To think cycling should be banned under lockdown?

[catsarelifetome]

I just had to drive to an essential medical appointment, and come across dozens of cyclists.

Why is cycling still allowed when driving is only allowed for essential travel? Surely the 1 hour exercise should be restricted to walking? If the cyclist falls off or is hit by a car, that puts pressure on emergency services.

And yes I know a very small minority will be cycling to an essential job... but I doubt all the people I saw were doing so. Surely the rules should be the same... essential travel only.

Why is it that just because one person is finding life a bit shit at the moment they have to get upset that others might be finding small ways to keep going and eek a little but of enjoyment out of life. You want to ban cycling just because they looked like they might be having fun. I despair.

Having seen how the local park has been I think that dogs should be kept on leads during the lockdown too. I've seen dogs off lead running up to people/other dogs and the owners have not been able to retrieve them due to the two meter rule. Some people have no thought for others at all.

Also runners running past, just because you're going past quickly doesn't mean I want you less than two meters to me.

But yes, back to the topic, there are definitely a lot more cyclists around so I see your point.

SuperMum loads of people really hate cyclists at the best of times and the current situation gives them lots of 'reasons' to put the boot in.

See also, children and people with mental health issues.

@ILikeTrains I had that situation with an off lead dog yesterday. Owner was busy chatting (yes really) and his dog was really bothering mine. I kept trying to pull away but the dog wouldn't leave us. When he retrieved it, he came far too close to me. Of course you don't want to say anything because you don't want to get into a prolonged conversation or potentially an argument.

Shall we cease to exist and completely give up on life?

I don't care about people cycling.

I care about them not wearing hi vis. I've seen a ton of cyclists over the past week, and I think 2 had on hi vis. I live in the countryside, so if you wear dark clothes on the road, you blend into the background. More likely to get hit by a car then.

Cycle if you want. Just be safe and not stupid. If you can afford a bike, you can afford hi vis.

Totally agree about hi-vis. Though I think pedestrians should wear it in winter too.

During the day, i can see cyclists the same way I can see pedestrians. Hi vis in the day?

'Just be safe and not stupid' - cyclists deaths are generally the fault of bad drivers not 'stupid' cycling

Oh do jog on op.

Scientific data suggests that there are 800,000 premature deaths per year in Europe from air pollution. Whilst some of that comes from the energy, aviation and manufacturing sectors, much comes from driving.
We have tinkered around the edges with by-laws against idling but we have yet to make any inroads against the driving lobby, which is very strong in this country and worldwide.
It is therefore not surprising that people hate cyclists. Cars appear to be a massively important part of our psyche, and the bigger the better.
I very much hope that people will use C19 to think about other unnecessary premature deaths due to the effects of our over-reliance on cars.
Far more people should cycle and hopefully those who have taken it up as their daily exercise will continue with it.

'Just be safe and not stupid' - cyclists deaths are generally the fault of bad drivers not 'stupid' cycling

Right, because the driver is the stupid one, not the cyclist dressed in dark green with no lights on, cycling in the dark. Even during the day that's difficult to see.

It's stupid to be on the road with no hi vis or lights. You can try and argue against that point, but the highway code disagrees with you. It costs a few pound to buy a hi vis vest, if your life isn't worth that to you, that's your choice.

. *More likely to get hit by a car then.

Cycle if you want. Just be safe and not stupid. If you can afford a bike, you can afford hi vis*

I am always high viz’d up to the eyeballs. Jacket, helmet, trousers, bike reflectors, plus half a dozen lights.

I’ve been hit by cars in full daylight twice. Once in the dark by a stationary vehicle opening their door, but it was a busy city centre area with plenty of streetlights.

There is research to show that motorists see a “professional” cyclist in lycra, hi viz etc they take more risks, get closer as they perceive that cyclist as less likely to make unpredictable moves, to be more experienced and therefore less likely to fall off in a backdraft. They actually give those cyclists with no equipment more room as they are percieved to be “beginners” who might fall off if a car gets too close.

Cycling now is popular because it's being used as a leisure activity. People aren't having to travel to work, take their kids to school or adhering to tight deadlines. Of course once it's over people will be back in their cars because their normal lives don't support only travelling within a small radius of their house with no deadline.

if your struggling to see a cyclist wearing green, then get your eyes tested before you drive as you're a danger to everyone on the highway not just cyclists

@Micah

I really don't think the same way as other drivers then. I see the hi vis ones as sensible and smart cyclists, and the non hi vis ones subject's of a darwinian experiment that are still lucky to be part of it.

I have seen some lycra clad ones that were still in dark colours. Professional idiots I guess.

As a society we need to move away from cars. They are polluting, dangerous and encourage bad behaviour in humans. The air in our neighbourhood is so much fresher now it’s really noticeable. Much quieter too. People are cycling instead. As it should be.

Dutch case

This is an interesting read. Why are we so threatened by cycling in the UK when ( from my two short visits) the Netherlands embrace it with no fuss? I think it comes down to two things -

• better design of safe segregated cycle paths, segregated from both pedestrians and cars. This would require a massive but worthwhile overhaul of road design and city planning. So there are cycle only routes to almost everywhere.

1. distinction between "sport cyclists" and "people on a bike". If you are cycle fitness training at speed yeah, wear Lycra, you need a helmet because if you fall off it will be at speed, go somewhere quiet or purpose built. People just out for the bike equivalent of a family walk or shopping/commuting etc, there is absolutely minimal risk of injury at those speeds. The only need for all the protective gear is to protect from cars. Which could be sorted by segregation.

The shared paths thing is I think a really rubbish design only works for very low traffic. But we are all being very quick to take offence too.

www.eta.co.uk/2017/10/20/the-british-curse-of-high-vis/

The nearest I came to being hit on a bike I was wearing a neon pink jacket. I was on a bike with a bright yellow basket.
The driver just didn't bother to look before entering the roundabout.

I was in Berlin recently and the cyclists and pedestrians mingled

Difference was the cyclists were going at a slower pace

Everyone made room happily for everyone

It was just a different culture around it

www.devonlive.com/news/local-news/smashed-up-police-car-shows-3804668

Police can and ambulance- yet both vehicles are damaged

Read the language used, roads are dangerous- no they are not drivers are dangerous when inattentive

No amount of flashing lights and hi biz will compensate for an inattentive driver

The message should be drivers start looking, people have become conditioned to blaming vulnerable highway users rather than laying fault with drivers

Even on here people want pedestrians to wear hi viz 🙈

The curse of the hi viz link has already been linked to 😊

@hearhoovesthinkzebras bikes should be part of our usual lives. Most trips done by car could be done by bike. I can carry both kids plus gear on my e cargo bike. It also takes me less time to get to kid pick up with a bike than by car, as the bike path avoids the traffic jams

Great loopy if you have the time to do it, are physically able to do it, and all of your travel is within distances manageable on a bike and with sufficient time to do it.

Research has just shown that the safe distance (re virus transmission) be a cyclist and a pedestrian is 30m. So yes.

@porcupine link to the study please.

Are you suggesting that a cyclist 30m away will infect but a pedestrian 2m away won’t? Sounds a bit far fetched.