to wonder why people are so horrible to cyclists that are not breaking the rules?

[DataColour]

Even I get irate at cyclists who go through red lights, pedestrian crossings etc. But how about those that obey the road rules?

This afternoon, cycling with DS14 and DD12, one car honked us whilst overtaking. No reason, apart from the fact that they were delayed by a few seconds as they couldn't go past me within inches to spare. I was riding in the middle of the rode and DD to my left, which is perfectly within the rules.
Minutes later, a road which I always ride in the middle because, if even half a chance, vehicles will overtake without giving any space. A group of pedestrians, shout at us, saying "you should be riding behind each other, what's wrong with you?"??
WTAF???

Why are some people such twats? Luckily (or unlikely) my DCs are used to this, so weren't bothered. Some driver gave my DD (11 at the time) the finger whilst cycling to school. A grown man trying to get one up on a 11yr old girl.

https://goo.gl/maps/R6q4kmwpmgMdGkaV9

A34 bypass round Newbury. The bit on the right is a cycle lane. 70 MPH traffic, surprise gutter on your left and reflectors in the cycle lane on the right. No chance of being hit by the lorry with that painted line protecting you.

I don't believe any cyclist has used that lane. Adds to the council's total though!

@HVC164

I believe I did actually state that for those motorists committing offences, there should be consequences. You are also making assumptions in that I consider the life of a cyclist to be less important than my car, which of course I don't. I was merely giving an example of the difficulty faced by a motorist in identifying bad cyclist behaviour, whatever that might be, and holding cyclists to account because although you may not behave irresponsibly, there are certainly others who do! Cyclists are not always the hard done by victims!
I also drive with respect and patience. I don't agree with blasting horns, hurling abuse from windows or any other form of intimidation and I agree that dangerous drivers should have privileges removed. That applies to cyclists too though but it so much more difficult to enforce where dangerous cyclist behaviour is concerned e.g. apparently police cannot insist on breathalysing a cyclist even though the whole idea of a cyclist on the road under the influence of drink or drugs is mind blowing!

I live up a mostly one track hill and I would love to be able to communicate with cyclists from my car, "I'm happy to stay a good six car lengths behind in first gear and I'm turning off soon, please don't wave me round you on a bend that neither of us can see around and then get arsey when I stay back, I will only overtake if I'm sure that it's safe for both of us and I will not harass you." There are idiots on bikes and idiots in cars.

Frankly, any cyclist stupid enough to cycle on the A34 at Newbury deserves all they get. Probably why I've never seen one doing it.

Cycling 2 abreast was illegal until quite recently. I must admit I was shocked when I found out the law had been changed without any sort of public announcement that I could see.

The other day, I usually always stop at the traffic lights unless it's too close and they have suddenly started to change lights, as you never know if an unmarked police car ect is nearby.

I was on route almost at the lights and they turned yellow, so I took the chance and went for it, (had I emergency stopped chances are I'd have come off the bike) then without even looking the pedestrians start crossing and have the cheek to shout at me for going though, the lights.

I looked back and shouted it was on yellow at the time which it was, hardly my fault they choose to start walking just because it bleeped for them to cross without them looking.

My point is, they are not the same situations and cannot be compared. Irritating behaviour from a cyclist will not have the devastating consequences of dangerous behaviour from a car driver in a similar situation. These comparisons too often function as a red herring to derail the discussion. Frankly, all road users should be thanking anybody with a dash cam who reports dangerous incidents because it’s keeping us all safer and policing the roads, not immediately jumping to ‘but what ifs’ and linking to totally different/unrelated examples.

If you’d like to have a separate discussion about making cyclists register etc., I believe that’s been bandied around for a while. From what I gather, ultimately the amount of money spent on implementing such a scheme would only decrease active travel dramatically by adding barriers (obviously bad for health and the environment) and be far too expensive and cumbersome to implement and monitor for the negligible ‘risk’ that cyclists pose in comparison to motorised vehicles. It’s only real impact would be to fuel this ridiculous culture war and alienate people from living a healthier and greener lifestyle.

As for breathalysing cyclists suspected of being drunk, I’d support that for their safety too, and had no idea they could refuse. But I guess that’s a whole other conversation again!

Late to the party, but I wish I knew why. I’d love our 9yo to start going to school by himself, but because of the unpredictable and impatient behaviour I see from car drivers on our 10 minute ride it won’t be for a good year.

All of male relatives go as fast as they can on country roads to impress eachother. I don't know why they don't get their cocks and measuring tapes out. Pathetic little men with pathetic little egos.

I wouldn't cycle in the countryside for the life of me and I'd love to go on the beautiful walks on my door step but I can't because I have children who I want to keep alive.

Doesn’t even look wide enough to be a cycle lane!!!

I don't think it was illegal to ride 2 abreast? From memory the Highway Code said not more than 2 abreast.

And the change was covered extensively by newspapers, TV news and online both on the run up to and following the change.

It's what drivers are supposed to do, but why should they put themselves and others in danger just because 'it's what they're supposed to do.'

i regularly overtake cyclists & move into the other Lane, I’ve not ever put myself or anyone else in danger doing so. It’s not a difficult manoeuvre to overtake a cyclists and give the legal requirement of space

It has never been “illegal”. Cyclists have always been allowed to do it. The HC code now makes this clearer.

I wholly support cyclists and live in an area where there are many. I do however also get frustrated at behaviours that may not be illegal but are irritating.
Cyclists often cycle in packs. Each individual may not be doing anything illegal but as a pack they can be terrifyingly difficult to drive around. When 10-12 cyclist are swarming around me, some going to my left 'undertaking' some nipping to my right 'overtaking' and some in the centre in front of me, it is incredibly stressful. Stress creates irritation. Each cyclist may be doing a legal manoeuvre but as a group it's like a swarm from all angles. I can easily navigate the road with 1 or 2 cyclists. When however it is a group swarming around me, I feel like don't have enough eyes.
Please can someone tell me why cyclist ride two abreast? I know it's legal. I want to know why though. The other day I was on a country road. 4 cyclists riding 2 abreast. I did not feel I would be leaving enough clearance to overtake so I sat behind them. They were getting stressed. They kept looking behind. They kept gesticulating for me to overtake. It would have been dangerous for me to do so as the road was too narrow. Why didn't they just stop to single file? They did do this eventually but after a looooooong time. They appeared more stressed than I was.

Legal doesn't mean it is always sensible. Can you ride two abreast? Yes. Is it always the best approach? No.
Can you undertake and overtake and sit in the centre? Yes. All these are legal. Is it always safe to do so? No.

You need to contact the decision maker on the highway code for that one, the law isn't decided by you.

Please can someone tell me why cyclist ride two abreast? I know it's legal. I want to know why though.

Generally it’s safer for the cyclist and also for cars. Pulling out to pass a 2x2 formation means you need to be overtaking for less distance than passing 4 cyclists one behind the other. Also it means the car overtaking can’t try and squeeze past even when there’s oncoming traffic. Cars should wait until the road is clear in the opposite direction. It’s why solo cyclists may cycle in the middle of the lane (as the HC now encourages them to do).

Those cyclists shouldn’t have tried to wave you last though. And I would say it also depends on the road but when I’m cycling in a group the only time we drop to single is if we’re on a road where it’s not wide enough for a car to pass two cyclists side by side. If there is space then we stay side by side.

Here

This is what the police say as to whether it was and is legal to ride abreast with other cyclists.

And this diagram from the police says how if you are overtaking safely and legally the fact cyclists are side by side makes no difference

So by your own admission you only stop because a traffic officer may be around. That kind of says it all really. You only follow rules because by not following them, you personal would be negatively impacted. If you know you can get away with it, you'd do so. You don't follow rules because it's what you are supposed to do and for the safety and respect for other road users but because their might be a cop around.

It makes a massive difference on a single width country road.

A few weeks ago a 4x4 overtook is dangerously as we were coming up to a crossroads, of a car had turned into our road it would have been interesting!

driver gets infront, slams the brakes on and jumps out to scream at us because he reckoned we were “three abreast”. We weren’t, there were 5 of us, 2 pairs and me at the back by myself.

So not only was he dangerous, he then thinks it’s fine to intimidate a group of women about some fantasy situation he’s invented in his head!

Which is why I said in my previous post that on that sort of road I’d move to single. But the person who asked for an explanation can’t have been on that sort of road a she said they were gesturing for her to overtake and that she didn’t as she didn’t feel she could see enough to be safe, not that there wasn’t space.

If it was bleeping, you crossed at red. You should have stopped on amber. They stay amber long enough for you to stop. You are clearly at fault.

Yes it was exactly this sort of road. A single width road. I live in an area with many single width country roads. I am a fairly calm person and always leave too much time so I generally don't mind tootling along behind cyclists but when they sit 2 abreast chatting for actual miles on single width roads it does grind my gears a bit