What cyclists have to put up with..

[WalkleyIan]

very scary item about motorists views on BBC Look East.

 

http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=399

[perplexed]

More of a spoke nipple key.

 

Have you got those deaths by bicycle brake failure stats yet?

 

I wouldn't hold your breath, I'm still waiting for answers to my questions a few pages ago.

 

Fact is, they just don't like cyclists, but dress it up in the usual bull effluent. Mind you, having said that, they're not even bothering to dress up their true opinions of cyclists now, because they've lost all the smokescreen arguments so many times.

 

I still think that it should be obligatory to cover a minimum number of miles on a bicycle before you're allowed anywhere near a set of L plates, unless you are physically disabled. The rabid anti-cyclists seem to "forget" that the vast majority of cyclists are also drivers I would bet. I don't know a single adult cyclist, and I know quite alot, who doesn't also drive...

 

I'd be interested if the anti-cyclists would state their driving experience levels, and then compare it to the cyclists driving experience levels...

[alchresearch]

very scary item about motorists views on BBC Look East.

 

http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=399

 

Interesting video. Why was he so far out when overtaking that parked car?

[Cyclone]

Interesting video. Why was he so far out when overtaking that parked car?

 

I've not watched this clip (I'm at work), but could it be in case there's an occupant who opens the door without looking?

[Squiggs]

Interesting video. Why was he so far out when overtaking that parked car?

 

Irrelevant. He WAS there for whatever reason. Not going to analyse the clip at this moment in time but there are numerous reasons such as doors opening, preventing dangerous close overtaking where a gap and/or oncoming traffic dictate etc. But WHY is not the issue - if the cyclist was somewhere he shouldn't have been then driving into him is still not competant driving.

 

If I put a freezer in the middle of the road, although that would be not a very nice thing to do, would a driver not be expected to see it and avoid it, and just plough into it regardless because it "shouldn't be there"

 

Whether or not someone or something should or shouldn't be there - sometimes people or things just ARE there and part of being allowed to pilot a ton or more of vehicle around in public places is being able to do so without bumping into things in front of them.

 

Sod it, let's play the emotive card - if the driver was not attentive enough to see an adult perched high on a bicycle, then the driver was certainly not driving with due care and attention to react if a child were to run out into the road.

[splodgeyAl]

Interesting video. Why was he so far out when overtaking that parked car?

 

Cycling up London Road last night, 2 parked cars' doors were opened when I was less than 5 metres away from them. A third did wait till I'd passed before fully opening their door.

 

When it happens that frequently, any non-suicidal cyclist would pass a parked car at least a door-length away from it.

[meshuga]

Trying to educate the anti-cycling participants on this thread, or any other cycling thread for that matter, is a little like trying to plait fog...

 

Isn't it just! Honestly there seem to be no end of idiots lining up to contribute to a thread that had they read in full, would stop them being the next one to make some idiotic comment about road tax, insurance, MOTs, licensing (i mean FFS, where does it end?)

 

And just when you think you've made a well reasoned and intelligent argument trying your best to slowly explain to these narrow minded people why their points are deeply flawed, up pops the next candidate to make an utter fool of themselves.

 

I too am still waiting for a sensible come back at my points against having compulsory mythical road tax, insurance, mots etc. But the idiotic brigade either just ignores sensible argument or keeps harping on about the original stupid point anyway. Funnily enough this is how most cycling threads end up. It really is scary to think that people with such low intelligence are allowed to drive at all.

[TimmyR]

Interesting video. Why was he so far out when overtaking that parked car?

 

a) to avoid car doors being opened.

b) to stop the car from overtaking too close

c) to increase visibility.

 

Whatever the reason, a car hitting any vehicle from behind is only the cars drivers fault. They shouldn't be attempting to overtake if the road ahead is not safe. How the hell do you drive into a cyclist from behind? He'd already pulled out.

[TimmyR]

Isn't it just! Honestly there seem to be no end of idiots lining up to contribute to a thread that had they read in full, would stop them being the next one to make some idiotic comment about road tax, insurance, MOTs, licensing (i mean FFS, where does it end?)

 

And just when you think you've made a well reasoned and intelligent argument trying your best to slowly explain to these narrow minded people why their points are deeply flawed, up pops the next candidate to make an utter fool of themselves.

 

I too am still waiting for a sensible come back at my points against having compulsory mythical road tax, insurance, mots etc. But the idiotic brigade either just ignores sensible argument or keeps harping on about the original stupid point anyway. Funnily enough this is how most cycling threads end up. It really is scary to think that people with such low intelligence are allowed to drive at all.

 

We can only hope they are just the more vocal minority.

[millhouses24]

Last week I borrowed someones bike for a trial run and ended up getting off and walking home because either I was going to be knocked off or I was going to end up getting cycle rage.

 

Some. Motorists. Are. Knobs.

 

(not giving up though, I'm pretty sure there is a law that says you can key someone's car door if they behave badly enough )