to think cyclists ought to sit a test before being allowed on the road?

[SantanaLopez]

I live on a route popular with amateur cyclists. Yet again this morning another group of folk were causing absolute havoc on a two lane road. They aren't dressed properly, they don't signal, they don't even look where they're going. One man was weaving along instead of cycling in a straight line!

So while I have a cup of tea and a cake (for medicinal reasons)- aibu to think that they should have to be tested before being allowed on the road? I know drivers are the biggest hazard, but safety works both ways!

Oh and the way many people see cyclists:-

They see us as some sort of underclass. They think it's OK to scream and shout at us, drive cars deliberately at us. Very much like a form of racism !

They are also mighty cowards when they realise you might actually be able to catch them in traffic. One of these days, I will blow my top, chase a driver down, grab their keys and tell them to collect them from the nearest police station ! Grr.

Look, if I was as angry and anti-cyclist as I have been made out to be, I'd have hit a good number by now. I've had plenty of opportunities.

I am not lazy. I am an ex- national level swimmer and I swim and run four times a week. I don't drive a 4x4. I have a Golf.

Why can you not accept that some cyclists cycle dangerously?

When I started my long commute a couple of years ago (realising I'd be faster than any car, bus or train available - and cheaper and healthier all round!) I used to get into 'road rage' incidents fairly regularly. Never coming to blows (though I once did climb onto a lorries front bumper and 'remonstrate' through the windscreen once I knew he wasn't going to open his cab after trying to kill me.)

I like my commute and wouldn't do it any other way. I try to see it as going for a bike ride, albeit at odd times and in odd circumstances. I try to approach it in a zen sort of way and ignore the mild-to-moderate fuckwittery of drivers. Otherwise they have 'won' and made my ride less enjoyable than it should be. It's hard at times though.

I think all cyclists do accept that some ride dangerously - we see it ourselves. Unfortunatley that acts as an invitation for fuckwitted drivers to castigate and behave even more dangerously to ALL cyclists, which seems to be based on their dislike of having to 'share' a road.

And have you seen how badly drivers often treat each other? And these people have actually passed some sort of 'test'?

Oh, and don't get me started on folk whe need a 4x4 who live in the city/urban areas - why ?

Because I participate in a sport that requires me to travel to areas where I need to put my car in to 4WD mode to be able to access the competition grounds. I also live two hours from ski fields and enjoy skiing on the weekends and my 4WD makes that much easier to travel to the cottage I own up on the mountain.

The great thing about this thread, in contrast to many cycling threads, is that actually there has been a lot of reasoned debate and it has not descended into name calling and abuse

i second what littlemissabs said earlier, analysing the original post which was a complaint that:

"They aren't dressed properly, they don't signal, they don't even look where they're going. One man was weaving along instead of cycling in a straight line!"

In summary:

"they aren't dressed properly" What concern is it of yours?
"not signalling" : cyclists are not supposed to use hand signals if it would compromise their braking or steering
"don't look where they are going" seems unlikely
"weaving along" Rule 213 HC "cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make."

So there isn't anything of merit in the complaint even though I have no doubt that the OP meant it genuinely. Lack of understanding of cyclists by the motorist seems nearly always to be the problem.

Santana Yes, some cyclists cycle dangerously. They usually end up injured or dead. Some motorists drive dangerously and they sometimes end up killing or seriously injuring others whilst being relatively unscathed personally and free to do it all over again. That is why cyclists cycling dangerously is not really a concern (about 0.5 lives a year would be saved if nobody cycled in the UK. Tens of thousands of lives would be saved if nobody drove.)

And have you seen how badly drivers often treat each other? And these people have actually passed some sort of 'test'?

Of course. But of course, having even a basic test cuts down on the amount of idiots in a car. And no one uses it as a reason to get rid of the driving test.

Oops, two of courses.

"they aren't dressed properly" What concern is it of yours?
Because it is DARK and I can't SEE them. I have said it 3 times now!

"not signalling" : cyclists are not supposed to use hand signals if it would compromise their braking or steering
yes, in some cases. But I'm not a mindreader.

"don't look where they are going" seems unlikely
I can promise you otherwise.

"weaving along" Rule 213 HC "cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make."
The example I gave, which I have also explained, was a cyclist performing some sort of figure of 8 on a dry, smooth road.

"I am not a mindreader". no, you are not expected to be but you ARE expected to read road position and use your common sense (eg a cyclist moving across towards the centre just before a right turn is likely to be turning right) and, if unsure, hang back until you can be sure.

Not being able to see cyclists is a valid complaint. Is it dark or do you have problems with your eyesight? How do you see pedestrians crossing the road? Legally, cyclists have to have lights when it is dark so I reckon this point is already legislated for if you are worried about the dark. If it's your eyesight then you should not be driving until it is sorted out.

I am not sure how a test for cyclists would resolve any of your complaints tbh

My point being that if these people behave sooo badly toward other, more equally matched, road users, their attitude to riders would be pretty dreadful I'd guess.
Other obvious stuff I've seen drivers do recently whilst driving forwards - eating breakfast, with both hands, texting, phoning, putting on make up, reading a book, reading a map whilst moving at about 20 mph in traffic, leaning back to talk to rear occupants.

and some the clothes they wear!!!

Because it is DARK and I can't SEE them. I have said it 3 times now!

Cyclists who don't wear hi-vis or use lights are, of course, being daft.

That's not an excuse for anyone to not be watching where they are going though. I've never failed to not spot a cyclist in the dark, lights or no lights, because cars have headlights of their own.

My eyesight is fine. It's still very dark here in the mornings, especially with the weather we've had recently.

I do use my common sense and I do hang back, but it's very frustrating and I get very anxious, because so many of them suddenly veer out. Genuine question- about half of the cyclists hold out an arm to move out (thinking about a particular turn-off on the road). I assumed this was the right thing to do?

Plenty of nightmare cyclists in London today due to tube strike.

Imagine if motorists decided to just mount the pavement and nearly mow pedestrians down just to beat traffic.

Depends Santana - IF the road speed and surface allows it I always signal. Sometimes it just isn't safe to take one hand off the bar. Road position of a bike should be just as a strong an indicator?

no need for driver to mount the pavement to mow down riders though.

Must admit though I was in London town recently and noticed the habits of riders there - a lot more aggressive than in my sweet part of the world. I'd realised though that driving in London is quite distinct to anywhere else in the country and given that most adult bike commuters are also drivers, they are probably taking their attitudes from when driving to biking.

"Why can you not accept that some cyclists cycle dangerously?"

No one has denied that. But that's not what your OP said. It was demanding testing of cyclists before they are allowed out on the roads. Why can you not accept that, despite not being tested, of accidents involving bicycles the majority of the time it is the driver's fault? And that when a bicycle and a car are involved in an accident it is always the cyclist who is injured or killed and very rarely the driver (in fact, I haven't heard of any accidents where a driver was killed in a collision with a bike).

Did you read my OP? I know drivers are the biggest hazard, but safety works both ways!

I recounted my problems with cyclists and suggested that tests might be a solution.

Road position of a bike should be just as a strong an indicator?
Honestly, some of them just fire to the side all of a sudden I do try and follow the road position, but it's difficult in some places because they are trying to avoid obstacles and things.

Suddenly lurching out with no warning can't be legislated for. Though whilst riding or driving I've hardly ever seen this happen. In fact in 25yrs + of driving I've never had a bike suddenly pull out in a dangerous way.

And yes, some few riders (usaully kids on local roads) don't wear bright clothes and lights...but then as someone said, I have head lights on my car. I've (again) in 25 yrs never had to 'swerve' to avoid a bike without lights.

Seems that some drivers (not you OP) like to tell fisherman tales.

Pan I have been driving a motor car for thirty years and I have had this happen twice to me, the last occasion was just myself and cyclist on road, she suddenly without warning crossed three lanes of traffic in front of me. Fortunately due to me driving sedately I was able to brake sharpely and aviod a collision. She was clearly wearing head phones and had no idea of how close to under my front wheels she came.

The irony was I had a bike on the roof and was dropping of a cyclist for a race...

I consider these people bike riders, they hop on a bike with no idea if the bike is even road worthy and they have never opened the pages of a highway code, rarely have any idea of how to even get the pedals to rotate, they are not cyclists

santana you sound like you do everything right and reasonably .

I can imagine it's frustrating waiting for more vulnerable road users but that doesn't meant there is a "solution" or that the other road user is at fault. I can get frustrated behind an old lady paying slowly at a checkout with coins, but I wouldn't dream of saying she should have a test before being allowed to shop, nor do I see how a test would make her faster and less frustrating for me.

You just have to allow for other people in life.

I haven't read the whole thread, so someone may already have said this, but I think a compulsory course for car drivers in pedestrian and cycle awareness would be more beneficial.

I speak as a non-cyclist and frequent driver, who has observed some awful motoring behaviour directed at more vulnerable road users.

I've just realised I've been driving 30 years this year and can't remember a cyclist lurching in front of me with no warning either.

I suppose it must have happened. I've certainly seen plenty of less than brilliant riding and a few occasions of aggression - I've mostly suffered from that as a pedestrian, because that's the only time I'm weaker than a cyclist.

But I've seen the same from drivers too - including lurching across my path without warning.

What I do definitely remember is about a year after I passed my test, just at that stage where you lose your fear and start to think you're really good, I pulled from a side road across the path of a cyclist.

I saw him but I misjudged his speed and do you know what else? I somehow thought he didn't count as much as a car. Not that I wanted to kill him but I'd have definitely waited if he'd have been a car because I respected cars more.

He went fucking mad at me and he was right. I cringe to this day. I wonder if he's survived unscathed.

I mostly walk or use buses or taxis now.

When I cross roads I look carefully, including over my shoulder and watch out for cycle lanes.

The Tufty Club made a very big impression on me when I was growing up and I'm very socially aware .

I always get a secret thrill when I do it and see the look of utter disappointment in the eyes of the self-righteous cyclist or driver who was longing to toot and swear at me but has been cheated by my desire not to get squashed

There are quite a lot of you about. Motorbike riders are generally pretty good though, aren't they? Not that I'm one.