8 radical solutions to protect cyclists

[Desperate Daniella]

Good for the LTDA - it is no longer a small minority who break the law in London.

 

10,000 tickets is nothing for a city the size of London. It means that most law-breaking cyclists are getting away with it which is why they will continue to do it.

 

The cyclist who knocked over the little girl when he jumped the red light and then rode off should have got at least five years. As the mum of a nine year old girl I'd have given him at least 10!

 

DD's idiot cyclist of the week: The guy who shot up on my driver's side as I was turning right, turned on the inside of me and then cut straight across the front of my car so he could mount the pavement!!!

[king12345]

I saw a great one today in Feltham.

A guy holding a little boy was crossing on the zebra and cars had stopped to let them pass.

A stupid cyclist was overtaking all the cars at full speed.

The pedestrian saw him and stopped half way through the zebra, just in front of the stationary car as the cyclist was approaching even faster.

He then kicked the cyclist off his bike all the way to the opposite pavement.

He calmly completed the crossing, stood over the hurt and confused cyclist and very politely said: "Sorry Sir, I didn't see you crossing the road" and walked away.

I was in stitches and the cyclist had a go at me.

I kept on laughing and he then asked me to wait there as he was gonna call the police and I needed to give a statement.

My answer: " Good luck to you!" and walked away.

One of the best Saturday morning of my life!

[fletch70]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541739/More-11-000-cyclists-caught-running-red-lights-riding-pavements-just-one-year.html

 

 

I am afraid that anything written in that rag is a waste of paper

[fletch70]

I saw a great one today in Feltham.

A guy holding a little boy was crossing on the zebra and cars had stopped to let them pass.

A stupid cyclist was overtaking all the cars at full speed.

The pedestrian saw him and stopped half way through the zebra, just in front of the stationary car as the cyclist was approaching even faster.

He then kicked the cyclist off his bike all the way to the opposite pavement.

He calmly completed the crossing, stood over the hurt and confused cyclist and very politely said: "Sorry Sir, I didn't see you crossing the road" and walked away.

I was in stitches and the cyclist had a go at me.

I kept on laughing and he then asked me to wait there as he was gonna call the police and I needed to give a statement.

My answer: " Good luck to you!" and walked away.

One of the best Saturday morning of my life!

 

And you condone that? Two wrongs do not make a right and you are condoning violence AND the child will grow up to think it is acceptable. What sort of example is that.

[sailor sam]

I am afraid that anything written in that rag is a waste of paper

 

So it's all inaccurate then? Or are you speaking as a cyclist yourself?

 

The article comes as no surprise to me as I see this all the time where I live. Plus I recently was almost knocked over myself on a paved area in Great Yarmouth by a cyclist even though there were "cycling prohibited" signs in place.

[fletch70]

Sam I am both a driver and a cyclist.

 

My issue is with the way the Daily fascist manipulates any statistics to make he point they want

 

As for the cyclist who killed a child, I can not comment because I do not know what sentence would have been the guideline for a motorist. It should have been the same IMHO, no more no less

[sailor sam]

Sam I am both a driver and a cyclist.

 

My issue is with the way the Daily fascist manipulates any statistics to make he point they want

 

As for the cyclist who killed a child, I can not comment because I do not know what sentence would have been the guideline for a motorist. It should have been the same IMHO, no more no less

 

This is one of the problems. The thing is that most of the laws applying to cyclists were made a long time ago and unlike for cars, havn't kept up with today's traffic environments. For example, there isn't an offence of death by dangerous or careless cycling but yet there have been a couple of fatalities over the last few years. So cyclist will always get a lessor penalty than a motorist because the law is outdated.

 

No deterrent you see.

[king12345]

And you condone that? Two wrongs do not make a right and you are condoning violence AND the child will grow up to think it is acceptable. What sort of example is that.

 

Firstly I'm sure the cyclist will never do that again.
Secondly children should be thought that a stupid cyclist determined to kill someone should be punished.
And please don't lecture me with the legal procedures and all the rest.
This way is easier and cheaper: no taxpayers money wasted, no expensive trials, no upset victim after the cyclist is given community order, etc.
And before you ask, I'm a cyclist, a biker and a car driver.
If, and only if, I did something stupid like this cyclist today I would deserve a kicking from the near missed pedestrian and accept it.
Well done to the guy with the boy I say!

[fletch70]

I just can not agree with you. Like it or not we have to rely on the rule of law.

 

I tell you what , why don't we let the mob dole out justice, that would save some money. let the lynch mob out there. Another option is , why not just stick anyone with a record on an island somewhere , or maybe have speed traps with bazookas ...now that would stop speeding wouldn't it

[king12345]

I just can not agree with you. Like it or not we have to rely on the rule of law.

 

I tell you what , why don't we let the mob dole out justice, that would save some money. let the lynch mob out there. Another option is , why not just stick anyone with a record on an island somewhere , or maybe have speed traps with bazookas ...now that would stop speeding wouldn't it

 

Good ideas!
You should be prime minister

[fletch70]

And my first act would be to shoot the mob

 

My 2nd would be to shoot anyone who disagreed with me

 

Then, because I was lonely I would move abroad:lol:

[Desperate Daniella]

And my first act would be to shoot the mob

 

My 2nd would be to shoot anyone who disagreed with me

 

Then, because I was lonely I would move abroad:lol:

 

[renegadeimp]

Where i live, until very recentley, cyclists had no choice but to ride on pavements. The roads here are just too dangerous. It got so bad last year, that we petitioned the local MP and Councillors to come and see for themselves. While they were there, one person got knocked off their bike ( thankfully he's fine).

 

This caused them to have a proper meeting about cycle paths, and finally, after years of asking and pleading, the council allocated close to a million pounds to add a full cycle path adjacent to the normal pedestrian path, for a total of 3 miles.

 

So please, if you start to mention cyclists on pavements, it helps to understand that a lot of the time, they simply have no choice. it;s either ride on the pavement and get fined, or risk your life riding on the road.

[fletch70]

Couldn't agree more Renegade. If you cycle on the main roads in Birmingham , the surface near the kerb is potholed and damaged. You just can not ride there. On the stretch of Pershore Rd I use I would suggest that 95% of the traffic exceeds the speedlimit , you can see that by the number of brake lights that come on as they approach the speed camera (that doesn't work). It is supposedly a 4 lane single carriageway but the lanes are not wide enough. Near the Cricket ground the cycle lane is actually on the footpath but due to repairs and wear and tare you can hardly see the dividing line .

 

On Bristol Rd only a fool would cycle as although the speed limit is 30 it is used as a race track even in the tunnels.

[MaxxPower]

So please, if you start to mention cyclists on pavements, it helps to understand that a lot of the time, they simply have no choice. it;s either ride on the pavement and get fined, or risk your life riding on the road.

If the road is too dangerous and the pavement is the only option, then you should dismount your bike and walk with it until such time as the road is safe again. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's what cyclists should be doing if they feel unable to cycle on the roads.

Cyclists most certainly DO have a choice, they simply choose to be arrogant when cycling on the pavement.

 

Motorists can't go "Well that road is a bit dodgy, I'll drive on the pavement instead", and neither can a cyclist.

[renegadeimp]

If the road is too dangerous and the pavement is the only option, then you should dismount your bike and walk with it until such time as the road is safe again. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's what cyclists should be doing if they feel unable to cycle on the roads.

Cyclists most certainly DO have a choice, they simply choose to be arrogant when cycling on the pavement.

 

Motorists can't go "Well that road is a bit dodgy, I'll drive on the pavement instead", and neither can a cyclist.

 

Walk with the bike. For a total of 3-4 miles + to get to work. It defeats the entire point of having a bike.

 

As for your closing comments comparing cyclists to motorists... Just dont go there. They are not comparable.

[sailor sam]

Walk with the bike. For a total of 3-4 miles + to get to work. It defeats the entire point of having a bike.

 

As for your closing comments comparing cyclists to motorists... Just dont go there. They are not comparable.[/QUOTE]

 

Actually they are. Both machines are driven/ridden by a person. It's that person who dictates whether their respective machine is used in a responsible manner or not.

 

This morning (well yesterday now!) I was confronted by a woman escorting her (I assume) young son while both riding bikes along a narrow one-way street the wrong way. It was quite foggy with visibility down to about 50 metres and as such, I had my dipped head-lights on. The cyclists on the other-hand, had no lights on so until they emerged out of the fog, I couldn't see them at all. But fortunately for them, I was driving in accordance with the conditions so I was able to just about stop before any collision occurred. And believe it or not, the woman thought I was at fault when I challenged her!

[MaxxPower]

Walk with the bike. For a total of 3-4 miles + to get to work. It defeats the entire point of having a bike.

 

As for your closing comments comparing cyclists to motorists... Just dont go there. They are not comparable.

They're perfectly comparable. Why wouldn't they be? The only reason they wouldn't be is if there was one set of rules for motorists and a different set of rules for cyclists. But I'm sure no cyclist would ever argue that was the case would they?

 

And I'm sorry but if the roads are 'too dangerous' to cycle on then the choices are,

Walk

Drive

Public Transport

Cycle on an alternative route

 

Cycling on the pedestrian pavement is NEVER an option.

[fletch70]

Why should a cyclist be forced to use alternative methods of transportation. I do not understand why cyclists and motorists can not rub along together. Maybe it is all related to extensions on Manhood

[Desperate Daniella]

Well that wouldn't apply to me! I am a Daniella, not a Dan.

 

Really though, cyclists and motorists did rub along together much better in the past. The anger directed at cyclists now is because many of the current generation of cyclists just don't believe the laws of the road apply to them.

 

I don't remember such animosity between cyclists and motorists until about 15-20 years ago. The first time I got angry was when I was nearly knocked flying by a cyclist mounting the pavement and aiming right at me. He missed me by a fraction. I was so terrified he was going to hit me that I dropped my bags to put my hands in front of my face. He didn't even stop. Cycling on the pavement then was almost unheard of. I was shocked that any cyclist would do it.

 

So it started off with a few bad cyclists but then other people who really should have known better realized that the bad cyclists were getting away with it so they adopted the same anti-social cycling habits knowing that the likelihood of ever getting a penalty was minuscule. As Sam relates above, even women with children are taking them the wrong way down one way streets in fog without lights despite the fact that this highly dangerous for their children. When challenged they berate the innocent motorist.

 

That's why motorists and cyclists no longer rub along together as they should. If everyone obeyed the rules of the road, and they were enforced as much on cyclists as they are on motorists, then everyone's standard of riding/cycling would be likely to improve and the level of animosity would drop.

[rebel11]

If they used unicycles there would be more room on the roads.

[Desperate Daniella]

But I can see them falling off more easily and imagine the damage it would do to your car if one fell off in front of you.

[rebel11]

Sorry, I now see it as being a flawed plan, plus pot hole damage would increase 10 fold.

 

But I can see them falling off more easily and imagine the damage it would do to your car if one fell off in front of you.

[Desperate Daniella]

Oh well, back to the drawing board then .....

[fletch70]

Everyone have Reliant Robins, more room on the road then when you take these 4 wheel drive penis extensions off the road. ( I wonder if the women who drive them are making up for Hubbys lack?)