Cyclist at Pedestrian Crossing

[grumpypedestrian]

First off I’m all for people cycling, it’s a great mode of transport.

Ive had yet another close encounter and narrowly avoided being hit by a cyclist. Is there an unknown rule that cyclists can go full speed through pedestrian crossings?

Ive experienced nearly being hit by cyclists going through red lights too.

The problem that needs fixing is poor driving.

How will that fix poor cycling? Do explain how fixing poor driving will stop cyclists running red lights and ignoring zebra crossings (which is what this thread is about). It won't so stop deflecting.

Registration doesn't stop motorists driving like arseholes.

People are the problem. Some people just don't know how to use the roads properly. The mode of transport they use is irrelevant.

I don't condone any form of bad travelling but....the mode of transport is not the issue here, it's the person. A bad cyclist would be a bad driver and would be a bad pedestrian too.

I don't think that's necessarily true, not least because people are identifiable in a car where they are unlikely to be identifiable on a bike. Therefore a cyclist who ignores red lights is not likely to do so as a driver because they will know that the chances are they will be picked up on camera and may well be prosecuted.

People don't walk around with licence plates on their jumpers and yet we aren't all going around stabbing people and robbing shops on the basis that we can't possibly be identified.

And it's not like car plates can't be removed/cloned or whatever either.

Registration of bikes has been tried in other parts of the world and it only serves to discourage people from cycling. It's a stupid idea.

What is discouraging about being in some way registered/identifiable if you don't intend to do anything wrong?

The bureaucracy involved stops people considering it as an easy form of transport

It's another barrier in the way of people just jumping on a bike and going to the shops. Getting people out of cars and onto bikes makes the roads less congested, makes the roads safer, reduces wear and tear and pollution and increases general health. We should make it as easy as possible, not put completely unnecessary barriers in the way.

Interesting take on got nothing to hide, got nothing to fear though

I don't know any rule that permits cyclists to go through zebra crossings at speed when a pedestrian is waiting to cross. YANBU, OP. If, as your post implies, you've been close to being hit in such circumstances then the cyclist in question is cycling in a dangerous manner without paying proper attention and needs to do better.

Cars are cause infinitely more fatalities and often drivers don't pay sufficient regard to cyclists, some are just downright aggressive and dangerous.

Its possible to have both thoughts in your head, they're aren't mutually exclusive.

It is stupid to shut down OPs point here because other 'bads' in the world might be bigger or more frequent.

Cyclists MUST give way to pedestrians at all crossings when green and must stop at zebras too.

Pedestrians are more vulnerable, so they're the highest priority on roads ahead of all vehicles.

Including bikes.

Simple as that.

@enchantedsquirrelwood

Cyclists are not the problem.

So on a thread about a cyclist failing to stop at a pedestrian crossing and almost hitting a pedestrian in the process, you claim that it is not the cyclist who is the problem? Whose fault is it then?

OP I agree with you as I have experienced similar recently with a cyclist running a red light, at speed, on a pedestrian crossing. Never had that from a car driver!
Your thread is only interpreted as "goady" by the few cycling enthusiasts who crop up on every cyclist thread on MN and whose sanctimonious/whataboutery/deflecting/sarcastic/rude responses often do far more to "spread the hate" than anything you've raised.

Unfortunately like a lot of things in life MUST does not mean people DO.
Living in London I see cyclists going straight across crossings when the green man is up, across zebra crossings when people are on it. I've had cyclists ring bells and shout at me when I'm crossing on a green man/zebra crossing. Sometimes they weave in between many people crossing. I've even twice seen people hit by cyclists. (Not badly hit though. Just clipped. But I've never seen a car hit a person my life. Seen cars hit cars and cars hit cyclists though.)
Obviously it isn't all cyclists. And in other parts of the country I've noticed it much less. But I would say I see it on average twice a week in London.

So on a thread about a cyclist failing to stop at a pedestrian crossing and almost hitting a pedestrian in the process, you claim that it is not the cyclist who is the problem? Whose fault is it then

the key word in that sentence is "almost"

Nothing happened.

I would say I see it on average twice a week in London

yes I agree, I've said above that cyclists in London can be a menace.

I am not sure being licensed makes drivers behave any better. Just makes them easier to catch.

A stupid human is a stupid human, regardless of what vehicle they are in or on.

Drivers are also protected in their tin cans.

The government doesn't have infinite resources and needs to concentrate them where it will have the greatest impact. Dealing with dangers rather than irritations is more important. Unless irritations have a health impact, such as noise pollution.

It is a question of priorities.

Breaking the law and cycling dangerously is OK then as long as nothing happens, as this is what you seem to imply? Your argument is typical of the very cycling enthusiasts I was referring to in my PP.....every excuse under the sun to minimise the fact that some cyclists are dangerous! The fact that nothing happened on this occasion does not equate to nothing will ever happen if the cyclist in the OP continues to think they are above the law and invincible.

It's goady because the OP came on with a stupid faux-naive statement clearly designed to kick off another cyclists are bastards road tax helmets blah blah thread.

It's the same as starting a thread about drivers saying "so, is it true that audis don't have indicators and BMW drivers can't get speeding tickets?"

@Frabbits

You've just confirmed my point!

"Your thread is only interpreted as "goady" by the few cycling enthusiasts who crop up on every cyclist thread on MN and whose sanctimonious/whataboutery/deflecting/sarcastic/rude responses often do far more to "spread the hate" than anything you've raised."

The premise being: is there a law OP didn't know about that allows it, when the answer is obviously there is no such law

Is clearly goady as fuck.

OP I agree, people should ride according to the law, and fortunately, most do

Sure hun.

A bit like "almost" being hit whilst on a bike from a close pass from a motorist you mean?
Double standards much?

The car is more likely to kill, cars are a menace

Not if they only "almost" hit someone.

But that is not the topic of this thread. Strange that cyclists are trying to deflect rather than recognising that cyclists too also have a duty - to not cause injury to more vulnerable people than themselves.