waldershelf Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 If this goes on much longer we won't have a problem with cyclists. They will all have passed out from lack of Oxygen so high is their assumed moral high ground. Stick to the topic which is "dangerous cyclists" to constantly keep harping back to how bad motorists are is a non sequitur if you want to defend cycling do so by all means but come out from behind the smoke screen and defend the accusations of running red lights, riding on pavements etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 You seem to have posted in the wrong thread waldershelf. There are no cyclists defending the running of red lights or riding on pavements on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldershelf Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 You seem to have posted in the wrong thread waldershelf. There are no cyclists defending the running of red lights or riding on pavements on this one. So what are you moaning about? The topic is about the perceived poor standards of riding, I selected two of the most common examples of "dangerous cycling" Why aren't you joining in with the critics of poor riding standards instead of just repeating the non sequitur reply that car drivers are worse. Surely as a responsible law abiding cyclist you should be at the forefront of the critics of poor riding standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 i think you missed seeing the cycle lane on the left thats there for them to use, or do you think that its a posh footpath??? I think you missed that there is NO COMPULSION IN LAW to use a cycle path, posh or common. The only complusion in a "mandatory" cycle lane is that YOU KEEP OUT of it. Why do you insist on illustrating your quite boring pig-ignorance? Do driving instructors not teach the rules of the road any more? Or were you just not listening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meshuga Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 So what are you moaning about? The topic is about the perceived poor standards of riding, I selected two of the most common examples of "dangerous cycling" Why aren't you joining in with the critics of poor riding standards instead of just repeating the non sequitur reply that car drivers are worse. Surely as a responsible law abiding cyclist you should be at the forefront of the critics of poor riding standards. Just read back, we cyclists are joining in with the critics. Red light jumpers make my blood boil, be they in a car or on a bike, and I see equal numbers of both. I'm not saying that car drivers are worse, just that they should put their own house in order before targetting a single group of road users. It seems that with many of these anti-cycling forum users it's a case of do as I say not do as I do. I can't defend red light jumping because guess what - it's wrong and downright dangerous. What I will defend is what most of this thread seems to have been about is not signalling around a parked car being the most dangerous thing someone on two wheels can do. I mean get a grip has the person behind no inkling of anticipation as to what is going to happen next!!?? The number of times I see ROAD USERS do this every day is beyond countable. Yet if you are on two wheels the conclusion of the debate according to bassman62 is that if they don't indicate, well to hell with them, just overtake them anyway in a totally unsafe position, it's their own stupid fault if they get knocked off!! And that is the main discontent as I see it with the criticism levelled at cyclists - it's the brain dead pointing of the finger at cyclists without any thought into the entertaining possibility that it 's nothing to do with the vehicle you use, the road tax you pay, the license you have, the insurance you have, the test that you passed, the helmet you aren't wearing, the size of your testicles or whatever - it's to do with the fact that people like to break the rules where it is convenient for them, regardless of their mode of transport. Have a go at the person, not the vehicle they use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 If this goes on much longer we won't have a problem with cyclists. They will all have passed out from lack of Oxygen so high is their assumed moral high ground. Stick to the topic which is "dangerous cyclists" to constantly keep harping back to how bad motorists are is a non sequitur if you want to defend cycling do so by all means but come out from behind the smoke screen and defend the accusations of running red lights, riding on pavements etc.Sorry you've got it all wrong Cyclists can do no wrong they can swerve eraticly about the road, do figure of eights, all of this to test the competence of motorists who are expected to guess the answer to 'And my next stupid trick is going to be-?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Yet if you are on two wheels the conclusion of the debate according to bassman62 is that if they don't indicate, well to hell with them, just overtake them anyway in a totally unsafe position, it's their own stupid fault if they get knocked off!!.You are posting lies! I've never said what you have posted above. I've stated that I find it most annoying and extemely foolhardy of cyclist like father and child that I came across today who both pulled out without signaling their intentions or looking behind them when they veered out of their position in the road without looking behind or signaling which is contrary to the highway code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I think you missed that there is NO COMPULSION IN LAW to use a cycle path, posh or common. The only complusion in a "mandatory" cycle lane is that YOU KEEP OUT of it. Why do you insist on illustrating your quite boring pig-ignorance? Do driving instructors not teach the rules of the road any more? Or were you just not listening? Well coming out of Chesterfield towards Newbold there are always cars parked in the cycle lane. Regarding pig ignorance (My Bold) the only poster displaying that is you with your rude comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 i think you missed seeing the cycle lane on the left thats there for them to use, or do you think that its a posh footpath??? No, I saw it. I probably wouldn't use it myself as it will mean having to give way at every side road as you go around, instead of having the right of way by being on the roundabout. Seriously, if you want to be involved in a grown up discussion it would help if you actually knew what we were talking about. Did you actually believe that cycle paths were compulsory if present??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Well coming out of Chesterfield towards Newbold there are always cars parked in the cycle lane. Regarding pig ignorance (My Bold) the only poster displaying that is you with your rude comment. I'm not familiar with that road. But to clarify for anyone not aware: If bounded by a continuous line, you cannot park (or drive) on a cycle lane during its hours of operation. If bounded by a dashed line, you can park on it if no other options are available (or words to that effect) - ie its still frowned upon. Cycle paths (tracks I think they're usually called) are a different matter. You cannot drive or park on them at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.