Cyclists !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

winkyincanada posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

The bit about "You MUST give way...." is the bit that some pedestrians seem to rely upon !

Not for long......

'You must give way' only applies in certain countries, eg, last time I was in Italy, zebra crossings might as well not be their, if I was to wait at a zebra crossing , I would still be their now...as for cyclists....they use any bit of tarmac available, regardless of it being road or footpath 

Jude2012 posted:

Well the sheep and education aspects are interesting.  Whilst we are not sheep, we certainly don't seem to be able to co-operate like ants or bees to achieve a common aim.

As for legislation Public Space Protection Orders are being used by a number of Councils for control or dogs, and I believe for bicycle in centres in some cities. So, no reason why it cannot be applied to specific hot spots where the interaction between cars, pedestrians and cyclists is dangerous. 

 

Well, dogs are a nuisance in public places unless on a short leash and have a poo-slave picking up their excrement. That is different from people with awareness, understanding and judgement ability crossing the road: Yes, I am sure that laws could be made or existing ones applied to control pedestrians - but that does not mean it is either necessary or right, nor that it will necessarily stop people crossing the road when and where they wish.

And the comparison with ants or bees is irrelevant when considering individuals crossing the road, even many at about the same time and place, provided that each is indeed exercising proper assessment - the problem comes when people adopt a sheep mentality and blindly cross just because others do.  (And that, of course, can lead to fatalities when people start to cross a road when a crossing light indicates that they can do so, but a vehicle has failed to see the red light.)

Had an interesting experience today, attempting to cross the road at traffic lights, traffic lights went to red, traffic stops, but cyclist comes along and decides to ignore red light and just keep going ...

This rogue cyclist obviously felt he did not need to abide by the laws of the road? 

Unfortunately it reflects badly on all cyclists ...

wenger2015 posted:

Had an interesting experience today, attempting to cross the road at traffic lights, traffic lights went to red, traffic stops, but cyclist comes along and decides to ignore red light and just keep going ...

This rogue cyclist obviously felt he did not need to abide by the laws of the road? 

Unfortunately it reflects badly on all cyclists ...

Doesn't reflect on me. What that guy did is irrelevant to me. He's a different person. What you're saying is like saying that a person wearing a blue shirt who crossed against the lights reflects badly on all blue shirt wearers.

winkyincanada posted:

wenger2015 posted:

Had an interesting experience today, attempting to cross the road at traffic lights, traffic lights went to red, traffic stops, but cyclist comes along and decides to ignore red light and just keep going ...

This rogue cyclist obviously felt he did not need to abide by the laws of the road? 

Unfortunately it reflects badly on all cyclists ...

Doesn't reflect on me. What that guy did is irrelevant to me. He's a different person. What you're saying is like saying that a person wearing a blue shirt who crossed against the lights reflects badly on all blue shirt wearers.

Agree, but the problem is, one has no way of knowing if the cyclist approaching can be trusted... 

Similar with motorists being respectful of cyclists, some do, some don't, hence no motorist can be trusted..

wenger2015 posted:

winkyincanada posted:

wenger2015 posted:

Had an interesting experience today, attempting to cross the road at traffic lights, traffic lights went to red, traffic stops, but cyclist comes along and decides to ignore red light and just keep going ...

This rogue cyclist obviously felt he did not need to abide by the laws of the road? 

Unfortunately it reflects badly on all cyclists ...

Doesn't reflect on me. What that guy did is irrelevant to me. He's a different person. What you're saying is like saying that a person wearing a blue shirt who crossed against the lights reflects badly on all blue shirt wearers.

Agree, but the problem is, one has no way of knowing if the cyclist approaching can be trusted... 

Similar with motorists being respectful of cyclists, some do, some don't, hence no motorist can be trusted..

I'm sure winky will be quick to agree with your last paragraph.

Don Atkinson posted:

wenger2015 posted:

winkyincanada posted:

wenger2015 posted:

Had an interesting experience today, attempting to cross the road at traffic lights, traffic lights went to red, traffic stops, but cyclist comes along and decides to ignore red light and just keep going ...

This rogue cyclist obviously felt he did not need to abide by the laws of the road? 

Unfortunately it reflects badly on all cyclists ...

Doesn't reflect on me. What that guy did is irrelevant to me. He's a different person. What you're saying is like saying that a person wearing a blue shirt who crossed against the lights reflects badly on all blue shirt wearers.

Agree, but the problem is, one has no way of knowing if the cyclist approaching can be trusted... 

Similar with motorists being respectful of cyclists, some do, some don't, hence no motorist can be trusted..

I'm sure winky will be quick to agree with your last paragraph.

Probably, he's very predictable......

wenger2015 posted:

winkyincanada posted:

wenger2015 posted:

Had an interesting experience today, attempting to cross the road at traffic lights, traffic lights went to red, traffic stops, but cyclist comes along and decides to ignore red light and just keep going ...

This rogue cyclist obviously felt he did not need to abide by the laws of the road? 

Unfortunately it reflects badly on all cyclists ...

Doesn't reflect on me. What that guy did is irrelevant to me. He's a different person. What you're saying is like saying that a person wearing a blue shirt who crossed against the lights reflects badly on all blue shirt wearers.

Agree, but the problem is, one has no way of knowing if the cyclist approaching can be trusted... 

Similar with motorists being respectful of cyclists, some do, some don't, hence no motorist can be trusted..

Yes, it is important to recognise that few (if any) of us follow all traffic rules all the time. We all take risks that we perceive as being acceptable. Be on the lookout for someone doing that. Trust no-one. But I'd rather be hit by a 30km/hr cyclist than by a 70km/hr car.

Had a lovely bike ride with my wife this afternoon. Beautiful cycle route from Aberystwyth, shared with walkers and horse riders. Just one sour note - came upon family walking with 3 dogs, none of which were on leads. Dogs running all over the place, no attempt to control them, we were both forced to stop whilst they meandered past. I appreciate its nice to be able to let dogs off the leash, but a little consideration to other track users would be good.

If this thread makes it onto the next page, that'll be as many pages as exclamation marks in the title. Woohoo!

Innocent Bystander posted:

Jude2012 posted:

Well the sheep and education aspects are interesting.  Whilst we are not sheep, we certainly don't seem to be able to co-operate like ants or bees to achieve a common aim.

As for legislation Public Space Protection Orders are being used by a number of Councils for control or dogs, and I believe for bicycle in centres in some cities. So, no reason why it cannot be applied to specific hot spots where the interaction between cars, pedestrians and cyclists is dangerous. 

Well, dogs are a nuisance in public places unless on a short leash and have a poo-slave picking up their excrement. That is different from people with awareness, understanding and judgement ability crossing the road: Yes, I am sure that laws could be made or existing ones applied to control pedestrians - but that does not mean it is either necessary or right, nor that it will necessarily stop people crossing the road when and where they wish.  The fact is PSPOs are in use and are enforced 

And the comparison with ants or bees is irrelevant when considering individuals crossing the road, even many at about the same time and place, provided that each is indeed exercising proper assessment - the problem comes when people adopt a sheep mentality and blindly cross just because others do.  (And that, of course, can lead to fatalities when people start to cross a road when a crossing light indicates that they can do so, but a vehicle has failed to see the red light.)   This is only one scenario, the report talks about cyclists and pedestrians crossing without warning. In any case, in your example, the motorist will be at a standstill, or at worse starting to accelerate.

Jude2012 posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Jude2012 posted:

Well the sheep and education aspects are interesting.  Whilst we are not sheep, we certainly don't seem to be able to co-operate like ants or bees to achieve a common aim.

As for legislation Public Space Protection Orders are being used by a number of Councils for control or dogs, and I believe for bicycle in centres in some cities. So, no reason why it cannot be applied to specific hot spots where the interaction between cars, pedestrians and cyclists is dangerous. 

Well, dogs are a nuisance in public places unless on a short leash and have a poo-slave picking up their excrement. That is different from people with awareness, understanding and judgement ability crossing the road: Yes, I am sure that laws could be made or existing ones applied to control pedestrians - but that does not mean it is either necessary or right, nor that it will necessarily stop people crossing the road when and where they wish.  The fact is PSPOs are in use and are enforced 

And the comparison with ants or bees is irrelevant when considering individuals crossing the road, even many at about the same time and place, provided that each is indeed exercising proper assessment - the problem comes when people adopt a sheep mentality and blindly cross just because others do.  (And that, of course, can lead to fatalities when people start to cross a road when a crossing light indicates that they can do so, but a vehicle has failed to see the red light.)   This is only one scenario, the report talks about cyclists and pedestrians crossing without warning. In any case, in your example, the motorist will be at a standstill, or at worse starting to accelerate.

 

The fact of PSPOs existing and enforced is irrelevant - I believe it is simply wrong to apply them to people exercising judgement to cross a road.

And my example was not one where the motorist is at a standstill or starting to accerlerate, but one where a motorist  fails to see the light turn to red and so is fully up to speed, presenting maximum dager to the witless pedestrian - and that does happen in reality (though I have no statistics for how often)

Innocent Bystander posted:

Jude2012 posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Jude2012 posted:

Well the sheep and education aspects are interesting.  Whilst we are not sheep, we certainly don't seem to be able to co-operate like ants or bees to achieve a common aim.

As for legislation Public Space Protection Orders are being used by a number of Councils for control or dogs, and I believe for bicycle in centres in some cities. So, no reason why it cannot be applied to specific hot spots where the interaction between cars, pedestrians and cyclists is dangerous. 

Well, dogs are a nuisance in public places unless on a short leash and have a poo-slave picking up their excrement. That is different from people with awareness, understanding and judgement ability crossing the road: Yes, I am sure that laws could be made or existing ones applied to control pedestrians - but that does not mean it is either necessary or right, nor that it will necessarily stop people crossing the road when and where they wish.  The fact is PSPOs are in use and are enforced 

And the comparison with ants or bees is irrelevant when considering individuals crossing the road, even many at about the same time and place, provided that each is indeed exercising proper assessment - the problem comes when people adopt a sheep mentality and blindly cross just because others do.  (And that, of course, can lead to fatalities when people start to cross a road when a crossing light indicates that they can do so, but a vehicle has failed to see the red light.)   This is only one scenario, the report talks about cyclists and pedestrians crossing without warning. In any case, in your example, the motorist will be at a standstill, or at worse starting to accelerate.

 

The fact of PSPOs existing and enforced is irrelevant - I believe it is simply wrong to apply them to people exercising judgement to cross a road.

And my example was not one where the motorist is at a standstill or starting to accerlerate, but one where a motorist  fails to see the light turn to red and so is fully up to speed, presenting maximum dager to the witless pedestrian - and that does happen in reality (though I have no statistics for how often)

 

Simply wrong, eh? :-))))

Next - train drivers are responsible for people/motorists /cyclits  hurling themselves in front of trains.

end.

Another good one this morning on my commute. A section I ride along has a series of central traffic island as "traffic calming measures". They are inherently hazardous to cyclists, as motorists will race cyclists to the pinch point created by the island, or even illegally go completely on the wrong side of the islands in their desperation to overtake. It's pretty common. Well this morning, a bus travelling the opposite direction to me was stopped to pick-up passengers and was completely blocking the narrow lane created by the central island. An impatient and stupid motorist chose to overtake the bus by coming around the island, head-on towards me on my side of the road. Although I was able to easily avoid this idiot, it was still remarkable.

winkyincanada posted:

An impatient and stupid motorist 

That's what you call multi-tasking.....

wenger2015 posted:

winkyincanada posted:

An impatient and stupid motorist 

That's what you call multi-tasking.....

They also tend to add "distracted" to the list of tasks they can achieve simultaneously.

Another good one, but it was yesterday morning.

I pulled up at a "T" junction to turn right. The "pedestrian" who was actually a jogger, was approaching from the right, about 50 yards away, so let's say 10 seconds to go to cross in front of me.

No one else around, so I could have just pulled ahead and turned right before she reached me. But no, rather than potentially interrupt her rhythm, I waited (ok, it was only going to be a few seconds anyway).

She turned left at the T junction. She could have indicated. She could have signalled a "thank you". But no. Nothing.

Next time will I bother ? 

I decided to walk back from the shops with shopping and with my bicycle along the path that's just only down the road from where I live.  This is on the right side forward as no left hand path on this section of street.  At a little point the path is very narrow. The road was not busy so decided to walk closely on the road along the Curb with the bike on the path. Along comes a driver with clear visibility of some distance towards me. They do not give any way for me, and I was fearful that they hadn't seen me on their side of the road and would hit me. 

If I was cycling along on that side the driver would have given way. Just because I was walking on the wrong side but clearly visible they obviously thought that I had it coming.

Don Atkinson posted:

Another good one, but it was yesterday morning.

I pulled up at a "T" junction to turn right. The "pedestrian" who was actually a jogger, was approaching from the right, about 50 yards away, so let's say 10 seconds to go to cross in front of me.

No one else around, so I could have just pulled ahead and turned right before she reached me. But no, rather than potentially interrupt her rhythm, I waited (ok, it was only going to be a few seconds anyway).

She turned left at the T junction. She could have indicated. She could have signalled a "thank you". But no. Nothing.

Next time will I bother ? 

You didn't do anything that benefitted her. Why would she thank you?

I was dismayed when I moved to Vancouver that the use of turn indicators amongst motorists was virtually non-existent. I later realised it was for safety. I mean, with a Blenz/Timbos/Artigiano in one hand and a cell phone in the other, who could safely use their indicators? We cyclists are worse. We don't often signal, often preferring to keep both hands available for braking and steering, and when we do, half the time it is with that goofy upraised left arm to indicate a right turn.

Nearly bagged myself a Santander (aka Boris Bike) this morning! 

In London there are many junctions with a painted box a full carriage width at the traffic lights within which only cyclists are permitted to stop.  (I wish a few motor cyclists and car drivers would read up on this requirement...)  This morning I approached a set of these lights and prepared to stop in the box, as the lights were on red.  Completely out of my line of vision, due to a lorry stopped at the junction, a Santander bike cut across right in front of me.  He had clearly thought it a good idea to mount the pavement to access the junction and then cycle across the stop box and on across the junction to continue on his journey.  He wasn't well pleased with my salutations and I hope he wakens up and realises just how close he came to being hit by my bike.  I haven't described it well but this was one of the more unusual antics people get up to, particularly first thing in the morning.

Peter

northpole posted:

Nearly bagged myself a Santander (aka Boris Bike) this morning! 

In London there are many junctions with a painted box a full carriage width at the traffic lights within which only cyclists are permitted to stop.  (I wish a few motor cyclists and car drivers would read up on this requirement...)  This morning I approached a set of these lights and prepared to stop in the box, as the lights were on red.  Completely out of my line of vision, due to a lorry stopped at the junction, a Santander bike cut across right in front of me.  He had clearly thought it a good idea to mount the pavement to access the junction and then cycle across the stop box and on across the junction to continue on his journey.  He wasn't well pleased with my salutations and I hope he wakens up and realises just how close he came to being hit by my bike.  I haven't described it well but this was one of the more unusual antics people get up to, particularly first thing in the morning.

Peter

Yes, I see the appalling behaviour of fellow cyclists in the downtown every single day. I have nothing in common with cyclists who cut across pedestrian crossings to shortcut lights for right-turns, who mount the sidewalk and who run red lights. I resent that I am lumped together with them for the dishing out of vitriol.

Saw an excellent motoring incident this morning. A guy illegally rolled a red light at some speed to make a right turn and then abused a fellow motorist who had the temerity to slow slightly while going through a green to check the street name. A right-turn on red is allowed, but you must STOP (NOBODY does) and you must give way to everybody else. The guy that rolled the red was a total tool.

winkyincanada posted:

 

A right-turn on red is allowed, but you must STOP (NOBODY does) and you must give way to everybody else. 

The equivalent (left turn on red) is not allowed in UK. This is an example of potentially dangerous differences between different countries (though I note that if performed correctly it should't actually be dangerous)

winkyincanada posted:

 We cyclists are worse. We don't often signal, often preferring to keep both hands available for braking and steering, and when we do, half the time it is with that goofy upraised left arm to indicate a right turn.

Huh? Not anything I've ever seen or heard of. Is that a Canada-specific goofy thing? If I were a motorist I wouldn't recognise it, though it sounds as if it might be the old hand signal for cars not fitted with indicators, which in UK with right-hand drive cars would be a right arm raised at the forearm to indicate left - but not applicable to a cyclist, not applicable to anything other than vintage cars, and probably not known to anyone under the age of 50 or so.

Don Atkinson posted:

Another good one, but it was yesterday morning.

I pulled up at a "T" junction to turn right. The "pedestrian" who was actually a jogger, was approaching from the right, about 50 yards away, so let's say 10 seconds to go to cross in front of me.

No one else around, so I could have just pulled ahead and turned right before she reached me. But no, rather than potentially interrupt her rhythm, I waited (ok, it was only going to be a few seconds anyway).

She turned left at the T junction. She could have indicated. She could have signalled a "thank you". But no. Nothing.

Next time will I bother ? 

Well, I've never seen a pedestrian indicate intended direction, and whilst thanking would be appropriate, that would only happen if said runner registered your courtesy, whereas most pedestrians would not even notice a car waiting in the middle of the road ahead if they were intending to turn, and a runner possibly even less so if concentrating on running.

winkyincanada posted:

Yes, I see the appalling behaviour of fellow cyclists in the downtown every single day. I have nothing in common with cyclists who cut across pedestrian crossings to shortcut lights for right-turns, who mount the sidewalk and who run red lights. I resent that I am lumped together with them for the dishing out of vitriol.

Quite. Personally I don't see cyclists doing all the things we're accused of, but that might be my idyllic rural setting where the cyclists I see are either riding solo or in small groups doing it properly and not causing any issue to anyone except for the terminally impatient who see a 5 second delay as a threat to their absolute right to drive wherever they want to at whatever speed they like and who apparently time every journey to the second, such is their instant anger at being held up for even the tiniest amount of time.

But the bad cyclists - we know they exist - are nothing to do with me, and I object to being vilified because of the actions of others. UK Cyclists don't have regular meetings where we all get together in a village hall to agree a course of action for the week, or to come up with new ways of getting up drivers' noses. The closest we have to a community is the web, where a few websites have forums such as this. A few years ago they were v busy with topics dropping off page 1 inside a day, or staying for the long term and running to many many pages. I can genuinely report that any discussions of red light jumping (RLJ), riding on the pavement and generally riding like an idiot - and there were a few, usually instigated by newcomers wondering what was wrong with going through a red -  consistently and strongly steered down the path of doing it properly - i.e. don't. Part of it was self-defence - don't give the tabloid press and the idiots out there the ammunition; the wider sense was that cycling is fun and doesn't need to involve law-breaking and antagonising other road users. We're all just trying to get somewhere.

The test is whenever someone writes a generic cyclist bashing post, mentally replace references to cyclists with references to coloured people, or Jews, or women. Anything. Just pick a group that's historically been a useful target for stupidity, and gauge the mentality of someone who can quite happily write 'cyclists are a law unto themselves, holier-than-thou green tree-huggers who have no care for anyone except themselves', or 'yeah they all jump red lights every one of them'. Mental. But as cyclists are the current favourite target as an easy outgroup, it's ok, apparently.

While on the subject of observed poor road use behaviour...

UK relevant  (we drive on left hand side)

For the past few years a there seems to be an increasing trend, which i see at least once or twice every time i ride by bicycle along a typical two-way road [a single carriageway each way of any giving speed limit 30, 40 or 60mph] in that when getting overtaken by a car, van, or truck the vehicle passes by on my right hand side while flashing their 'left' indicator while doing the overtaking.

Always causes me a moment of tense concern when a vehicle conducts an overtaking pass on my right while signalling to turn left, but it seems to be happening so often these days. I would of thought it obvious that the 'right' hand side indication should be used in overtaking manoeuvres...?

This new and potentially dangerous habit seems to be a new trend started within the past decade, can't remember it ever happening beforehand.

Does anyone have any explanations for it?

Debs