SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Tom]

Bikes ran red lights with abandon, cars didn't.

Running a red light means not observing the stop line once the traffic signal has turned red. Anyone who does that has committed the offence. Yes, some cyclists will go through well after the light has changed, but they risk nobody's life but their own and generally do it at about 10-15mph. Your so-called "amber gambler" will be racing through at 30mph (often faster) and if that person hits another road user not also in a car, chances are someone will die. That never happens with a bicycle, the energies involved are too low.

It isn't difficult to understand that a cyclist who runs a red light and gets into difficulty can very easily extricate themselves from the situation, because the bike can be picked up and carried away. You can't do that in a car. Christ, that's why red lights exist - because cars are big, bulky things that carry inherent risks. Nobody needed red lights before they came along, not even cyclists.

Thankfully, some people get it.

Junction Malfunction and a New Dawn

Cyclists don’t cause us, as an organisation, problems, that’s because they aren’t causing our communities problems, they aren’t killing nearly 100 people on our regions roads as mechanically propelled vehicles currently do. Yes we do get complaints of the “nuisance” variety, pavement cycling, some anti-social behaviour (usually yobs on bikes rather than “cyclists”), red light running etc. but you get the idea, most peoples interpretation of “1st world problems” or the “modern day blues”, nothing that’s a priority for a force like our own in a modern day society. Bad cycling is an “irritant” to the wider community rather than a danger, and maybe an improvement in infrastructure and policing may alieve many of the reasons that cause a very small minority of cyclists to be an “irritant”

 

[Tom]

Thats the classic answer...a two lane 60mph carriageway...you can't overtake the bike till the outside lane is clear, and of course, it's full of people getting by the obstruction...the cyclepath is immaculate..they just do it because they can and have some bizarre personality to risk their lives for a point and get off on the abuse they recieve.
It's a seperated path with 4ft of grass between it and the road...99% of riders use it, you would have to be a grade A cock not to...but every morning there is one.

Google Streetview link to this mythical cycle path and I will tell you exactly why they don't use it. Go on, money where your mouth is.

 

[Scouse]

I mean, how many cars vs bikes are on the road? Is that like saying oh theres only 20 thousand black people in prison vs I don't know, 60 thousand white people?

You can tell you're a teacher @Gwadien. No basic ability to read tables (or understand statistics).

To put it on a plate for you - look at the "Number of Vehicles" line on the table. And, really, what overall impression does the table give you? Could it be that humans are pretty much the same no matter what vehicle they're driving?

If that's the case - what West Midlands Police say is even more pertinent:

Cyclists don’t cause us, as an organisation, problems, that’s because they aren’t causing our communities problems

Cyclists are an irritant to self-important arseholes. Nothing more.

 

[Raven]

You have to wonder who is the self important douchebag, the guy wobbling about causing a delay or the 10 people behind him just wanting to get where they're going without having to put up with morons.

 

[Scouse]

You have to wonder who is the self important douchebag, the guy wobbling about causing a delay or the 10 people behind him just wanting to get where they're going without having to put up with morons.

Oh noes! A delay! On a shared use Road! Well I never!

Leave earlier.

 

[Tom]

Fucking cyclists!

congestion - Google Search

 

[Gwadien]

You can tell you're a teacher @Gwadien. No basic ability to read tables (or understand statistics).

To put it on a plate for you - look at the "Number of Vehicles" line on the table. And, really, what overall impression does the table give you? Could it be that humans are pretty much the same no matter what vehicle they're driving?

If that's the case - what West Midlands Police say is even more pertinent:


Cyclists are an irritant to self-important arseholes. Nothing more.

What? That table doesn't show the total amount of cars in the UK vs the total amount of bikes in the UK, so therefore how can it be representative?

Teachers being unable to read tables, that's a new one.

Like if I got Amsterdam and an equally sized city and said oh look Amsterdam had loads more bike accidents than anywhere else, what would your response be?

 

[Gwadien]

In fact using Amsterdam as an example would support your argument - theres 30 road deaths a year in Amsterdam according to an article I looked at 20-30% of them are bikes, so therefore even though it's a bike paradise, they are still in the minority of accident.

'Statistics can prove everything, apart from the truth.'

 

[Bodhi]

I'd agree cyclists are an irritant and nothing more, however I'd also agree there are quite a few self important arseholes going round on two wheels too. Only really irritating thing they do as far as I'm concerned is when you overtake them going through town, get to a red light, then they feel the need to filter to the front of the queue so everyone has to overtake them again. Not the biggest issue in the grand scheme of things, and it's easy to position the car so they don;t filter through - still annoying though.

We do have a first grade nutter cyclist in Stafford however - always cycling in the middle of the road (i.e next to the white line in the middle), swearing at everyone who overtakes him safely, cycling the wrong way round roundabouts and then swearing at anyone who has the temerity to go the right way round, but I suspect he's just a mental, and not indicative of cyclists in the main.

 

[Raven]

Shall we just agree that generally roads are impractical for cyclists for the most part and for every cyclist that rides to the speed of the road (it is the speed the road should be traveled on, not just the limit, doing 10mph in a 30 is also wrong) there are 10 that refuse to.

And while cyclists have every right to be there, just a little common sense would go a very long way.

Oh and if a council spends a bucket load of money to make sure you have a safe and clean route to travel on, fucking well use it, it is put there for a reason!

I have mentioned this before but I work on one of the busiest industrial estates in the country, for every car there is an HGV. For this specific reason there is also a network of cycle paths, some running next to the footpath (off the road) and some completely independent of the road that criss-cross the estate, that are swept weekly by a road sweeper and actually probably much better maintained that the roads. Yet morons still risk their life with the HGVs. You can get from the centre of town to beyond the industrial estate without ever riding on the road (except to cross it in a couple of places at proper managed crossings)

It is completely baffling that to prove some sort of idiotic point they are willing not only to die but to ruin the life of someone driving a truck.

 

[Raven]

And...just popped out for a ciggies and watched a cyclist riding full pelt down the footpath, the footpath that has a cycle route running parallel to it...

 

[Scouse]

I'd agree cyclists are an irritant and nothing more, however I'd also agree there are quite a few self important arseholes going round on two wheels too.

Not disagreeing with anything there. 100% agree.

However:

Only really irritating thing they do as far as I'm concerned is when you overtake them going through town, get to a red light, then they feel the need to filter to the front of the queue so everyone has to overtake them again. Not the biggest issue in the grand scheme of things, and it's easy to position the car so they don;t filter through

That's what they're supposed to do. And driving like that makes you a bit of a cock.

Rule 160 states that road users should ‘be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be filtering through the traffic’; Rule 88, in relation to manoeuvring, states that road users should take care and keep speed low ‘…when filtering in slow-moving traffic’. Rule 211 says that ‘it is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are filtering through traffic’.

It's irritating. Yep. But only if you never bike. If you ever hop on a bike and use one regularly then you give precicely zero fucks about any of the things the people on here are whining about.

 

[Bodhi]

Nope I'd agree you should always let people filter through slow moving traffic - in my morning queues on the motorway I am always as far right as possible to let motorcyclists through (more out of respect for the size of testicles required to ride a motorbike down the M6), and if we are moving slowly in traffic and a cyclist wants to come through I will let them.

I am talking about stationary traffic waiting for a red light, in which case yes, I will suggest through car positioning that cyclists maintain their place in the queue for the red light - seeing as you suggest cyclists give zero fucks about our issues, I have no problem suggesting I give zero fucks about their ability to go to the front of the queue again and slow everyone down whilst they wobble up to speed. To be fair most of the cyclists round here seem to stay where they are anyway, so it's a very rare occurance. Also doesn't seem to contradict anything you've posted from the HC, so we're good!

 

[Access Denied]

I'd like to see representative numbers. Cyclists are massively in the minority so one day, when I'm bored I'm going to sit at a cafe by some lights and watch 200 vehicles and 200 cyclists go through. Would be interesting to see what percentage of each are arseholes.

 

[fettoken]

I don't really mind cyclists being assholes. More cyclists means less traffic, pollution, more space for parking, less traffic.. etc etc.

You're sitting in a car, perfectly comfortable. Have some patience.

 

[sayward]

I like to give bikes enough room so when they fall off I don't crush their skulls. However on an ordinary road the idiots coming the other way usually drive on the white line making it impossible to leave any room even when they see what i'm doing.

 

[Scouse]

I am talking about stationary traffic waiting for a red light, in which case yes, I will suggest through car positioning that cyclists maintain their place in the queue for the red light - seeing as you suggest cyclists give zero fucks about our issues, I have no problem suggesting I give zero fucks about their ability to go to the front of the queue again and slow everyone down whilst they wobble up to speed. To be fair most of the cyclists round here seem to stay where they are anyway, so it's a very rare occurance. Also doesn't seem to contradict anything you've posted from the HC, so we're good!

Actually not. That post was about cyclists moving to the front of stationary traffic. And if you gave zero fucks you wouldn't be such a knob jockey and be trying to block them.

Small-dick syndrome

 

[Raven]

But its OK for them to block cars...right?

 

[Scouse]

But its OK for them to block cars...right?

Being disingenuous there @Raven

Accept it. Bikes aren't cars and you're jealous as hell that it's perfectly legal and correct that they wind their way through stationary motor-traffic and get to the front of the queue and you have to wait for them. OMG! In your comfortable car! Wait! For another road user!!!

If you don't like using the roads as they're supposed to be used, then walk, or take public transport, or, god forbid, a bike.

 

[DaGaffer]

But its OK for them to block cars...right?

*Ahem*

 

[Tom]

I will suggest through car positioning that cyclists maintain their place in the queue for the red light

It's a deal, so long as motorists never overtake cyclists, ever. I mean, if you don't like overtaking cyclists, only to be passed by them later on, then don't overtake them.

Average speed of traffic in central London - 8.98mph. Top speed of a chicken - 9mph. Sounds to me like you should be riding chickens.

 

[Raven]

*Ahem*
View attachment 34487

Whats that supposed to show? A rare cycle box? I think there are perhaps 2 in town...

Edit. But then we also have a decent cycle network...that cyclists refuse to use, because, reasons, whatever.

 

[Job]

Here's the roads in question...it is national speed limit...so everyone doing 70 of course.
Who the fuck would use the road with those cycle paths...every morning at least one.

 

[old.Osy]

Here's the roads in question...it is national speed limit...so everyone doing 70 of course.
Who the fuck would use the road with those cycle paths...every morning at least one.

View attachment 34488View attachment 34489

Mate, have to ask, are you sure YOU were driving on the correct road?

 

[georgie]

Mate, have to ask, are you sure YOU were driving on the correct road?

Well in the first picture he's taking the Ass (NW), so I'd say he is.

 

[Job]

You may be surprised to learn I am not the Google street view car.

 

[Scouse]

Here's the roads in question

Can see how a confident roadie on a decent bike might not want to go on that surface. Funny that you haven't provided a simple google maps link tho - even if you think that surface is OK maybe it isn't a little bit up the road - and do you expect them to hop on and off all the time?

Either way, I think people on road bikes are a bit nuts. To many wankers in cars who struggle to pass bikes even on a dual carriageway.

 

[Bodhi]

It's a deal, so long as motorists never overtake cyclists, ever. I mean, if you don't like overtaking cyclists, only to be passed by them later on, then don't overtake them.

Average speed of traffic in central London - 8.98mph. Top speed of a chicken - 9mph. Sounds to me like you should be riding chickens.

Relevance of traffic speeds in London to my commute = 0. Mainly as I live in Stafford, and commute to Birmingham. I could try riding a chicken, but a) I wouldn't fancy it on the M6 and b) I'd probably end up in a video in Wij's "Romantic Movies" section.

Not that worrying about cyclists in traffic takes up too much brain power in Stafford, as all the crazy fuckers ride on the pavement anyway.

 

[Bodhi]

Actually not. That post was about cyclists moving to the front of stationary traffic. And if you gave zero fucks you wouldn't be such a knob jockey and be trying to block them.

Small-dick syndrome

Why does your quote mention slow-moving traffic then? Slow-moving != Stationary waiting for a light to change.

 

[Raven]

Been giving Audible a go, there seems to be something wrong with audio books. I think its because I like to take a break in a book, maybe mid sentence, or scan back a bit.