Cyclists who act like they own the road should pay towards it

[dreamingofsun]

So cyclists get priority on the roads, and are happy to ride two abreast so they hold all the car traffic up. Shouldnt they at least pay towards the upkeep of the road?

This is it.

No matter the back and forth bickering about who pays what taxes and who the roads were originally designed for, the fact is, cyclists simply require a bit of care taking over them because they are vulnerable road users. That's it. That's the only practical impact of them.

Yes, you get nobhead cyclists, as you get nobhead motorists. Which one of those is more dangerous?

What?? Able bodied people get in the car to drive a distance that is less than a mile - who the hell are these people?

Ginmonkeyagain. these people laurel and hardy

Lots of school runs, Americans, people going to do a big shop (the latter is more understandable, things to carry etc).

I saw a video on Twitter of someone in the US filming from their office block as one of their colleagues backed his car out of the driveway from a few houses away, drove over the road, and parked at the office. It would have been a minute or two walk, maximum.

Ha! When I worked at a major tourist site Americans were obsessed with asking if there were "shuttle buses" to perfectely walkable places.

People who are time poor. I have a dog so I walk loads but if I have stuff to do at lunchtimes on a work day it makes more sense to take the car so I can fit it all in.

How much stuff do you have to do in your lunch break that is less than a mile away that takes more than an hour (noting that at least some of that will be taken up with starting the car and parking the car).

I live about 8 mins walk from my town centre. It would take me longer to take the car than it does to walk. Obviously if I need to buy something heavy or bulky I do take the car, although these days I am more likely to order online.

Indeed. Although if you're a woman going to the gym at night you will drive because you don't feel safe walking and may be worried that your bike will get nicked.

If men didn't attack women and if people didn't steal bikes we'd have more people walking and cycling, even without investing in cycling infrastructure.

No problem 😉

@GymBergerac

'.......they are just exercising socialising and getting outdoor enjoyment...' ???

LMAFO! 😆

Doing their best to get away from their wife and kids more like! Funny how these MAMILs are never 23 year old single blokes, or just dating/no kids.

I loathe MAMILS with every fibre of my being. They are SO entitled and arrogant and selfish.

They DO need to pay road tax like car drivers do, and also have a number plate/registration.' The amount of absolutely idiotic MALE cyclists I encounter on a weekly basis is phenomenal. As I say, entitled and arrogant to the nth degree!

Car drivers don't have a particular right to travel at a certain speed, just because they produce pollution.

Cyclists, people on horses and even runners have a right to not be intimidated on the road.

Enchantedsquirrel, women on bikes aren't exatly the demographic for sexual assault

Onefinemess- if we use your logic, we should ban cars from the road, given how many people die in them

Stupid post. Quite a few areas in the UK are flat as a pancake too (Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire, parts of Norfolk, parts of Lincolnshire, etc.) Germany is largely not flat, but it still has loads of cyclists. Because the cycling infrastructure is there.

OP if for any reason you are banned from driving, or are unable to drive, don't come asking me for sympathy.

Doing their best to get away from their wife and kids more like! Funny how these MAMILs are never 23 year old single blokes, or just dating/no kids.

I loathe MAMILS with every fibre of my being. They are SO entitled and arrogant and selfish.

That's a bit over-invested in made up stories about an entire group of people.

Also, MAMIL is a middle aged man in lycra, so obviously they're not 23 😂.

But there's actually a lot of people who cycle who are a range of ages. I cycled in my 20s. So did DH, although we weren't married then. Do you loathe me with every fibre of your being? Or is it just men of a certain age who get weird scenarios made up about them for their choice of hobby?

Some men probably are trying to avoid family life. Just like some men take up football, increase their gym schedule or play golf.

If some of the men I've worked with are anything to go by, there's also a lot of men who "work late" and probably have partners who talk about how demanding their hubby's job is. The working late seems to involve a lot of chatting with other men who like avoiding family life.

Honestly if you can’t beat them join them! Will be far better for your blood pressure than ranting away…

I now go cycling with my friends (MAWIL?!). It’s great - lost two stone and my arse is noticeably smaller and we get to enjoy the outdoors. We largely get positive vibes from car drivers actually usually similar aged women encouraging us up hills!

You don't need to cycle, it's just a massive EGO TRIP. If you can cycle somewhere, you can just as easily take a bus or taxi, the same doesnt apply for cars. Cycling isn't a legitimate form of transport in the UK and shouldn't be seen as one. There is absolutely 💯 no reason for anybody to cycle on a road

@onefinemess who's looking after the family brain cell this week?

Tomorrow morning I am due to start work just after 4am. If I still owned a car, it would take me 10 minutes to drive there, plus five minutes of walking to/from parking spaces at each end (for some reason the Victorians didn't design many parking spaces into this village). This would cost me money and pollute the environment.

To get there by public transport it would take 45 minutes with a change. Except that it wouldn't because there are no buses at 4am anyway. So I'd have to go to work and take a camp bed for a few hours. And again it's cost me money.

Taxi? You're joking, right? That'll be more than a tenner each way, and I'm relying on a third party setting his own alarm and getting up. If I don't get to work on time the commuters won't be getting to Manchester.

On the other hand I could just wheel my bike straight out of my front door, ride it the 18 minutes direct to my work place, and keep my money in my pocket. Win-win.

I cycle all the time as transport. Why is it not a form of transport?! What has that poster been smoking?! Too weird.

Cycling is ideal if you live in the suburbs takes 40 mins to walk into town or 10 mins to cycle. Not sitting in traffic soo ok it’s quicker to cycle than get the bus plus exercise and avoiding unpleasant nutters on buses.

Oh come on now, don't be daft. You're making an assumption that all cyclists are middle aged men, and you've picked a specific trait based on a generalisation. It's like saying "all librarians" are dowdy spinsters or "all McDonald's staff" are bored looking teenagers.

Clearly the MAMIL is a particular demographic, but they're a single small part of a massive group of people. Of the thirty or so people I regularly ride with, maybe 10% could be described as you have, and I'm pretty sure they aren't evading their families! You can't base an argument on a stereotypical generalisation.

At the end of the day, that isn't really the point of the thread anyway. There's no logic in hating and wanting to ban, or imposing additional penalties/taxes for an entire group of people simply because you don't like the way a small proportion of them behave.
I'm not terribly keen on people who drive enormous "vanity 4x4's" for half a mile to drop children at school if the buggers could walk or cycle...... Would I get my knickers in a knot about them? No, because life's too short.
Yes, some cyclists are dickish. As are some drivers. If everyone behaved responsibly on/in their chosen method of transport, the world would be a safer and more harmonious place.

Cyclists exist, whether you like them or not, and they are vulnerable, and cars can kill, so it makes sense that the big machine with the engine is taxed, and that you need a license to drive it.

Cyclists create no emissions and very little wear and tear on the road (unlike your car). They are also (by virtue of not driving a car) freeing up space that makes it easier for you to drive (and park). You could try showing a bit of gratitude instead of ranting bitterly?

As I said numerous times. Pedestrians and cyclists should be banned from walking on carriageways.

Country lanes are no different. Either drive or take public transport. If there isn't a pavement then you don't walk on that road. Same as you wouldn't walk or cycle down a motorway, even if it was more convenient for you to get to your destination.

So to answer your question, we should ban both pedestrians and cyclists from using those country lanes. A small inconvenience and expense for them, but a huge benefit in terms of safety.

There are no houses that cannot be accessed by a vehicle, so absolutely no reason to walk or cycle on the surrounding roads.

If you live rurally and cannot afford a car, then the reality is that you cannot afford to live in that location. If pedestrians and cyclists were indeed banned from using the roads then people would move to a location where there were pavements and cycle tracks for them to use. People are changing their cars to comply with ULEZ, so modal shift can be directed at pedestrians and cyclists to encourage them to drive.

HTH

Modern cars are not polluting. That's why they don't have to pay the ULEZ charge.

Try to keep up. Now back to my original question about lungs?

Very few people die in cars.