to still be fuming today about this cyclist?

[microserf]

i have to rant. i have form ranting on here about how much i hate ill mannered cyclists, but this one really took the piss.

last night, at 5pm (so still sunny) i was walking with my 2 kids in the double buggy and we had to cross a busy road at a crossroads. i waited ages at the crossing for the green man. green man light flicked on, i checked the cars had actually stopped and stepped out onto the crossing. all seemed fine.

only for the buggy to be nearly hit by some fucking asshole who came flying around the corner on his bike and ran the red light (he was going downhill, so had built up a bit of speed) swerved at the last second and cycled off without a word of apology.

i am still furious!!! i was really shaken up by it, and i am really tired of bad cyclists running red lights and cycling over pedestrian crossings when i'm crossing, esp with the kids. it's not like a fully loaded buggy can jump out of the way!

i think we should put license plates on the cycles, so the bad ones can be weeded out! if i did that in my car, i'd not be driving for much longer.

hmm -- the arguments for cyclists wearing hi-vis clothes, and helmets would all apply equally to pedestrians. A walking helmet is exactly as useful as a cycling helmet, but oddly you never see them.

I agree with your point about hi vis clothes, stubbornhubby, as you will see from my post, just above yours. I disagree about helmets, though - cyclists move a lot faster than pedestrians, and it is the speed of the accidents that increases the severity of the injuries. There are, I am sure, plenty of statistics about cyclists and speed and head injuries, but I am not aware of any studies or statistics about the percentage risk of serious head injury to a pedestrian who falls over - but I would think it would not be anywhere near as great as the percentage risk of head injury in a fall from a bike.

I don't think this is a cyclist bashing thread, it is a shame that a bad driver can be stopped from getting in a car, but not a bad cyclist.

I was beeped by a motorist once for stopping at a red light when the crossing was being used , she was quite angry at me. And before the lights had changed over took me on the crossing horn blaring. Never got to the bottom of that one, lots of pedestrians and other drivers were as confused as I.

Bad cyclists do make the roads more dangerous for everyone. I turned out a corner yesterday and shouldn't have, not because there wasn't room or time, but because the oncoming driver panicked and slowed right down. I think, despite my turning in the corner by the pavement he thought I was crossing to get to the pavement on the other side... I really don't know. I have to remind myself the some drivers almost expect me to do something stupid, iyswim.

And if the pavement is wide and pedestrian free, I do use it as it means traffic can flow a bit faster if it's a busier road

hi viz arguemnts are bit like the 'sexy clothes will get you attacked - cover up' - we get knocked over and killed in large quantities, hi viz or not. I do wear one, and a helmet but often to no avail.

drivers, and some pedestrians need to focus a bit more, rather like cyclists have to.

I'm not suggesting that folks don't wear a helmet - I always wear one out and about but I hate the way the media portray not wearing one. It's the same as they always get the ages of people and how much their house/car is worth - like it's relevant. But I digress.
Helmets will prevent serious injuries from accidents but hi-vis clothing does more to prevent the accident in the first place.

staying, I'm actually quite insulted by your asking me what I think of the incidents on this thread. I took the trouble to point out that I don't do any of them ("boringly law-abiding" was the expression I used). Of course I don't condone the kind of behaviour people are describing. But why the hell should I have to say that expressly, just because I'm a cyclist?

Oh, and bad drivers don't get stopped from getting in cars unless they kill someone (and even then they only lose their licence for a period, not for ever). I've been knocked off by someone who drove straight into me when I had the right of way - she just didn't look at a roundabout. The police weren't interested because I wasn't hurt.

Doesn't the hi-vis clothing give them something more to focus on, then AP? If I can't see you, it's pretty damn hard to avoid you. Or perhaps cars should stop using headlights, because it doesn't matter if other drivers (or indeed cyclists) can't see them coming - they should just focus a bit more!

On the hi-vis, I wear it - people still don't see you. Drivers often don't expect to see cyclists and therefore they don't see them, even if you're lit up like a Christmas tree.

Taplow - I would happily see the authorities come down far harder on dangerous drivers. And I am sorry but the fact that you are boringly law abiding as a cyclist, but the fact that you seemed to be siding with those posters who have focussed on the cyclist bashing and do not seem to disapprove of cyclists who break the law and cycle dangerously/inconsideratly led me to ask the questions, to find out if you shared all their views. Clearly you don't, which is great. I am sorry you felt insulted, but should I not have asked the question that was in my mind?

TadlowDogIncident

I get your point but assume you don't mean bad cyclists should be allowed on the roads

I came on to make a point about cyclist-bashing, but I'll be sure next time to make sure I add the obligatory paragraph condemning cyclists who do dangerous and stupid things.

An extra point to throw into the mix (to add to the point that I and microfight were making up-thread). I get far more racist abuse when I'm on my bike than I do the rest of the time - not sure what that says about people, but it can't be good. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of racist comments made to my face in the last twenty years, off my bike. On it, I've stopped counting. I have to conclude that people think that because I'm on a bike, it's fine to spew any kind of poison they like at me, because cyclists deserve it, don't they?

I loathe it when cyclists zoom through a zebra crossing while I'm walking across it, then ring their bell/shout AT ME as if it were my fault! Unfortunately they're normally going too fast to hear, but I always shout abuse after them (but NEVER racist/personal abuse, obviously). Cyclists on the pavement piss me off too. I know it's by no means all cyclists, but some of them do seem to think it's OK to switch between behaving like road users and pavement users as it suits them.

Agree with Voluptua about getting rid of bike lanes and making cyclists behave like small-car drivers.

I don't think anyone has said it is fine to spew poison at cyclists, or that they deserve it - not on this thread anyway, TadlowDI. And for the record, I think it is unacceptable to abuse cyclists.

Should I take it from your snippy comment about 'obligatory paragraphs' that if I have a doubt or question in my mind about a cyclist's attitude, I can't voice it/ask it?

Actually, what I should have said is that any racial/gender based/appearance based abuse is unacceptable - but like LadyCannock, I'd see no problem with shouting a mouthful of abuse at a cyclist who'd just nearly knocked me down on a pedestrian crossing. And I don't discriminate - I am just as willing to shout abuse at a driver who cuts me up, or changes lane without indicating or displays any one of the thousands of dickhead behaviours we see on the roads every day. I've asked dh to get me an LED signboard for the back of the car, so I can make sure they actually see what I think of them [tongue-in-cheek] - but apparently that's not allowed.

I'm sure everyone on this thread would condemn racist insults to a cyclist - the point I was making is that attitudes of the "I hate all cyclists" kind seem, in some people's minds, to make it easier to voice whatever other nasty thoughts they happen to have going through their heads at the time.

Did I say you couldn't ask it? I answered it, after all - I just made the point that it's wearying having to prove I have "acceptable" attitudes all the time. It happens in RL a lot if I happen to mention I ride a bike: I always get asked if I jump red lights / ride on the pavement, and it gets really boring. Funnily enough, I don't get the same sort of questions if I mention driving somewhere or walking somewhere.

i worry that London cycle lanes don't protect cyclists, quite the opposite - they seem to function as bus lanes, delivery drop offs for lorries etc - i often see cyclists forced out of them. a proper cycle lane would be segregated from traffic a bit more, like in Amsterdam - which really does seem to take care of its cyclists, from the limited bit i can remember.

i feel a bit like a broken record, but again, it's all about your road user experience. as a pedestrian, i am more likely to have bad experiences with cyclists. when i drive, i am more likely to have bad experiences with other drivers - i am a reasonably timid driver, but i frequently encounter other drivers being aggressive on the road. i drive rarely though, i try to walk when i can. and let me say, i do my absolute best to take care of cyclists when i drive! i am terrified of the idea of hitting one. i tend to treat them as a small car (ie stay well behind them) unless i've got a nice wide area to pass.

one poster did suggest that if a car nearly hit on me a pedestrian crossing, then i would do nothing. let me assure you that i would have walked straight to the police station and demanded they pull the cctv to get the licence plate (if i didn't manage it myself). i'd be utterly furious. generally, though, and this is a big "generally", drivers are courteous to me if i'm crossing with a buggy. there is the odd exception, such as mr white-van on a small road near me 2 weeks ago.

ps TallowDogIncident, that's horrible about the racist abuse.

Oh, cycle lanes are appalling - there's one near me that has lamp-posts stuck right in the middle of it so it's unusable. They're also full of broken glass and other crud that's been swept to the sides of the road.

Staying David

You also accused me of thinking that bad cycle behaviour was acceptable and I also had to write a post to you to say I didn't. Just because we come on here and say we don't think posters should generalise and be rude and say "I hate ALL cyclists" doesn't mean we think that it's okay to cycle badly. There is no link between the two but you have obviously made the assumptions because you have accused two of us on here.

Well - as I said to Tadlow - it was very unclear to me from your postings that you did actually disapprove of cyclists who behave badly - and I preferred to ask whether that's what you think than to simply assume that's what you think and respond accordingly.

Actually, I'd have said you were assuming that we did approve of cyclists behaving badly, or you wouldn't have felt the need to ask - you haven't asked anyone on here who identifies as a driver whether they break the rules when driving. I do get sick of having to assert that I'm not one of "those" cyclists, when there are as many bad drivers and no-one ever assumes that I mow down pedestrians or have a mobile phone glued to my ear when I'm behind the wheel.

I had made my point very clear that I was upset that posters were generalising about ALL cyclists and saying such venomous things as "I bloody hate ALL cyclists" and you replied with

"Do you think a three year old would be fine if hit by a cyclist then, microfight?"

On what basis did you not know whether I would think this was fine. I had never said that I thought it was okay to cycle badly and you ask me this very patronising question completely unrelated to my post? Why?

In an ideal world all vehicles using the roads and all vehicles using the pavements at fast than walking pace would be regulated. Clearly, this is unworkable. Cyclists jumping red lights ought to 'have their licence revoked' with spiralling punishments for repeat offending. Until such time as a bike licence is brought in, that's pie in the sky. It is ok to rant about it and be angry about it weeks later. There's no cure, though.
@ the bike bashers, there is a difference between going through a red light slowly while looking out for other road users and pedestrians, and whizzing through without regard for anyone. It is much the same as crossing what's normally a busy road safely when there is nothing coming compared to jumping out into traffic from between parked cars. It is the thoughtless and dangerous behaviour that is the problem, not the mode of transport used.

bagpuss

• all powered vehicles on roads ARE regulated. For instance it's illegal to use a Segway on a road.

• vehicles are not allowed on pavements, other than mobility aids (powered chairs) which again are regulated. Bikes aren't allowed on pavements. Seqways aren't allowed on pavements.

Microfight - the question 'Do you think a 3-year-old would be fine if hit by a bike' was NOT asking if you think it is OK to hit a 3-year-old with a bike - it's asking if you think the 3-year-old will be unhurt or less badly hurt than the cyclist.

I have posted on similar threads to these on other sites in the past, and have found that often the 'I hate these cyclist bashing threads' posters are trying to deflect attention from the specific bad behaviours described by using this straw man. I asked the questions I did rather than assuming you were excusing bad behaviour by cyclists.

Would you prefer that I DID simply assume that anyone who starts crying 'cyclist bashing' on a thread like this is unwilling to accept that some cyclists do behave badly and are a danger to the general public?