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!

I'm on a road bike, feet clipped into pedals, often at speeds in excess of 20mph. I'm traffic, pal, and if you don't like it - if my speed and assertiveness unnerves you - you can fuck right off.

Round of applause.

Exactly boney! Did you see that one recently with the guy in the white Audi? Exactly that happens to me so often!

Yanbu the cyclists who take to the roads in packs where we live at weekends are utterly selfish and oblivious to other road users. They ride in pack formation pretending to be in the Tour de France chatting to their mates on a busy road with a 60mph limit. Frustrated drivers overtake them by crossing to the opposite side and facing oncoming traffic. It's terrifying. These are not commuters making their way to work but wannabe Bradley Wiggens with little road sense or consideration for their own safety or the safety of others.

And don't get me started on those flip flop, headphone wearing cyclists dodging in between double decker buses.

naff, I can't tell exactly what your post is about, because you're quite vague - but no, 20 mph doesn't 'unnerve'. Why would it? Many cyclists are quite capable of driving at a slow car speed, whether that's 15 or 20 or 25. But you are completely wrong if you think you only get considered 'traffic' at that speed. Drivers have to consider all cyclists as 'traffic'.

Why do you think they notice how slow or fast you are?

They need to notice things like whether you're wobbling, or signalling, or likely to make the junction first - sure. But no-one should ever make a judgement based on whether you're doing 10 or 20 miles per hour (or in car terms slow or so so slow you're crawling). You sound as if you expect people to have special respect for you because you imagine you're very fast as a cyclist, and that to me is no different from someone thinking they drive a Jag so they get special treatment.

Agree with LRD.

It is the quality of the cycling/driving/trotting and the manners that counts. Nothing wrong with slow cycling but they need to observe common courtesies and the laws of the Highway.

YY.

And actually, I have seen loads of slow cyclists who are brilliant. It's stupid to make out there's a correlation between speed and ability to understand what's safe.

LRD You sound as if you expect people to have special respect for you because you imagine you're very fast as a cyclist, and that to me is no different from someone thinking they drive a Jag so they get special treatment

tbh I have more respect for someone who gets off their arse and propels themselves under their own power, rather than someone who merely flexes their flaccid ankle up and down on an accelerator pedal.

Well, sure, you've a point there less.

But I still think I would treat all cyclists the same, no matter how fast. Where I am, lots of parents have children on the back, lots of people have shopping on the back - they are slower. So what?

If you can't overtake, you must wait, just as you would for a car.

You aren't expected to leave a six foot gap for a car you are overtaking in case it wobbles and goes under your wheels.

Or is it OK not to do that if they are cycling two abreast?

Do I get a moral gold star for conveying myself on foot, on two wheels AND on a horse then?

I'm pretty sure Jessica Ennis/Rebecca Atherton and Steve Redgrave all drive and nobody could say their ankles are flaccid.

What a facile argument it is to equate car driving with physical unfitness and indolence.

Well, personally, I am more impressed by (say) Jessica Ennis than by your average Jag driver.

I'm sure many people would agree with me.

The issue is, impressed as we might be by fast cars and very good cyclists ... why on earth would we treat them differently?!

What I meant was that if driving a car = laziness+flaccid ankles and cycling=moral and physical superiority then where does that place athletic car drivers (Jensen Button!) such as Ennis?

Why don't more people cycle, out of interest? Plenty of people live in my village and work in the city centre which is 6 miles away so it takes about 15 minutes for a speedy cyclist or a maximum of half an hour for a slower one. The same two takes usually an hour on a car because it is very contested. Plenty of the journey has decent cycle lanes and yet loads of people drive it. Why?

I couldn't cycle at work because of the copious amounts of paperwork (all confidential and weighing a ton) and medical equipment I often needed to cart about. I also had to convey patients about- not best achieved on a bike when they are mentally very unwell.

I think it would be an excellent idea for cyclists to be given plenty of guidance on training when they buy a bike and for all bike purchases to come with membership of the CTC for insurance purposes.

I also think it would be a really good idea for drivers to retake their driving test every 10 years so people realise that their little bad habits are actually fucking dangerous and could kill someone.

Shame the guy who was on his phone and crashed his car into my DH and DD (yes they were on the off road cycle track and wearing proper clothing) last summer hadn't read his Highway Code in a while or bothered to concentrate properly, then DH might still be able to walk.

They should make it illegal to carry anything on a bike unless it is in panniers and the weight is distributed correctly. I am fed up of seeing idiots cycling with heavy bags hanging off the handlebars, who wobble along. They are a danger to themselves and to everyone else.

Shit skaen, I'm sorry to hear that, so unfair.

I'm sorry that happened to you both Skaen and I too am all for compulsory retesting of car drivers every so on.

I passed my driving test way back in 1983. There was no mention of cyclists. Prior to that I rode a motorbike, as did the rest of my family. Day one my father told me "never argue with something bigger than yourself and assume that everyone else on the road is an idiot". I rode accordingly and it kept me safe.

We live in a cycling city. Last week I was walking across a zebra crossing on the green man when a very fast moving cyclist overtook a bus and shot across my path. He missed me by about a cm.

I had cycling training last year and was horrified when the trainer told me to "take the road". Cyclist are being taught these assertive techniques but drivers who passed their test back in the 1980s don't know this, and assume, as I did, that the cyclist is just being arrogant.

I rode my bike to work for a week, all on cycle paths, and gave up and went back to walking. It was terrifying. Very fast cyclists head towards you at full pelt and expect you to jump out of their way, or shoot up behind you with no warning, when they can clearly see you are a novice.

A frequent assertion is that cyclists don't cause pollution. If you are freewheeling along at 4mph with a massive queue of cars stuck behind you in second gear because they can't get past, what do you think is happening pollution wise? And I have to overtake you as if you were a car, but you can squeeze up into the 2 inches of road between me and the kerb. Why aren't you giving me the same room?

4mph. Really. You can barely stay upright on a bike at 4mph so you'll forgive me for thinking you are exaggerating a tad. Regardless, you'll spend far more time chugging out pollution sat in traffic jams than you will for the 10 seconds a week you get stuck behind a cyclist (average speed on the road for even a slow cyclist = 15 mph).

WRT your second question, the answer is fairly obvious. A cyclist passing a stationary car is a completely different thing to a fast moving car passing a moving cyclist. If you still aren't sure, think about the smallest gap you would be happy walking through - a door, say. Then think about whether you'd be happy about a car passing you with the same gap.

winterkills I have worked as a cycle courier in the US and had cycling holidays in europe. I have never encountered the same level of contempt and hostility towards cyclists then as I have in this country - I find it really baffling

Yep. Depressing, isn't it? I've lived in Holland, Germany, Switzerland and Italy, and the UK has some of the strangest, most intolerant people I've ever encountered.

Its as if theres a hatred of people who don't choose to become overweight as they progress through life, and do something healthy and fun.

The driving, standards of car maintenance and lack of compliance with insurance, MOT and licensing requirements are pretty worrying too.

I agree with GuybrushThreepwoodMP

If you can't cope with reasonable road hazards you should do the rest of us a favour and walk.

And do try to look both ways when crossing.