Cyclists on A roads

[Beetnik]

Appreciate & understand your point but although cyclists maybe liable in law for the consequences of there actions,once they have left the scene of an accident you have no trace on them if they give you false details(i.e. no number plates on bicycles).

Nor did, for instance, the guy who headbutted me and broke my nose, and I suspect there are far more 'pedestrians' causing damage than cyclists and we don't require pedestrians to carry a number plate.

 

[jonthetourist]

I know I sound paranoid but really I am scared.

I don't cycle much on roads any more, I had a few too many close shaves when I cycled 3 miles every day to and from work in central Leeds.

I don't think it is paranoid. Research suggests that people driving and using a mobile have a very limited amount of attention available for peripheral activity, and they are everywhere. I have an electric bike so don't struggle up hills, but I don't do busy roads these days unless I absolutely have to.

Jon

 

[dtr]

Cars, vans, trucks etc - misused kill people on a regular basis

Bikes, pushchairs, mobility scooters, boats misused rarely kill people

So register the former but not the latter.

Agreed about the registration, but not the use. Railways are reserved for trains for a good reason. Equally, busy main roads are not safe for cyclists, or pedestrians (particularly in black clothes at night - I've seen that too not long ago). People need to assess the risks they face and put others to. Some roads are particularly dangerous for such users. In fact, motorway hard shoulder looks like a safer place to walk or cycle (illegal by law) than some of these A roads.

 

[Dieselman]

One time, right in the city centre, I was turning left in a very narrow one way system, a cyclist completely ignored my signal to turn, and obviously dreaming, mounted his bike and continued to cycle straight into the side of my car.

My driving instructor would have said that was your fault because you were incorrectly positioned for making a left turn.
He insisted you should be close enough to the kerb so that a cycle couldn't get down the side of the car.
Technically he is correct.

 

[Dieselman]

As much as some people dislike it , cyclists , horse riders , pedestrians and even farmers taking their cows or sheep from one field to another have every bit as much of a right to use the roads as any driver or motorcyclist - so NO , they should NOT be banned from 'these roads' .

Al of the above have legal priority over motorised vehicles, livestock have the highest priority. By law cars must give way to them.

 

[Frankie]

I'm shocked by some of the comments in this thread. The OP was clearly going too fast for the conditions. If a road is 40,50 or 60mph but you can't see safely, you do not continue at that speed. You need to slow down or perhaps jump onto a bigger road if you want to go fast.
I also have a moped,it struggles up some hills, should I get off the roads? I pay tax and insurance on that so I feel I have the same rights.

Cycle lanes are unusable,on many occasions drains face the wrong way,so you either swerve out the cycle lane or end up going over the handle bars. Also cycle lanes tend to be more dangerous as they often start and end in dangerous positions. They are not compulsory to use.

One point to bear in mind, in the eyes of the law if you hit a cyclist or pedestrian you are in the wrong,they can claim off your insurance if they choose. If you kill them you can be done for manslaughter. So maybe just being a little more attentive to what is going on around is the answer,give bikes and pedestrians a wide berth.

 

[bigfatjim]

Sir, would you like my licence number?

Have you got a licence? Two can play this childish game you know.

 

[0ptic]

How large might this bike pump be?

Big enough.

 

[m2287]

My driving instructor would have said that was your fault because you were incorrectly positioned for making a left turn.
He insisted you should be close enough to the kerb so that a cycle couldn't get down the side of the car.
Technically he is correct.

the cyclist mounted his bike on a footpath, then cycled down a dropped kerb into me at a right angle.

 

[mattc]

And I'm a firm believer that car drivers who insist on overtaking me while I'm on my bike cycling along a narrow B road with traffic coming the other way should be dragged out of their car and beaten with my bike pump

I used to carry an extra pump filled with lead wire. You get cut up by enough idiots and in the end you have enough.

 

[snoop51]

I used to carry an extra pump filled with lead wire. You get cut up by enough idiots and in the end you have enough.

So you open yourself up to assault with a deadly? weapon. Do you carry a pick axe handle in your car too??

I'm not going to have a go at ALL cyclist but some do put themselves in danger unnecessarily. E.G. Last Monday morning 5am I drove down Remembrance Avenue in Colchester, which is a road almost wide enough to be a dual carriageway (not quite though) it is unlit, tree-lined, with a double width cycle path separate from the carriageway with 2 metres of grass verge between the 2. A cyclist coming in the opposite direction, completely in black with hood up, no lights on his bike on the main carriageway. Lunatic in my eyes.

There are times when all of us ROADUSERS be it car, van, truck, cyclist, horse rider etc make simple errors of judgement. Unfortunately this is generally what causes accidents, I certainly don't think it's worth beating someone with a bike pump modified to be a weapon liable to cause blunt force trauma!

To the OP, I think you are probably getting jumped on because of the way you have worded your posts. Banning cyclists all together just isn't going to happen, the same as banning those who just shouldn't be driving 1-2 tonnes isn't applied until too late in most cases. Live and let live, drive a little more defensively and if a cyclist pees you off for obstructing YOUR road, take a deep breath and think back to the mistakes you have made whilst a road user.

BTW. I am a car driver pure and simple, I don't do cycling, far too energetic, plus too many idiots in motor vehicles.

 

[Scott_F]

Well done, you've completely missed the point.

The main point is, these cyclists totally risk their lives. That is one pointless risk. Many get killed daily, many more injured. Is that not a good enough reason to ban them from these roads?

You should pay a visit to South West, where visibility ahead is frequently obstructed by numerous turns and bends, as well as trees. The A roads here are rarely dual carriageways, they are more like a slightly wider version of B road. We have M5 if we want a decent road
Did I travel at the max allowed 50 there? No - more like 30 as I was expecting trouble. Did I put him at risk? I had to break, but there was no immediate risk to him at all (this is going up a hill). Only when the other car zoomed in at 50 things started looking somewhat dangerous. Did the cyclist take any notice of the events? No, he completely ignored it and kept using the whole lane. Well done!

Before you continue to slack me, I may tell you that I used to cycle a lot and plan to do some this year. I do make use of cycle routes, and never try to get in anybodys way like that, jump lights, etc. If there is any danger I just move to the safety out to the side. Why risk it?

The trouble is, there are plenty of cycles routes in the South West, and they would totally ignore them even if they were along the main road. I can't understand that.

You claim to be a cyclist and yet you advocate banning cyclists from the roads ??

And you think that South Wales has more bends, trees and B-roads than anywhere else ??

Like most places, there are few cycle paths near me and those that do exist aren't enforced so that morons who will "just be a minute" block them with their selfish parking.

So apart from a multi-billion pound program of nationwide cycle path construction and employing enforcement officers, where do you see cyclists actually being able to indulge their pesky habit once you've banned them all from the public roads that they have been using since before the motor car came along ?

 

[Dieselman]

the cyclist mounted his bike on a footpath, then cycled down a dropped kerb into me at a right angle.

Fair enough. Clearly he was in the wrong then.

 

[m2287]

Fair enough. Clearly he was in the wrong then.

Cheers, I probably should have explained it better in the first place!

 

[mattc]

So you open yourself up to assault with a deadly? weapon. Do you carry a pick axe handle in your car too??

And where did I say

a) I ever used it.
b) That it was against the person.

As for assualt with a deadly weapon what do you think 1500kgs of metals and plastics at 40mph constitutes in the hands of the wrong person.

I agree with you; there are too many lunatics on the road and the cyclist riding in the dark in black is Darwinism waiting to be proven.

 

[snoop51]

And where did I say

a) I ever used it.
b) That it was against the person.

As for assualt with a deadly weapon what do you think 1500kgs of metals and plastics at 40mph constitutes in the hands of the wrong person.

I agree with you; there are too many lunatics on the road and the cyclist riding in the dark in black is Darwinism waiting to be proven.

OK having re-read my last post maybe a bit OTT but you could still get done just for carrying / having it on your person. As to what you would use it on it doesn't really matter if caught carrying you have to prove what you WOULD use it for!

1500kgs of metal and plastic purposely driven at someone could indeed be assault with a deadly weapon but more likely to be loss of control or an accident.

But I do take your point

 

[oldcro]

Would it help if when posting about an incident that occurred on a particular road, the OP could include the location details. Then folk could see the location using Google maps and get a far better idea of the circumstances than words can explain.

Not always possible I know, but for instance writing "I was driving along a country lane..." gives different people vastly different pictures of the actual scene.

Just a thought.

 

[renault12ts]

Would it help if when posting about an incident that occurred on a particular road, the OP could include the location details. Then folk could see the location using Google maps and get a far better idea of the circumstances than words can explain.

Not always possible I know, but for instance writing "I was driving along a country lane..." gives different people vastly different pictures of the actual scene.

Just a thought.

A very good thought, since everyone is imagining this in a different way and thus lambasting the OP.

 

[buccal]

A very good thought, since everyone is imagining this in a different way and thus lambasting the OP.

OP posts don't make any sense.

He had to emergency brake as he was travelling faster than his observation skills. Nothing more to it really.

He then proposes to ban cyclists from the roads, yet claims to have been a regular cyclist who plans to do it more in the future, but only on cycle paths so that's ok.

I don't think i have ever met a cyclist who has wanted to ban cycling on the road. We all know the risks and its a risk many of us choose to take.

 

[dtr]

OP posts don't make any sense.

He had to emergency brake as he was travelling faster than his observation skills. Nothing more to it really.

He then proposes to ban cyclists from the roads, yet claims to have been a regular cyclist who plans to do it more in the future, but only on cycle paths so that's ok.

I don't think i have ever met a cyclist who has wanted to ban cycling on the road. We all know the risks and its a risk many of us choose to take.

I have never and will never come close to A road by bike. This is common sense. There ARE dedicated cycle paths, and disused B roads. I think this is enough for people cycling for exercise or recreational purposes. For example there are exclusive paths from Bristol all the way to Bath and beyond without the need to touch a road. Yet many willingly chose to risk their and others lives. This is what I can't understand. Some law would go a long way to making roads safer for cyclists and motorists. Cyclists are not so bad in the city - but only as long as they stick to the highway code (many don't). If they don't they should be fined, just like the motorists.

There is no need to take unnecessary risks.

Now to fuel the argument even more - how about cyclists that cycle parallel to each other taking half the width of the road and refuse to move out. I am pretty sure this is illegal but they don't care.

To put things back into perspective 30mph is 15 times faster compared to 2mph (the speed of cyclist going up a hill hidden behind that bend). It is not really practical to go any slower than that. What he did was near enough an attempt to commit a suicide.