be looking at £100 more.

I actually do not enjoy driving. That is why I am so much a user of the cycle these days. I do enjoy riding the bike even in the rain and cold! I am sure that my driving is more than just adequate, but I am aware of my shortcomings! For all of thirty years of experience and only one incident in the time, and no prosecutions, or speeding tickets [fingers crossed for the future!], I am get increasingly nervous of other road users, be they cyclists, pedestrians, or other drivers. I can see that some might think my lack of pleasure comes from owning the car equivalent of a military tank, but I enjoy its momentum, and really hate the rattly soft feel of most more modern compact cars. I keep the mileage as low as possible, on account of the petrol consumption being in the region of 35 to 36 MPG as a rule, though I can still get 40 plus on a long amiable ramble in good traffic conditions.

I intend to give the car up altogether when the Volvo expires, or requires a too expensive repair. But even so I only pay £180 PA for my insurance, which is probably unbeatable by now. All with the same company - the NFU Mutual. Not the cheapest for new drivers, but very friendly and cost effective in the long term.

So I shall not be putting myself up for the stress of another driving test at advanced level. I am always a bag of nerves under test conditions, and nerves can beyond a certain point actually make the driving worse. It took three goes to pass my original driving test. I passed first time for agricultural tractors as a 16 year old. I am not sure that is allowed before 17 these days, and quite right to if this is the case!

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by Don Hooper:
George, Maybe you could consider doing the IAM advance driving cource. Details can be found on iam.org web site. It is an eye opener and has improved my enjoyment of driving. On a plus point it reduced my insurance costs. For example I pay £400pa to insure a Mazda RX8 fully comp with full busines use. Without the IAM ticket I would be looking at £100 more.

You live in London and ENJOY driving? You're more patient than I am.

W.R.T. your previous post that alleges that cyclists cause death, injury and damage without taking financial responsibility is perhaps trivially true, but statistically insignificant alongside the carnage that motorists cause on a constant basis.

Of all the things we should be enraged about, "dangerous" cycling is trivial. We are only enraged by it because at some level, we are jealous. Of youth, freedom, speed, fitness, risk-taking and adventure. We (and by we, I mean you) sit there, stressed and stuck in traffic, in our expensive but ultimately unfulfilling, metal-box status symbols and just fume.

I love driving, even in London. My issue is with all road users who do not drive/ride responsibly. I don't a problem with the fit youth. I have a bike and I am fit enough to use it even at 52.

All road users can cause death and injury if they are not careful. The cyclists in the video were reckless (and yes I'm sure it was fun) but the public highway is no place for acting like that.

Dangerous cycling is not trivial even by degree and any annoyance is caused by the fact that the authorities do nothing about it. (views from and police members please).

I pay my road tax, petrol tax, insurance and all the other costs associated with motoring and get demonised by the anti speed lobby, the loathsome traffic wardens, the green tree hugging global warming idiots. But worst of all I have to put up with idiot cyclists who pay nothing to act like irresponsible numpties.

Give the roads back to the people who pay for them.

That feels better.

Don

So you are bleating because cyclists do not pay tax.

Awww you poor little man.

I run 2 cars and pay tax on them and I also use a push bike and on that I pay no tax. But before you bleat that you are subsidising me, I had to pay the best part of six figures in tax last year, so here is one cyclist who is bloody subsidising you.

Also if you are 51, you are getting into the heart attack age and cycling will help to keep you fit. Personally the only reason I do not want you to have a heart attack is that your treatment will cost the tax payer money and you will be subsidised by the fit and healthy cyclists.

My point is simple, everyone subsidises everyone in todays society. Your argument is drivel.

Regards

Mick

dont pull any punches mick.

quote:

Originally posted by Don Hooper:

Give the roads back to the people who pay for them.

Motorists continue to be heavily subsidized in their choice of transport. The true costs of motoring are externalised and not seen in registration, fuel taxes, insurance etc. I pay my fair share of tax. The user-pays argument just doesn't wash. Yes, give the roads back to those who pay for them. That is; pedestrians and cyclists. After all, we were here first.

You're annoyed by the "authorities" too? My goal in life is to be less annoyed. Being annoyed is no fun.

Well, I didn't expect a sort of Spanish Inquisition...

quote:

Originally posted by 151:
dont pull any punches mick.

Mick I am not bleating as you put it about the tax issue. My main complaint is about lack of responsibility.

If I have a heart attack I will not burden the NHS as I pay for BUPA. I also go to the gym three times a week and are very fit for my age.

I too pay a great deal of tax. I am an MD of a limited co and I run a self employed busines as well. All I want as I have stated before is for all road users to act in a responsible manner.

As for drivel, before making such a comment maybe one should look in to a mirror first?

yes don, well said.

Don

You are a typical clapped out old Brit .. you love moaning.

We could all sit at the side of the road and if so inclined could probably make a list of dozens of instances of "irresponsible behaviour" from all manner of road users.

Nothing is perfect but our roads are safer today than ever before, so if nothing else we are moving in the right direction.

Cycling needs to be encouraged and sniping from miserable old men like you does nothing to help matters.

We need a lot more cycle lanes and I do not begrudge a penny of my tax going towards them.

Regards

Mick

Pots kettles black, as the man said look in the mirror first.

Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,
Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,
Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel,Drivel.

Can any one find Mick a new word, he seems unable?