Infirmary Road Tesco - are drivers targeting cyclists?

[hicksy3]

Well as both a cyclist and motorist, I am not in any way trying to suggest that all motorists try to kill cyclists, being a motorist myself some of the time.

 

However this incident was typical of a number I've experienced, where the intent has been to intimidate at the very least. And I'm sorry but using a two-tonne vehicle to do this indicates that serious harm is meant.

 

Gong back to the location here, it really could win prizes for the worst thought out bit of cycle lane. SCC have even put a manhole cover right in the middle of a sharp bend for you to fly off when it's wet unless you know it's there.

 

And as far the "cyclists going through red lights" circular argument, I'd like to point out that a discrete red light camera on Ripley Street as it joins Langsett Road would net SCC enough money from fines off motorists who ignore red lights to fund a leisure centre etc.. But this doesn't justify me going through red lights on a cycle, so I don't.

[Klondike Kid]

yes that as it should be but cyclist know that if you sit in the red box at the front then traffic builds up behind you. Lorries and buses have a nasty habit of wandering into these and on some occasions even running into cyclist because the force them into the kerb edge.

On balance i would much rather go through a red light if it is safe, for me, for other traffic, for pedestrians.

I really cant see the problem with this EXCEPT its against the highway code.

But then again as i have said consonantly so is speeding and using phones.

But a lot of motorist break the law as far as these rules go.

On balance going through a red on a bike is nothing in comparison.

 

Very difficult for them to do if you have taken the primary position. As suggested previously just try a bikability course which will show you how to ride with a degree of control over the situation. Surprisingly there are a lot of drivers out there who lack confidence hence their get passed the cyclist at any cost" attitude. Let them know what your intentions are they will be glad of it.

[Guest]

Err, no it isn't.

 

The only possible prosecution would be for something like cycling furiously.

It's not a shared path, it's a separate cycling lane. The pedestrians would clearly be in the wrong.

 

Yes they would but pedestrians aren't expected to read the highway code so would likely get a slap on the wrist. If you hurt a pedestrian you could still be prosecuted. Cyclists should be as aware of dangers as car drivers. I have no problems with cyclists in general, there are bad cyclists and there are bad drivers and they both need to be aware that pedestrians are unpredictable.

 

Also re your head injuries claim, can you point us at your sources that the risk goes up when you wear a helmet please?

[altus]

Also re your head injuries claim, can you point us at your sources that the risk goes up when you wear a helmet please?

 

Most likely at www.cyclehelmets.org.

[wiggie]

SCC should install traffic lights, funds permitting, like the one's being rolled out in Cambridge which give cyclists a 5 second head start.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23723866

[Squiggs]

SCC should install traffic lights, funds permitting, like the one's being rolled out in Cambridge which give cyclists a 5 second head start.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23723866

 

I don't think there's need for it in Sheffield at the moment.

 

In London where it has also been mooted, because of the volume, cyclists will bunch up at the lights so a 5-second gap suits everyone, gives them all time to clip in and the stronger cyclists to get ahead, then gives cars a clearer start

 

Cambridge are trialling it as it has a higher density of cyclists.

 

I don't need a 5-second head start when I'm sat at a junction on my own or with one other cyclist. 3 occasionally, 4 is quite rare.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Squiggs

[Cyclone]

Would it not be fair to say that there is just too much traffic volume for cyclists/motorists to achieve perfect cohabitation? On telly the other night, it was saying that such and such a percent of people in Holland use bikes more than cars, and accident rates are far lower, but isnt Holland a lot flatter than Sheffield, and since most use bikes the accident figures WILL be less. That dosent seem possible here, what with there being an "Us and Them" attitude, where cyclists accuse motorists of trying to murder them, and motorist accusing bikers of doing whatever they bloody like. Its nice to think that we all live in harmony, but as long as there are as many vehicles in Sheffield, cycles will always be outnumbered.

 

Not at all, there's no reason volume of traffic should make individuals act like t*ssers. The guy shouting at me yesterday is just a poor driver and has anger issues. He shouldn't be allowed to drive, or probably to cycle.

 

---------- Post added 23-08-2013 at 07:26 ----------

 

As i have said in other posts, even if for thousands of meters there is no Vehicles,

If you can show me the traffic lights where you can see cars AND pedestrians for thousands of metres, then at the least I'd agree that the traffic lights are superfluous.

even if your sat there for five minutes because the detectors in the roads don't pick you up sat there.

Annoying I know. But still wrong to jump them.

even then your saying that going through a red light is wrong???. i would like to know how many car drivers would be as law abiding in those same circumstances.. Not many i bet

Nearly all of them. It's quite rare to see a car jump a light, much more common to see cycles do it.

its just complete madness to follow the letter of the highway code

What a ridiculous assertion. Not following it, particularly key things about traffic behaviour is irresponsible and dangerous.

 

---------- Post added 23-08-2013 at 07:28 ----------

 

what will happen when the rules change?.

these new roundabouts that give the cyclist priority will certainly cause a few road rage cases.

Personally i cant wait until the powered vehicles have to give way to cyclists!! it cant come fast enough.

 

Out of interest, do you drive as well as cycle? I'm suspecting not.

 

---------- Post added 23-08-2013 at 07:29 ----------

 

 

Gong back to the location here, it really could win prizes for the worst thought out bit of cycle lane. SCC have even put a manhole cover right in the middle of a sharp bend for you to fly off when it's wet unless you know it's there.

Yep, I had a slide on that recently in the rain. And I DO know it's there!

 

---------- Post added 23-08-2013 at 07:31 ----------

 

Yes they would but pedestrians aren't expected to read the highway code so would likely get a slap on the wrist. If you hurt a pedestrian you could still be prosecuted.

There simply is no offence with which to charge a cyclist if a pedestrian is around a blind corner in a dedicated cycle path.

Cyclists should be as aware of dangers as car drivers. I have no problems with cyclists in general, there are bad cyclists and there are bad drivers and they both need to be aware that pedestrians are unpredictable.

That's why I haven't yet hit one, I am aware that many of them are idiots in that location. I do like to scare them though, I'm hoping that the lesson will stick in their head. (I don't have time to go for positive reinforcement).

 

Also re your head injuries claim, can you point us at your sources that the risk goes up when you wear a helmet please?

http://www.google.co.uk

Type in some appropriate words and see what comes up, it's not obscure or hidden, it's very easy to find.

[martyn1949]

As for sensationalism, when someone deliberately aims a heavy vehicle at a cyclist, what do they think the end result will be? Deliberate serious harm is meant. I have a knowldege of the law, and where deliberate serious harm is meant and results in death it's murder.

 

You cannot know the mental intentions of a driver - that they "deliberately" aimed at you - that is just supposition on your part. Perhaps you have a ripe persecution complex - I don't know - it is much more likely that they just didn't see you - many vehicles have substantial blind spots to the rear quarters, and it is easy to "lose" a cyclist in these.

 

In the interests of self-preservation, cyclists should avoid the rear quarters of vehicles, especially larger one such as vans, 4WD's etc.

 

The same thing applies as I was advised, many years ago, by a cynical but experienced instructor - drive (or cycle) as if all the other people on the road were actively out to kill you - even if they aren't!

 

The sense of "entitlement" that cyclists have, even though they contribute nothing to the upkeep of the roads is annoyance enough to engender murderous thoughts in the average driver.

 

And don't start me on the dangerous stuff I see cyclists doing on a daily basis - jumping red lights, shortcutting through queuing traffic with minimal room to do so, cycling on pavements and yelling at pedestrians to get out of the way... little sympathy I am afraid.

[Squiggs]

The sense of "entitlement" that cyclists have, even though they contribute nothing to the upkeep of the roads..

 

Go away. Learn the subject that you want to talk about. Then come back and stop boring everyone with tired old gibberish and showing your ignorance

[alchemist]

As i have said in other posts, even if for thousands of meters there is no Vehicles, even if your sat there for five minutes because the detectors in the roads don't pick you up sat there.

even then your saying that going through a red light is wrong???.

 

Is that the only time you run a red light? I suspect not I suspect its mostly just sheer impatience and arrogance

 

---------- Post added 23-08-2013 at 08:17 ----------

 

lets try some common sense eghh

 

I think we are all trying to do that but no one seems to agree that its common sense to jump red lights!!!