Do cyclists have a date with death?

Associate
Joined
10 Sep 2008
Posts
1,620
When I'm biking the cars that bother me the most are the ones who give me too much space. The drivers are usually being considerate but I wish they'd just get on with it and pass me even if they do get a bit close to my right arm, motorists seem to get this feeling that we're randomly going to ride across the lane into their path, I won't do this as I don't like being crushed.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
The point is, at least car drivers must have the ability/knowledge to be able to drive safely. Yes, those who do not drive safely around cyclists etc are at least on a par with cyclists who do not know how to ride safely, if not worse, but a certain amount of responsibility/driving skill is assumed when one passes the driving test, whereas absolutely no riding skills are assumed when riding a bike on the roads, which is really quite dangerous.

Just because you're going to do more damage to yourself than anyone else if your riding dangerously gets you into a crash is not a ticket to let any cyclist on the roads.

I appreciate that most cyclists know how to cycle safely, just as most car drivers drive safely around them - in both cases it is the ones who do not ride/drive safely that you notice. I just feel that idiot car drivers are better trained to escape a hazard (that they may or may not have created) than idiot cyclists.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
When I'm biking the cars that bother me the most are the ones who give me too much space. The drivers are usually being considerate but I wish they'd just get on with it and pass me even if they do get a bit close to my right arm, motorists seem to get this feeling that we're randomly going to ride across the lane into their path, I won't do this as I don't like being crushed.

But, coming back to idiot cyclists, there are those who will pull across the road without warning to turn right/those who can barely cycle in a straight line, and that is why many car drivers choose to give cyclists more room than is necessary - as they cannot necessarily tell the good cyclists from the bad ones.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Sep 2008
Posts
1,620
Thats a fair comment miniyazz, I certainly understand why they're nervous around bikers. I don't like holding drivers up and I'll move on to the pavement to let them pass if there's no pedestrians even if it slows me down, I don't prioratise my time over x amount of drivers stuck behind me.
 
Associate
Joined
30 Apr 2003
Posts
2,451
Location
jarrow
I agree that perhaps there should be some kind of formal test for cyclists, as not everyone has good road sense and that goes for drivers. I think what is being over looked tho' is that as a cyclist your are a lot more vunerable (for obvious reasons) than if you were in a car, yes you could still argue that again that there should be some formal test to pass before riding on the road. For for me though being vunerable makes be more careful and i never take chances.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
:)

I don't think any cyclist enjoys holding drivers up (unless they're feeling particularly sadistic that day :p), as someone mentioned before, I tend to cycle as fast as possible until the road is clear for overtaking, unless of course empty pavement - which does make sense to go on, as long as it is empty, just to let traffic past.
Unfortunately, you could still be nabbed by the cops for doing so, but they really shouldn't when it's empty and it's to let a tailback of cars past!
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
I agree that perhaps there should be some kind of formal test for cyclists, as not everyone has good road sense and that goes for drivers. I think what is being over looked tho' is that as a cyclist your are a lot more vunerable (for obvious reasons) than if you were in a car, yes you could still argue that again that there should be some formal test to pass before riding on the road. For for me though being vunerable makes be more careful and i never take chances.

I think that's really why there's the formal test for cars whereas for cyclists, and even motorbikes IIRC, there isn't - because you're more likely to be harmed yourself than harm someone else, which means you're less likely to be cycling like a tool. Certainly if there was no test for car drivers, the standard of driving would drop far below that of cyclists - it is only because of the test that idiot drivers are sensible enough that they can be compared to idiot cyclists. As soon as self-preservation stops being an issue (i.e. in safe metal box), unsafe driving is bound to become more prevalent unless safe driving is beaten into them by having to pass a test.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Jul 2008
Posts
1,839
When I'm biking the cars that bother me the most are the ones who give me too much space. The drivers are usually being considerate but I wish they'd just get on with it and pass me even if they do get a bit close to my right arm, motorists seem to get this feeling that we're randomly going to ride across the lane into their path, I won't do this as I don't like being crushed.

I don't know about everyone else but when I learned to drive I was told to give motorbikes/bicycles the same amount of space I'd give a car. Obviously you can't always do this practically but that might explain.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Jun 2004
Posts
5,472
Location
Exeter
I'd love to be allowed to cycle on the pavement so I could avoid having my elbow smashed by moronic car drivers' mirrors (has happened to me several times) as they try to pass me while traffic is coming the other way. Would it really hurt to wait a few seconds to pass?

That's happened to me a few times too. On one occasion a stupid car driver in a 4x4 tried to over take on a blind bend on a very busy road and a huge lorry came the other way. The 4x4 smashed into my elbow, throwing me into the hedge and back into the middle of the lane right in front of a van who only just managed to stop in time before he ran me over.

Where I live in a semi-rural area a lot of the roads don't even have pavements and those that do usually only have them on one side.
They are also very narrow and overgrown.
It's probably more dangerous to ride on the pavement here than on the road.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Oct 2005
Posts
3,298
There isn't a cycling test for the same reason there isn't a skateboard test or a rollerblade test. They are human powered modes of transport and VERY rarely exceed 30mph. Also the fact that the person most likely to be injured is the rider AND if a pedestrian is involved then there is usually only one other injured party. A car can kill loads of people at once if it was driven into a crowd, and cars also move very quickly and thus have a LOT of momentum which can be dangerous in a crash.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
Neither skateboard nor rollerblade users do so on the road - that's what makes cyclists different. And tbh, if some idiot cyclist rides into me through no fault of my own, I couldn't give a rat's bum if he's injured himself more than me, if he's dented/scratched my car, I'll be ****ed and as many (not all) cyclists have no insurance, especially those who can't ride safely, unless he's willing to sort out repairs amicably I'll be forced to either go through small claims or front the cost myself.. or pay the excess/lose NCB on my own insurance, all because *he* didn't learn how to ride properly before cycling on the road, and because *he* didn't get any insurance.
 
Associate
Joined
30 Apr 2003
Posts
2,451
Location
jarrow
I think OAPs in motorised chairs shouldnt be allowed on the footpaths, they contantly hold me up and often pull out in front of me when im walking along. If it wasnt for them i would be at work at least 3 seconds earlier !

Whats more they get free bus passes so another reason to get these HELLS OAPS of the streets. I kid you not i take my life in my own hands every time i step foot out of my door, they just fly around and have very little footpath sense and i bet they dont have any insurance either - even more so i bet they didnt take anykind of formal test before being let loose to terrorise members of the public.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Nov 2004
Posts
2,645
Location
BOOMTIMES
When I use my bike I generally ride on the pavement, deferring to pedestrians where appropriate.
But he most annoying thing observed whilst driving was on the Hinckley bypass to the A5 - long stretch of road between a few roundabouts, with a pavement and a cycle path on the side of the road... what did I see? Some fool on a bike with his shorts up his backside, riding (wobbling) all over the road when 2 feet next to him off the road is a rather expensive cycle path.
I treated him to a blast of the horn followed by enveloping him in a large cloud of diesel fumes as I overtook him.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
I think OAPs in motorised chairs shouldnt be allowed on the footpaths, they contantly hold me up and often pull out in front of me when im walking along. If it wasnt for them i would be at work at least 3 seconds earlier !

Whats more they get free bus passes so another reason to get these HELLS OAPS of the streets. I kid you not i take my life in my own hands every time i step foot out of my door, they just fly around and have very little footpath sense and i bet they dont have any insurance either - even more so i bet they didnt take anykind of formal test before being let loose to terrorise members of the public.

I assume that's aimed at me. Your point?
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Oct 2005
Posts
3,298
When I use my bike I generally ride on the pavement, deferring to pedestrians where appropriate.
But he most annoying thing observed whilst driving was on the Hinckley bypass to the A5 - long stretch of road between a few roundabouts, with a pavement and a cycle path on the side of the road... what did I see? Some fool on a bike with his shorts up his backside, riding (wobbling) all over the road when 2 feet next to him off the road is a rather expensive cycle path.
I treated him to a blast of the horn followed by enveloping him in a large cloud of diesel fumes as I overtook him.

I never ride in cycle lanes if they are on the pavement as they are bloody dangerous, I also ride to the edge of the cycle lane on a road as the main lane is covered in manhole covers and debris from the road. Don't be such a retard and think that you giving him a blast of your horn did anything other than label you an idiot.

miniyazz said:
Neither skateboard nor rollerblade users do so on the road - that's what makes cyclists different. And tbh, if some idiot cyclist rides into me through no fault of my own, I couldn't give a rat's bum if he's injured himself more than me, if he's dented/scratched my car, I'll be ****ed and as many (not all) cyclists have no insurance, especially those who can't ride safely, unless he's willing to sort out repairs amicably I'll be forced to either go through small claims or front the cost myself.. or pay the excess/lose NCB on my own insurance, all because *he* didn't learn how to ride properly before cycling on the road, and because *he* didn't get any insurance.

That's fair enough but any decent cyclist would stop and sort out damages through home insurance or out of their own pocket. You still get drivers who don't stop after an accident and the damage that they cause is far worse and more costly. Some drivers are also not insured, they are cracking down on these but they are still around. So basically your argument there is flawed.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Posts
467
Location
Portsmouth
There is no law to say a cyclist has to use the cycle path any way. It's just reccommended. People need to stop whinging and get on with drive well and making the road safer by doing so.

Yes you get people who ride slowly and wobble, but that's because they're worried that they'll be knocked off by some looney in a car trying to speed past them because they might be held up for 20 seconds.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Dec 2008
Posts
5,976
Location
Sheffield/Norwich
That's fair enough but any decent cyclist would stop and sort out damages through home insurance or out of their own pocket. You still get drivers who don't stop after an accident and the damage that they cause is far worse and more costly. Some drivers are also not insured, they are cracking down on these but they are still around. So basically your argument there is flawed.

Don't even get me started on drivers without insurance, far worse than cyclists without insurance. 10yr/permanent ban tbh + fine, except in rare cases where it's unclear if it's accidental. Anyway, just because I wasn't focussing on illegally driving car drivers doesn't invalidate my argument.
 
Back
Top Bottom