petition to PM

wycombewheeler wrote:

Link seems to be to a petition about insurance for cyclists with a bit of a ramble about cycle lanes.

It would appear that the wording of the petition has been updated (to remove reference to "Road Tax" after comments made.

Road.cc are running a new feature on the front page now.

Alfa a wrote:

haha, having read my post back it does seem a bit cycling elitist!  I was putting inverted commas around proper and cyclists as it doesn't apply to all and it is just a very general statement.  I've obviously been reading too much tabloid press!!  Apologies!

Too be honest for every tw*t on a bike you get a tw*t in a car...

Exactly there are reasonable safe road users and there are aggressive or impatient or careless road users. Personally I'd rather all those dangerous types were on bikes than in cars

Alfa a wrote:

I live in Cambridge and there is a major problem with 'cyclists' not understanding that the rules of the road apply to them.  This is mostly your everyday commuter/drunk doing this and I haven't seen any 'proper' cyclists doing it but it is a major annoyance and very dangerous.  I have had cyclists crash into my car when they have run red lights and a friend of mine was crossing a zebra crossing and got wiped out by a guy cycling on his phone...  This petition is way over the top but I do think that police need to be more vigilent in regards to 'cyclists' road use.

I don't even agree with that (more moderate) idea. In an ideal world I'd be fine with it, but in this world the police have limited resources, and its a matter of priorities.

As a pedestrian I can handle irritating scrotes riding on the pavement or ignoring zebras. Mostly they are just arrogant youths (who can't be that brave or they'd be on the road). I find just refusing to get out of the way or glaring at them is enough to make the point (one day I might encounter one who is carrying a knife and come to regret it, of course).

What I would rather the police do something about are all the motorists who also ignore zebra crossings and even light-controlled ones. Those guys I can't handle on my own, both because they are in fast-moving armoured boxes and can't even hear me shouting at them, and because they tend to be older and significantly harder-looking than their younger siblings on bikes!

Seriously, many drivers seem to have entirely forgotten what zebra crossings are. Not only do they not stop when you are clearly waiting to cross, but they really don't like it if you force them to do so by actually stepping out (which, weirdly, is what legally you are supposed to do). I've had them shout abuse at me for it. And several times I've had one only just stop in time and then noticed they were busy texting with a phone in their lap.

Drivers pay little more attention to red lights at crossings than do cyclists.

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Seriously, many drivers seem to have entirely forgotten what zebra crossings are. Not only do they not stop when you are clearly waiting to cross, but they really don't like it if you force them to do so by actually stepping out (which, weirdly, is what legally you are supposed to do). I've had them shout abuse at me for it.

This; very much this.

FluffyKittenofTindalos][quote=Alfa a wrote:

Drivers pay little more attention to red lights at crossings than do cyclists.

I agree with a lot of what you say, although I don't experience the level of zebra issues you have, but this last line is something i've not seen anywhere in the country. Just my own experience but I would say that the proportion of cyclists ignoring (or not even seeming to register the existence of) red lights is massively higher than motor vehicle drivers - not entirely surprising in one regard as it's hard to 'sneak' a Volvo across a junction without causing a minor war to break out..

fukawitribe]</p>

<p>[quote=FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Alfa a wrote:

Drivers pay little more attention to red lights at crossings than do cyclists.

 

I agree with a lot of what you say, although I don't experience the level of zebra issues you have, but this last line is something i've not seen anywhere in the country. Just my own experience but I would say that the proportion of cyclists ignoring (or not even seeming to register the existence of) red lights is massively higher than motor vehicle drivers - not entirely surprising in one regard as it's hard to 'sneak' a Volvo across a junction without causing a minor war to break out..

I think the 'bad behavuiour' forms are different. Cyclists probably more likely to ride through mid-cycle if they think nothing is coming, cars more likely to 'amber gamble' and sprint through 'as the lights are changing'.

oldstrath]</p>

<p>[quote=fukawitribe wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Alfa a wrote:

Drivers pay little more attention to red lights at crossings than do cyclists.

 

I agree with a lot of what you say, although I don't experience the level of zebra issues you have, but this last line is something i've not seen anywhere in the country. Just my own experience but I would say that the proportion of cyclists ignoring (or not even seeming to register the existence of) red lights is massively higher than motor vehicle drivers - not entirely surprising in one regard as it's hard to 'sneak' a Volvo across a junction without causing a minor war to break out..

 

I think the 'bad behavuiour' forms are different. Cyclists probably more likely to ride through mid-cycle if they think nothing is coming, cars more likely to 'amber gamble' and sprint through 'as the lights are changing'.

Aye, agreed - that's partly what I meant by the last bit, no mid-cycle motorists. The added danger with the amber gamblers is that, as you say, they tend to speed up - so any potential damage is increased. As for the cyclists - it's a mish-mash that I see, especially in the city centre (Bristol).. some mid-cycle going carefully, looking for some space - some, mostly couriers, looking but then belting through - some others just seem to be staring off into space out front and very calmly just riding straight through at any point in the cycle... tempting to say the last group seem to be students but i've no idea to be honest, quite un-nerving to watch the serenity of them sometimes though.

fukawitribe]<p>[quote=oldstrath wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Alfa a wrote:

Drivers pay little more attention to red lights at crossings than do cyclists.

 

I agree with a lot of what you say, although I don't experience the level of zebra issues you have, but this last line is something i've not seen anywhere in the country. Just my own experience but I would say that the proportion of cyclists ignoring (or not even seeming to register the existence of) red lights is massively higher than motor vehicle drivers - not entirely surprising in one regard as it's hard to 'sneak' a Volvo across a junction without causing a minor war to break out..

 

I think the 'bad behavuiour' forms are different. Cyclists probably more likely to ride through mid-cycle if they think nothing is coming, cars more likely to 'amber gamble' and sprint through 'as the lights are changing'.

Aye, agreed - that's partly what I meant by the last bit, no mid-cycle motorists. The added danger with the amber gamblers is that, as you say, they tend to speed up - so any potential damage is increased. As for the cyclists - it's a mish-mash that I see, especially in the city centre (Bristol).. some mid-cycle going carefully, looking for some space - some, mostly couriers, looking but then belting through - some others just seem to be staring off into space out front and very calmly just riding straight through at any point in the cycle... tempting to say the last group seem to be students but i've no idea to be honest, quite un-nerving to watch the serenity of them sometimes though.

Mostly I mean failed amber gamblers. But I encounter a surprisingly high number of blatent mid-cycle red-jumper drivers as well. Sometimes on the wrong side of the road or turning from the wrong lane, where they've just suddenly decided they can't be arsed queueing at the lights if they can't see any cross traffic and its 'just a few pedestrians'. I think its getting worse, It's like there's like a core of drivers for whom ignoring such rules is a form of showing off.

Also, you have to consider the proportion who do it relative to those who have the opportunity. As cyclists can filter they usually have the option of RLJing. But only motorists at the front of the queue have the option (apart from those who just go on the wrong side of the road), so the proportion of those who do is higher than it seems.

Also, different towns presumably have motorists and cyclists with different temperaments.

fukawitribe]</p>

<p>[quote=FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Alfa a wrote:

Drivers pay little more attention to red lights at crossings than do cyclists.

 

I agree with a lot of what you say, although I don't experience the level of zebra issues you have, but this last line is something i've not seen anywhere in the country. Just my own experience but I would say that the proportion of cyclists ignoring (or not even seeming to register the existence of) red lights is massively higher than motor vehicle drivers - not entirely surprising in one regard as it's hard to 'sneak' a Volvo across a junction without causing a minor war to break out..

There are a lot of cyclists who ignore red lights but as over 80% of cyclists also have access to a car it should follow that they have passed their driving test. This logically draws us to the conclusion that ignorance of the rule is not what is causing cyclists to ignore red lights so there for forcing a cycling test is not going to help the issue. I think that the cause should be investigated if they want to stop it, trying to solve a symptom is always just a waste of time and money.

Personally I do not as a general rule run red lights, except for one. There is an access road that leads on to a main road near where I live and this is controlled by traffic lights. The set of lights on the access road has a motion detector on top so it does not interrupt the main flow of traffic just for the sake of it. The problem here though is that the motion detector does not recognise cyclists so if I want to get out of this junction I need to either wait for a car to appear behind me (who knows how long that could take) or safely run the red light. I could see how someone encountering several of these types of lights could get into a habit and just start to ignore all traffic lights.

That is just an example of how I think this mentality could come about, there must be many others (including people just being idiots regardless of being in a car or on a bike) but until we fully understand the reasons we can't effectively educate against it.

Just my 2p worth

Alfa a wrote:

This is mostly your everyday commuter/drunk doing this and I haven't seen any 'proper' cyclists doing it ...

Look - we're all just folks, OK.   I'm a commuter not a roadie, and I seriously resent the implication that I'm not a 'proper' cyclist 

brooksby wrote:

Alfa a wrote:

This is mostly your everyday commuter/drunk doing this and I haven't seen any 'proper' cyclists doing it ...

Look - we're all just folks, OK.   I'm a commuter not a roadie, and I seriously resent the implication that I'm not a 'proper' cyclist 

And I'm a drunk and seriously resemble that implication too, hic.

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

What gets me... is that you can provide a sound argument in response to this proposals and its supporting comments, and people just completely ignore it.

Is this what Post truth society looks like? With facts often so immediately available, people now ignore any and all arguments apart from the angle of truth  they want to hear... 

"Don't let facts get in the way of a good story?"

"No one wants to listen to the opinions of experts anymore..."

Etc etc etc...

I did like one comment on the petition that was saying yes, lets get this discussed and dismiss this road tax bullshit once and for all. 

According to Radio4 this morning the Oxford Dictionary have just announced "Post-truth" as their word of the year.

Well said and well done for using the new word in context