Rude cyclists

[Dieselman]

Rule 47.

Sorry, I don't follow. What does the rule have to do with cyclists, pedestrians or animals.? It covers carriages particularly ones for hire.

47
Horse-drawn vehicles used on the highway should be operated and maintained in accordance with standards set out in the Department for Transport’s Code of Practice for Horse-Drawn Vehicles. This Code lays down the requirements for a road driving assessment and includes a comprehensive list of safety checks to ensure that a carriage and its fittings are safe and in good working order. The standards set out in the Road Driving Assessment may be required to be met by a Local Authority if an operator wishes to obtain a local authority licence to operate a passenger-carrying service (see 'Other information').

 

[oldcro]

Sorry, I don't follow. What does the rule have to do with cyclists, pedestrians or animals.? It covers carriages particularly ones for hire.

47
Horse-drawn vehicles used on the highway should be operated and maintained in accordance with standards set out in the Department for Transport’s Code of Practice for Horse-Drawn Vehicles. This Code lays down the requirements for a road driving assessment and includes a comprehensive list of safety checks to ensure that a carriage and its fittings are safe and in good working order. The standards set out in the Road Driving Assessment may be required to be met by a Local Authority if an operator wishes to obtain a local authority licence to operate a passenger-carrying service (see 'Other information').

Sorry, I bought a new copy of the highway code earlier this year and threw the old one away. Correction, I thought i had thrown the old one away but now realise it was the new one that went into the bin. The issue I quoted from was a 1999 version in which rule 47 reads:-

"Use cycle routes when practicable. They can make your journey safer".

I was just upset by anyone thinking they have a greater right to be on the road than anyone else. All road users have rules they must obey and because some users gain access for free it does not give them any extra privileges or rights.

 

[Dieselman]

Of course they do, and all road users should respect the others rights and space.
It just appeared from comments within this thread, not necessarily yours, that some people thought differently..

And I'm sorry, but this just made me laugh...as I'm sure it did (not) you too..

Sorry, I bought a new copy of the highway code earlier this year and threw the old one away. Correction, I thought i had thrown the old one away but now realise it was the new one that went into the bin.

 

[gina2201]

Everybody has a right to use the roads (of course they do) and as such, need to realise they are not the only user and accommodate and 'get along' with one another. It's not hard - really!

 

[Spinal]

And..??

I'm just shocked... in our over-protective, over-controlling society I'm truly shocked that cyclists aren't forced to wear something as essential to their safety as a helmet...

I've never read such Guff in my life.
Voted the most hated by whom.? Cyclists.?

Here actually...
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=48976

We've been through this already, and as much as I respect you DM; I still hate cyclists. I'm sure you may not be as bad as the others, but trust me - there is a large lot out there that should be banned from the roads.

Which is my true reason for hating cyclists - not just their "I'm small and fragile, so I can flout the law" attitude, but also the fact that they CAN flout the law as there is practically no way to identify them and ban them from the roads!

Michele

 

[Dieselman]

Which is my true reason for hating cyclists - not just their "I'm small and fragile, so I can flout the law" attitude, but also the fact that they CAN flout the law as there is practically no way to identify them and ban them from the roads!

So, is it that they can flount the law or that they do flount the law that annoys you to the point of hate.?

Come in, have a lie on my couch and tell me about it....

 

[V8mate]

Walking about in London, my biggest fear is of being 'run over' by a cyclist. Cars, trucks, buses, even motorbikes all conform to some reasonably predictable set of movements but bikes can, and do, come from anywhere and everywhere, often at utterly inappropriate speeds.

Pavements, subways, controlled crossings showing in favour of pedestrains: none are safe places to be for pedestrians when cyclists are about.

Hanging's too good for 'em, naturally

 

[para alpha]

Let me take you to the Rainford by-pass. A purpose built cycle lane runs along both sides from St Helens to Skelmersdale. Ever seen a bike on it...No, I never have. I do however, see cycle clubs using this stretch of dual carr for their pointless time trials. Funny that, I thought organised racing was illegal on a public highway.

I don't actually see any cars on it! But what a road to drive quickly on though (I don't advocate speeding of any kind)... Until you get to that silly little traffic island by the pub?????

***, I know exactly what your talking about! Aintree is full of cycle lanes off the road for safety reasons (Apparently) and for some reason these morons still use the road! Most of them suffer from NPS!

 

[Ratz]

For all of those progressive thinkers and armchair commentators - get on a bike yourself and then you can give your opinion on what cyclists should and shouldn't do! I am genuinely stunned by some of the egocentric, knuckle dragging comments.

 

[Dieselman]

I am genuinely stunned that Neanderthal man can use a keyboard.

Evolution..

 

[st4]

***, I know exactly what your talking about! Aintree is full of cycle lanes off the road for safety reasons (Apparently) and for some reason these morons still use the road! Most of them suffer from NPS!

Thats my main gripe, and it extends to the council. Why not just widen the road so a) the cyclists have more room and b) the cars have more room rather than a derelict piece of tarmac that neither the cyclists use, nor the cars can use

 

[Dieselman]

Why not just widen the road so a) the cyclists have more room and b) the cars have more room rather than a derelict piece of tarmac that neither the cyclists use, nor the cars can use

Because laying a bit of tarmac to pavement standard cost £ and laying one to roadway standard costs ££££££££££.

That's one reason why cycle paths are pathetic to ride on.
Someone probably thought it was a good idea.

 

[st4]

Because laying a bit of tarmac to pavement standard cost £ and laying one to roadway standard costs ££££££££££.

Why not just save the £. Another example of mis spent funds [/quote]

That's one reason why cycle paths are pathetic to ride on.
Someone probably thought it was a good idea.

Clearly then the track was therefore a waste of money. My argument is we have some very silly people in Argyll & Bute local council. If the track aren't even of use to the bike riders, and they don't benefit either car user or bike user than really, what was the point, and what a waste of money.

 

[para alpha]

For all of those progressive thinkers and armchair commentators - get on a bike yourself and then you can give your opinion on what cyclists should and shouldn't do! I am genuinely stunned by some of the egocentric, knuckle dragging comments.

I used to allot! I rode for the army in competition actually! And used to cycle from Liverpool to Southport (15 miles) where I worked. I used designated lanes and paths!
The Cycle lane is exactly that! A lane for cycles... Why not use the lane for what it was laid for? Or are some cyclists above using it or are they invulnerable to getting knocked off? So does this qualify me to have a opinion?

 

[Carrotchomper]

I used to allot! I rode for the army in competition actually! And used to cycle from Liverpool to Southport (15 miles) where I worked. I used designated lanes and paths!
The Cycle lane is exactly that! A lane for cycles... Why not use the lane for what it was laid for? Or are some cyclists above using it or are they invulnerable to getting knocked off? So does this qualify me to have a opinion?

Dieselman's point is that cycle lanes are, on the whole, incompatible with a half-decent road bike- Rutty horrors that you just can't live with! There are exceptions, and if there are decent tracks I will use them. I generally travel at well over the mean traffic speed in the city in any case so don't hold TOO many cars up...

 

[Dieselman]

So does this qualify me to have a opinion?

Everyone can have an opinion, but don't expect others to agree.

Why not use the lane for what it was laid for?

Because they are rubbish to ride on and have too many stopages.

Or are some cyclists above using it or are they invulnerable to getting knocked off?

Nope. Which is why THE LAW says car drivers must give them room.

 

[Ratz]

I used to allot! I rode for the army in competition actually! And used to cycle from Liverpool to Southport (15 miles) where I worked. I used designated lanes and paths!
The Cycle lane is exactly that! A lane for cycles... Why not use the lane for what it was laid for? Or are some cyclists above using it or are they invulnerable to getting knocked off? So does this qualify me to have a opinion?

Indeed it does sir , but I am surprised at the strength of it. Generally as a cyclist or a driver I am rarely so irritated by other road users, hence my surprise at the comments in this thread. However, generally in my car I am annoyed by other cars far more frequently than cyclists.

Perhaps we should qualify what the cycle lanes are like, the ones I use are part of the road and just marked off by lines - and so offer little or no protection. The ones I don't use(mostly at least) are part of the pavement and are generally littered with with glass and other debris - plus they are normal width pavements which have just been split in half(little more than 2m wide), which IMHO are dangerous for pedestrians.

 

[para alpha]

Dieselman's point is that cycle lanes are, on the whole, incompatible with a half-decent road bike- Rutty horrors that you just can't live with! There are exceptions, and if there are decent tracks I will use them. I generally travel at well over the mean traffic speed in the city in any case so don't hold TOO many cars up...

I understand what he is saying Carrot. The Lanes provided by the council in Liverpool are for the most very good! Not many in Liverpool city centre but certainly on the outskirts.
I used to enjoy riding but I decided it wasn't doing my old knees any good.

 

[para alpha]

Indeed it does sir , but I am surprised at the strength of it. Generally as a cyclist or a driver I am rarely so irritated by other road users, hence my surprise at the comments in this thread. However, generally in my car I am annoyed by other cars far more frequently than cyclists.

Perhaps we should qualify what the cycle lanes are like, the ones I use are part of the road and just marked off by lines - and so offer little or no protection. The ones I don't use(mostly at least) are part of the pavement and are generally littered with with glass and other debris - plus they are normal width pavements which have just been split in half(little more than 2m wide), which IMHO are dangerous for pedestrians.

You also have an excellent point... I have rode some horrors I can tell you... The worst of the lot was in the Surrey area (Aldershot).

 

[para alpha]

Everyone can have an opinion, but don't expect others to agree.

Because they are rubbish to ride on and have too many stopages.

Nope. Which is why THE LAW says car drivers must give them room.

Come and have a ride on some of the ones here in Liverpool and Lancashire. They are excellent and contrary to popular belief, There is some outstanding scenery as you pass from the Liverpool/Lancashire boundary.

I have been on the rough end of accidents... I have been knocked off cycles and Motorcycles. So, I can understand where you are coming from. I don't treat Cyclists and motorcyclists as another piece of traffic. I give them all the room they need. But I get a bit cheesed off when they don't use perfectly good cycle lanes..