119 comments Add a comment
Some cars or more appropriately the driver, have absolutely no respect for cyclists on the road. Do they think we belong only on cycle lanes and shouldnt be on the road? Sometimes we have no choice but to cycle on a public road. Cars and cyclists are both bound by the rules of the Highway Code however and both should obey these safety rules regardless of the type of vehicle.
For example, I nearly got knocked of my bike by MX05 XTW - a red 4 wheel drive. I was cycling up a hill near Menlove Gardens West in Childwall, Liverpool. Its quite a narrow road with cars parked on the left hand side.
This car turned left onto the hill and drove down the hill towards me expecting me to stop and pull over. We both had to stop - but the Highway Code says you should allow vehicles travelling uphill to have right of way. The driver of this vehicle obviously thinks that they are exempt from these rules of the road. She and her passenger actually had the nerve to stop, get out of the car and harass me for daring to pedal up their hill.
Go and read the Highway Code!
By the time this happened I was too knackered to say anything other than, go and read the bloody Highway Code! Typically, she wasnt listening and insisted I should have pulled over.
To the woman driving MX05 XTW - You are a danger to other road users and youre going to seriously hurt someone one day. Maybe you should re-sit your driving test or at the very least read that Highway Code as I suggested!
Too many car drivers these days think that they own the road. I drive more than I cycle but always give cyclists plenty of room.
Leave a comment
Lets pick on the cyclist who skips a red light. Deaths caused to others? 0. How many more deaths and severe injury resulted from 1.5 tonne lumps of metal skipping red lights at speed? Plenty.
Cyclists have no insurance. They`re not required to, although many do actually have insurance through various other insurances...unlike the estimated 1 in 12 motorists who are required to have insurance and can`t be bothered to pay it resulting in your premium going up each year.
We can discuss this and throw stats around all day long. Yes, idiots use bikes and they use cars but if the police ever come knocking on your door to ask your identity before stepping in and telling you your husband/wife/son/daughter was involved in a collision 3 hours ago and they regret to inform you that despite the very best efforts of the medical team they were unable to revive them you can pretty much guarantee that the idiot who killed them `accidentally` (as society likes to say) was not a cyclist but was in fact...a motorist.
I`ve been through that with a 5 year old step sister who was hit by a speeding driver back in 1994. Had she been hit by the same idiot on a bicycle instead of in his car she`d have been 23 now. So, before the lazy and the impatient and the downright dangerous motorists of this world wake up and realise their arguments are so utterly selfish and in many cases completely inaccurate (such as the ever boring and non-existing road tax excuse) just look around you at the real issue on the roads...motorists. They kill, they maim, they paralyse, they ruin lives and destroy families...cyclists do not.
Its an argument the motorist can never win until the day comes when society no longer has to grasp at their children on the pavement and warn them about `the cars`.
Why is that ? The behaviour of motorists in no way cancels out the inconsiderate or dangerous behaviour of cyclists.
In your own time Generalist.
Could you tell me why you believe cyclists don’t need to obey the law until every motorist does?
In my opinion both should do so. Do you have an opinion, not a wall of statistics and quotations but an opinion of your own?
“Generalist There are so many things wrong with your posts that it is hard to know where to start.
“ "If cycling were far more common and motorists were all saints who never speeded; jumped red lights; used the phone & etc., THEN AND ONLY THEN THERE MIGHT BE A CASE for the registration of bicycles."”
Why do you make the assumption that there is no need to regulate the law- breaking behaviour of some cyclists until all motorists also obey traffic laws? That is like saying we need to get all muggers off the streets and then and only then there might be a case for stopping pickpockets.
Motorists should obey the law and so should cyclists.”
I thought that was a reasonable post but you would not answer it. I have re-printed it and put my name to it is as anonymity seemed to be the problem for you. Would you like to answer it now?
I know there's a typo in that, I don't need to be told, and I also know it's not coherent becuase B-liar is not dead yet, but I'm sure reasonable people will get my meaning.
Do you have any opinions of your own, or do you simply look for quotes and statistics to knock down the opinions that others express?
Do you ever answer, as oppose to ask, questions?
Are you a politician? Where you perhaps Tony B-liar in a previous incarnation?
Søren Kierkegaard, (1813 to 1855)
There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.
Benjamin Franklin (1706 to 1790) and Johnathan Swift (1667 to 1745) said:
You cannot reason a man out of an opinion into which he was not reasoned to begin with.
`it dint work`
not
`it didn`t work`
He does the same things that he accuses others of, namely ignoring any points that he does not want to answer. Apparently it is the old "do as I tell you, not as I do".
It didn't work.
Regarding statistics, I have two comments:
1. "There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics."
2. "chump" is right - he who pays the piper, calls the tune.
MoreRespectForMotorists