AIBU Cyclist Twats

[TractorAndHeadphones]

Walking down lovely canals with DP. Supposed to be romantic - but every 5 minutes we were interrupted by a cyclists whizzing along! Some had the courtesy to ring the bell but even so they rode straight at us instead of around us.

This really boils my piss because cyclists always complain that cars overtake dangerously and that’s it’s their god given right to hold up traffic. But cyclists can ride straight through pedestrians?

There was enough space for a cyclist to ride alongside us if they’d been slower ; even so you don’t expect people to walk in single file on canal roads which are meant to be enjoyed slowly! There were families in front of us, mothers with prams etc. Thé cyclists were probably scared of swerving into the lake but if you can’t control your bike then dont bloody ride!
It really ruined my day.

This has also happened on pavements with people whizzing along in the middle. Even if the road is dangerous there’s no need to go that fast.
AIBU to think that cyclists are twats and should be licensed?
People often complain that cars are rude to cyclists but IMO people in general are twats. Cars can do more damage but they’re not behaving worse than cyclists.

@FloconDeNeige

cyclists don’t set out to annoy other road users.

Some of them absolutely do.

Why on earth would they do that ?

When I took my driving test, on one of the times, I was told by the examiner (and failed because of it) that I should have moved before I did, when I was waiting to go on a roundabout. Surely, there must be an aspect of having to keep the flow of traffic moving and the need to do what other road users are expecting. Surely riding slowly, three abreast on a road, increases the likelihood of collision, further back, because cars are going to be having to reduce their speed suddenly - that is if it's a quietish road, and not a tailback if slow traffic.

Why on earth would they do that ?

Fuck knows why - because they’re entitled wankers, maybe? Because they have a death wish?

@FloconDeNeige yep. They do it specifically to bother you. They get out of bed in the morning thinking about how much they want to make your journey 5 mins slower. Same as old people who drive really slowly.

@ripples101 obviously I don’t know flocon’s local roads but I can say with certainty in the U.K. cycling infrastructure and signage generally doesn’t use common sense or give regard to the reality of cycling. It is entirely possible that they judged following the signs could have put them in more danger but that this wasn’t factored into the design.

Sorry you’ve had a bad day but YABU for your attitude:

AIBU to think that cyclists are twats and should be licensed

@PattyPan

Nope and nope. The signs are there primarily for their benefit as they are obviously the most vulnerable of the road users here (there’s no footpath, it’s a mountain road leading up to a pass).

I can’t understand why some people are falling over themselves to justify unreasonable and dangerous behaviour by some cyclists

Vested interest and lack of self-reflection.

Because as a cyclist whatever you do is wrong. They hate you on the road. They hate you on the bike path. Ringing your bell is rude. Not ringing your bell means you give no warning. You literally cannot win. I am just trying to get to work in a quick environmentally friendly manner yet I am the devil incarnate! Every cyclist commuter is one less car in your traffic jam!

No vested interest here - I have said I rarely cycle and walk the majority of my journeys. I would never justify things like cyclists running red lights, which actually is a cyclist doing something dangerous. I just think cyclists are normal people not years who set out to deliberately wind up cars 🤷‍♀️

*Twats not years - that’s a weird autocorrect

Because as a cyclist whatever you do is wrong. They hate you on the road. They hate you on the bike path. Ringing your bell is rude. Not ringing your bell means you give no warning. You literally cannot win. I am just trying to get to work in a quick environmentally friendly manner yet I am the devil incarnate! Every cyclist commuter is one less car in your traffic jam!

You are focusing only on yourself and that’s while that is understandable you seem unwilling to see how pedestrians feel about this. There are legitimate concerns on our side as well.

I live near a canal I hate cyclists with a passion and I am a pedestrian who doesnt know how to drive.

they are just so entitled and you cant escape them when you walk down the path they think they have right of way to bomb past you and expect you to dive out the way and when you go to cross the road they think traffic lights and crossings dont apply to them.

Well when pedestrians stop wearing dark clothes in winter, stop wearing headphones, stop looking at their mobile phone screens, stop walking hand in hand blocking paths, stop walking on the cycling bit of shared paths, and start keeping their dogs on short leads on narrow paths, they can have an opinion on the "wrongdoing" of people on bikes.

Pedestrians are hardly perfect either and I can't really see how their lack of consideration for other road users is any less than that of cyclists and drivers. The impact is less - a lot less - but they are not innocent. And drivers have a much greater impact on me as a pedestrian than cyclists do. Yes it's irritating when one rides along the pavement, but at least there's still room for me, unlike when some w**ker parks on the pavement.

@ChardonnaysPetDragon

Because as a cyclist whatever you do is wrong. They hate you on the road. They hate you on the bike path. Ringing your bell is rude. Not ringing your bell means you give no warning. You literally cannot win. I am just trying to get to work in a quick environmentally friendly manner yet I am the devil incarnate! Every cyclist commuter is one less car in your traffic jam!

You are focusing only on yourself and that’s while that is understandable you seem unwilling to see how pedestrians feel about this. There are legitimate concerns on our side as well.

the high way code states that they must ride at pedestrian pace in shared areas and abide the rules of the road when on it. the only place they are legally allowed to bomb around ringing their bells at people is on designated cycle lanes. pedestrians have right of way on shared spaces and pedestrian footpaths.

@FloconDeNeige

I can’t understand why some people are falling over themselves to justify unreasonable and dangerous behaviour by some cyclists.

I find it more difficult to understand why people amplify the minor annoyances caused by cyclists, while minimising the real harms caused by drivers.

pedestrians have right of way on shared spaces and pedestrian footpaths

a pedestrian still needs to move over to let someone past - whether that is a faster walker, a jogger/runner or someone on a bike.

you don't get to stroll along at a snail's pace blocking everyone else

the high way code states that they must ride at pedestrian pace in shared areas and abide the rules of the road when on it. the only place they are legally allowed to bomb around ringing their bells at people is on designated cycle lanes. pedestrians have right of way on shared spaces and pedestrian footpaths.

I agree with you. Completely. My post above is quoting a previous poster I disagree with.

[quote FloconDeNeige]@MinnieMountain

Unless you’re a cyclist who is deliberately aggressive and dangerous, then it’s not about you. And if you are one, then suck it up.[/quote]
@FloconDeNeige if it's not about us responsible cyclists then why am I reading so many "all cyclists..." comments?

you don't get to stroll along at a snail's pace blocking everyone else

As a pedestrian you do. What if you are elderly, very young, have mobility issues or are simply tired? Pedestrians have priority and cyclists have to stick to that.

Why are you taking it personally? I’m a cyclist too and I’m not. I’m also a car driver, motorcyclist and pedestrian.

Most people have no problem with most cyclists. It’s the entitled and dangerous wankers that piss people off.

As a pedestrian you do. What if you are elderly, very young, have mobility issues or are simply tired? Pedestrians have priority and cyclists have to stick to that

Of course! And most pedestrians slow down or wait or pass and say 'hello' when they can - they don't whizz up behind with self-importance expecting everyone to walk single file and hyper-alert for the God on Wheels.

Scooters are currently illegal on the roads or pavements, yet many are ridden. My concern is that enthusiasm for ecologically-sound transport blinkers people to the fact that scooter riders are taking huge risks with the way they ignore the rules. It is as if it doesn't matter if you ride on the wrong side of a quiet road/ cross it diagonally/ mount the pavement on the other side of the road where you please/ ignore traffic lights.

If they are breaking the law now, and don't care, what will it be like when they are legal?. It will be free for all - travellers on all forms of transport will make decisions about what is safe based on their instinctive judgement, ignoring the possibility that their antics might distract cyclists/motorists/ lorry drivers.

That's it, definitively! Pedestrians have right of way on shared paths and cyclists should ride at a pedestrian pace. I guess because they are more vulnerable.

I worry about human error on the roads. Cyclists have a right to be there, but they are vulnerable. Whose fault it is is not the issue. We don't want casualties.Perhaps there should be cycle routes for them to use instead.

they don't whizz up behind with self-importance expecting everyone to walk single file and hyper-alert for the God on Wheels.

Lots of drivers on this thread have said exactly that. They expect cyclists to ride single file so they can get past.

I'm fairly sure which is the real 'God on Wheels' in this country and I don't think it's cyclists!

Where does it say that pedestrians have right of way on shared paths? News to me. I’d always assumed shared paths were shared.