To ask how we stop dangerous cyclists

[Everythingisnumbersnow]

Why do the most dangerous ones wear those stupid little headcams too? YOU'RE the problem, guy.

It doesn't matter who causes the most irritation

It matters who causes the most death and injury through their self righteousness ans arrogance and their large heavy fast and poorly controlled car

But hey someone feels upset - poor diddy dums

I’m one of the ones that carries my kids around in a cargo bike at about 11mph in an area of London where the average speed is about 8mph. Constantly being cut up or overtaken by aggressive wankers only to have them stop at a light or turn left immediately.

Next time you get stuck behind a cyclist, remember that they are delaying you by seconds - maybe minutes. Is your time really so precious you’d risk the lives of a fellow human for a minute or two?

Doubtful.

if a pedestrian didn’t do this and blocked a path by continuing in the middle of the path this would be the equivalent of two or three cyclists riding side by side, centred on the white line and not allowing cars past in either direction. Never seen it. Can’t imagine it happening

You really can’t even imagine people doing this? It happens frequently where I live. Cyclists often ride two or three abreast and even in bigger groups. All down winding country lanes where you can be waiting to pass them for miles because there’s no safe place. Selfish wankers, all of them.

I’m talking about in the middle of the whole road. Ie both sides of the centre line. That does not happen. I explained in my previous post why cyclists ride 2 abreast taking up their carriageway which they are entitled to do and is safer. I’m not going to make myself less safe and encourage cars to squeeze by unsafely. It’s me that will be killed.

If you’re talking about a narrow country lane with only room for a car in one direction that’s different. I clearly mentioned a white central line, so two carriage ways.

I accept on a narrow country lane it’s more difficult all round. If I’m with friends and it’s safe for the car to overtake we’d definitely go single file. If it’s too narrow for a car to squeeze past when we’re single file we’d stay in pairs to prevent a dangerous overtake. Personally I’d pull us all in at the first wider point/gateway as I don’t particularly want a car behind us for ages. But guess it depends on the road. Maybe I know after five mins we’re turning off or the road gets wider in which case I may be more inclined to think they can wait. Depends how busy the road is. I’m not pulling in every two minutes 🤷🏻‍♀️.

There are roadworks where I live restricting access to an A road for 3 years. However there are recent notices to warn cyclists who are crossing the blocked off route to avoid the diversion causing risk of death to themselves and motorists following the rules. Why do cyclists think that rules don't apply to them?

Will keep saying this

Don't blame the people who are getting killed

Blame the killers

That’s kind of like blaming lions for eating the people that waved a steak while dancing around in their enclosure though.

Another cyclist bashing thread. Judging cyclists by different standards from car drivers. About 25% of car drivers are unfit to have a licence, either medically or because of their conduct behind the wheel.

Discrimination or victimisation, I am not sure which.

the issue with this is that its cause of death not cause of accident.

If we held cyclists to the same standards as drivers, how many would be found to be unfit to be on a bike?

Wow, you do realise most cycle deaths are not the cyclists fault

Scientists also reckon that more than a quarter of the microplastics in the ocean were shed from car tyres. That stuff is getting into the food chain!

Hardly any. You need to be pretty fit to ride a bike in the first place, and the consequences of road rage in a driver as opposed to a cyclist are incomparable.

Ludicrous comment.

Given that car drivers routinely get away with murder (literally and figuratively), next to no one would fall afoul.

I think that it's time to hold car drivers to the same standards as train drivers. Zero tolerance of drink & drugs, zero tolerance of speeding, zero tolerance of failing to stop etc. There wouldn't be a single motorist left on the road.

I have seen government statistics on this subject. If I find them again I'll post them. They tot up which party was deemed to be responsible for the many fatalities and serious injuries each year (spoiler: not cyclists)

What I don’t understand is when there is a completely free pavement going on forever and no pedestrians but they still decide to go on the road and hold all the traffic up - it’s so odd.

Cyclists are not meant to be on the pavement!

And bikes are part of traffic.

Can I remind you all that at this time of year pedestrians too are totally invisible at night. Most people wear black or dark blue and you know, you do have to cross the roads sometimes, you're not always on the pavement. Next time you're driving, notice how hard pedestrians are to spot in the dark and take note for your own safety.

I would hold cyclists to the same standards as well. Including the state of the vehicle that they use.

I drive, cycle, walk and take buses in London, and it astounds me there aren't more deaths. Actually, I think drivers are much more cycle aware than they were even five years ago, and I think that's because the electric rental bikes have brought a lot more bikes onto the road. So more drivers are also cyclists, and even those who never use bikes are at least used to seeing a lot of bikes around.

Some of you sound quite unaware, though. In London, where the speed limit is generally 20mph, cyclists are not delaying drivers behind them; we are generally moving the same speed. It would help if, when you're in your car, you remind yourself that you are driving not because you want to get there faster (you won't, not in London) but because you have luggage or children or bad weather or hills. You can still appreciate the luggage/children/warmth in your bubble while going the speed of the traffic around you.

Drivers in the city should not be trying to push past cyclists, especially since the Highway Code (and plain common sense) tell cyclists to stay at least half a metre away from parked cars that can swing their doors open without warning -- so the bicycle has to be in the middle of the lane. And drivers may not pass a cyclist with less than a car's width between them, which means only in places where they could equally pass another car.

Cyclists are supposed to stop in front of the queue of cars at every traffic light, not to the side or behind. That's why most marked intersections in London now have a box painted for cyclists at the front of the queue.

On the whole I do not see a lot of dangerous cyclists, and as far as I do, they're mainly dangerous to other cyclists (us grannies on bikes) rather than pedestrians. And they are not the infamous MAMILs. Some of them are in fact YMIL (young men in lycra), but as a PP said upthread, most of them are delivery cyclists who should be easy to register and number-plate. But by far the biggest danger on the roads everywhere are HGVs. It's astonishing in this age of in-vehicle cameras that any truck or bus is considered road-legal if the driver can't see all the way around his own vehicle.

Again, this would penalise hardly any cyclists.

My PP was as usual far too long! 😅TL;DR: car drivers need to remember that the speed limit is a maximum, not a target. You do NOT have some kind of god-given right to go faster than the rest of traffic, which includes cyclists.

Yeah but surely it’s common sense to make use of the pavement if it’s empty!

That's illegal though.