meshuga Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 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. We all find it annoying when ROAD USERS do that sort of thing. Why single out the cyclists though? Why not have a go at the person? You spent most of the thread arguing about road users pulling round cars. Now on page 19 you are bringing up a different subject - figure of 8's! I find it very frustrating that you don't respond and debate the points I raise. Instead you cherry pick one sentence and carry on with your much laboured point that NO ONE IS ARGUING WITH. Have you got it yet? Has the penny dropped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'll try a different tack, since Bassman is so keen on this being a thread about Dangerous Cyclists perhaps he can explain how a cyclist moving out to pass a parked vehicle is dangerous? Not just a quote from the HC, that just repeats the advice given which we already know, I interested in what danger this cyclist poses and to whom, and particularly whether any danger is only present if another road user is also not following the highway code... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perplexed 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??? That one sentence alone shows us how little you know and understand. Particularly when you add a loopy... The first cyclist did absolutley nothing wrong in using the roundabout. Not one thing. Yet in your mind he's commited an infringement. He did not. It's entirley your misunderstanding as a driver that you think he has, and sadly you're not alone. Red light jumping. I disapprove, regardless of the mode of transport. And filtering is legal. Driver's may not like it, but it's still legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I live near a very busy road (an E-Route.) It's two-lane (one lane each way.) There is a 4ft wide cycle path to the side of the road, but there is also an amazing number of cyclists who are too arrogant/too stupid to use it. They would far rather 'mix it' with lorries and cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perplexed 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. No. There are dangerous people. No one is defending nutters on bikes. But Dawny admirably demonstrates a problem of perception and a lack of understanding. In many drivers (note many, not all...I don't label all the users of one mode of transport as muppets) thought patterns, the cyclist was in the wrong by not using the cycle path at the roundabout. So will get all steamy and huffy about it. Where in actual fact the cyclist committed no offence whatsoever by using the roundabout. And, shock, horror, even signalled to exit it. And as for being at the forefront of condeming bad behavior by some cyclists? What makes you think we aren't? Redlight jumping has been condemned by me and others. More than once. As someone else has said, the motoring lobby needs to put it's own house in order first, and practice what they preach before turning their attention to bikes. Cyclists have far more to fear from some drivers who speed, text, phone, jump red lights etc, that driver's have to fear from cyclists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattleonard Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I live near a very busy road (an E-Route.) It's two-lane (one lane each way.) There is a 4ft wide cycle path to the side of the road, but there is also an amazing number of cyclists who are too arrogant/too stupid to use it. They would far rather 'mix it' with lorries and cars. You talk as if the fact that the road has two lanes (one lane each way) makes it in itself spectacularly dangerous. Given the choice between the two I expect I would take the road. I don't really see why it makes me arrogant or stupid. I think it would be arrogant or stupid to suggest that some other group of road users who are perfectly entitled to use it shouldn't do though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted by Rupert_Baehr I live near a very busy road (an E-Route.) It's two-lane (one lane each way.) There is a 4ft wide cycle path to the side of the road, but there is also an amazing number of cyclists who are too arrogant/too stupid to use it. They would far rather 'mix it' with lorries and cars. mattleonards amazing reply was:- You talk as if the fact that the road has two lanes (one lane each way) makes it in itself spectacularly dangerous. Given the choice between the two I expect I would take the road. I don't really see why it makes me arrogant or stupid. I think it would be arrogant or stupid to suggest that some other group of road users who are perfectly entitled to use it shouldn't do though. That sums up you and many arrogant stupid cyclists who ignore the use of cycle lanes, with the attitude I'm special, I'm a cyclist, you should expect no commonsense from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 No. There are dangerous people. No one is defending nutters on bikes. But Dawny admirably demonstrates a problem of perception and a lack of understanding. In many drivers (note many, not all...I don't label all the users of one mode of transport as muppets) thought patterns, the cyclist was in the wrong by not using the cycle path at the roundabout. So will get all steamy and huffy about it. Where in actual fact the cyclist committed no offence whatsoever by using the roundabout. And, shock, horror, even signalled to exit it. And as for being at the forefront of condeming bad behavior by some cyclists? What makes you think we aren't? Redlight jumping has been condemned by me and others. More than once. As someone else has said, the motoring lobby needs to put it's own house in order first, and practice what they preach before turning their attention to bikes. Cyclists have far more to fear from some drivers who speed, text, phone, jump red lights etc, that driver's have to fear from cyclists. There isn't a motoring lobby here, the topic is Dangerous Cyclists but the freak out merchants here cannot accept that and they have to make up excuses for the poor excuses who ride cycles in an idiotic careless and dangerous manner, nothing to do with cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I'll try a different tack, since Bassman is so keen on this being a thread about Dangerous Cyclists .. Well isn't it? your problem is that you keep on about motorists which is off topic which has already been pointed out by other users.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I assume that means you can't actually answer the question, QED they aren't dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.