Why is there so much animosity towards cyclists in Sheffield?

[jezzyjj]

Then as I said, good on you, cushy number. ;)

Thinking being self employed is a cushy number is about as ignorant as ignorant as all of the bigoted nonsense on this thread about cyclists.

 

The anti cycling vitriol is the same sort of ignorant and vile gibberish racists come out with to justify their equally inaccurate and unpleasant viewpoint, which is fundamentally based on hatred and not facts. Pesky facts will tend to contradict every thing racists and anti-cycling numpties have to say.

There is no point arguing with racists and likewise there is not much point arguing with the anti-cycling brigade because bigots by definition, are stupid people who refuse to be educated.

[TonyPrice]

Last ditch attempt to get ahead of the cyclist rather than be held up by them setting off from the lights!

 

It's clear from this thread what is similarly clear when driving on the roads, that is that some car drivers are ignorant and dangerous, and quite a lot of cyclists are pompous, self-righteous and think they're above the law. Hell, one particular example even has the time to make nearly 60,000 posts mainly while at work, in between gazing out of the window at nasty motorists - hope he's not public sector!

 

Have to agree with the cyclist definition after reading the post below.

 

True. I'm just more concerned with my own safety (coming from greater prevalence of cyclists) than I am with the fatties who refuse to do any exercise. (Although I should be concerned about the amount it costs to treat diabetes, the largest single cost to the NHS).

 

All motorists overweight with diabetes?

[Cyclone]

Did I say that?

[jezzyjj]

So I think it's fair to say that for a fair proportion of people, the question

 

"Why is there so much animosity towards cyclists in Sheffield"

 

Can be answered

 

"Because people are under a misapprehension about how roads are funded; and incorrectly believe that their taxes pay for roads and cyclists' taxes don't"

There's also another reason. They get really annoyed that some 'poor person on their cheap bike' can go faster around town than they can in their expensive status symbol. This is perceived as unfair and is the real reason why car drivers get so wound up. The non-existent road tax only adds to that feeling of unfairness

The fact that cyclists tend to be richer on average or that bikes can cost more than many people pay for cars and that keen cyclists tend to have several expensive bikes [and a car] is not something that will ever register in the angry brains of the poor put upon motorist.

[achorste]

There's also another reason. They get really annoyed that some 'poor person on their cheap bike' can go faster around town than they can in their expensive status symbol. This is perceived as unfair and is the real reason why car drivers get so wound up. The non-existent road tax only adds to that feeling of unfairness

The fact that cyclists tend to be richer on average or that bikes can cost more than many people pay for cars and that keen cyclists tend to have several expensive bikes [and a car] is not something that will ever register in the angry brains of the poor put upon motorist.

 

I'm always amused that at every sportive and triathlon I compete in, a significant proportion of the bikes are more expensive than the cars that are carrying them

 

Also of note that the cost of a bike has 20% VAT added... which goes to the government who pays for the road system.

[TonyPrice]

I have been reading the number of cycling threads on here the past week and quite frankly I do not understand why there are so many when basically they are all full of the same content.

From what I have read I have come to the conclusion that the cyclist seem to have a major chip on their shoulders. Not once justifying why they break the law, instead, trying to warrant their law breaking with stories of what car drivers have done wrong.

Best excuse I read which I had to laugh at and summed all the threads up for me was the excuse, some geezer and bird in London said I should be ok to ride on FOOTPATHS so therefore the law should be changed and even of ot is not I am still going to do it because they said I could.

In fact the poster in question even pointed out that because these two people said that, the poster thought for some strange reason The Government said it.

Strange but true.

[Cyclone]

If you'd be reading more carefully you'd notice that nearly all the threads are started by angry motorists who have a chip on their shoulder.

 

We don't justify breaking the law because we (the people posting) don't do it.

 

Some geezer and bird? You mean the two home secretaries? You know, the members of the cabinet responsible for that area.

 

Are you confused, do you not thing that official statements from the home secretary are statements from the government?

[achorste]

I have been reading the number of cycling threads on here the past week and quite frankly I do not understand why there are so many when basically they are all full of the same content.

Agreed.

 

From what I have read I have come to the conclusion that the cyclist seem to have a major chip on their shoulders.

 

Quite possibly. But nearly being killed by dangerous driving will do that for you.

 

Not once justifying why they break the law, instead, trying to warrant their law breaking with stories of what car drivers have done wrong.

 

Here's where I disagree with you. It is a minority of cyclists who break the law (red lights, pavement riding, dangerous maneuvers etc). Just as it is a minority of motorists who also break the law (red lights, speeding, dangerous driving).

 

Quite possibly it's the "them vs us" attitude that highlights these issues, but I have not once broken the law on my bike with regards to red lights, pavement riding etc.

 

I would love to see some education or awareness campaign for all road users on the rules of the road, peoples rights to use the roads and how we all should behave.

 

With any luck this would eliminate the absurd situation we find ourselves in where certain road users resent other road users merely for the type of transport they elect to use.

[TonyPrice]

If you'd be reading more carefully you'd notice that nearly all the threads are started by angry motorists who have a chip on their shoulder.

 

We don't justify breaking the law because we (the people posting) don't do it.

 

Some geezer and bird? You mean the two home secretaries? You know, the members of the cabinet responsible for that area.

 

Are you confused, do you not thing that official statements from the home secretary are statements from the government?

 

TWO members of a cabinet DO NOT equal Government.

I'm sure that even the most confused mind would be able to realise that lol.

 

I have read the threads from start to current, I am not condoning or taking either side, I am merely stating what I deduce from what I have read.

[Cyclone]

So when a single minister makes an official statement, that's not the government. Do they all have to say it at once, in a chorus?

 

---------- Post added 03-06-2015 at 11:27 ----------

 

So, for example, when the Chancellor announces the budget, that's not a government thing, and we probably shouldn't believe it. It's just some geezer in London...

 

---------- Post added 03-06-2015 at 11:27 ----------

 

This probably isn't even true

The Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne has announced that there will be a Summer Budget on Wednesday 8 July 2015.

 

Not until they all announce it together.