BBC Inside Out tomorrow - reminder

[Lizban]

yeah, but that's not your average motorist, where as these tv shows portray what many believe to be an "average" cyclist.

Don't think so, they were careful (as people here have acknowledged) to make the point about the minority of cyclists.

 

[thomas]

Don't think so, they were careful (as people here have acknowledged) to make the point about the minority of cyclists.

Yeah, but compared to police action camera shows it portrays a much more common experience.

 

[Twanger]

I got the train and bus in today, and in walking a couple of hundred yards from Selfridges to where I work got passed by a pavement rider, then nearly hit by some cretin cycling the wrong way through a red light in Wigmore street while another cyclist was, simultaneously, cycling the right way through the same red light. All in the space of 90 seconds.

There are some seriously crappy people on two wheels in Westminster. I thought the programme let the bastards down lightly.

I am continually overtaken on the inside, even when there is no room. I have had people knock me out of the way on the inside to jump lights when I am stopped at them.

I know it's only a fifth of cyclists, but it's a very visible fifth, and they are offensive.

Edit - to add, most of the discourtesies I have received from cyclists have been from people cycling in suits and/ or skirts. Work clothes. I have never been cut up by a lycra wearer.

 

[hackbike 666]

I don't wear lycra but I rarely have a problem with a lycra wearers so I really don't know where this term lycra lout comes from.On second thoughts it's the press as usual.

 

[gouldina]

I got the train and bus in today, and in walking a couple of hundred yards from Selfridges to where I work got passed by a pavement rider, then nearly hit by some cretin cycling the wrong way through a red light in Wigmore street while another cyclist was, simultaneously, cycling the right way through the same red light. All in the space of 90 seconds.

There are some seriously crappy people on two wheels in Westminster. I thought the programme let the bastards down lightly.

I am continually overtaken on the inside, even when there is no room. I have had people knock me out of the way on the inside to jump lights when I am stopped at them.

I know it's only a fifth of cyclists, but it's a very visible fifth, and they are offensive.

Edit - to add, most of the discourtesies I have received from cyclists have been from people cycling in suits and/ or skirts. Work clothes. I have never been cut up by a lycra wearer.

Word.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

bomb dodgers. They've brought their lousy attitudes with them when they got off public transport and onto their bikes. Same lousy 'super-men/women' attitudes they have behind the wheels of their cars. "Get out of my way plebs, I am on the road, I am considerably more important than you, and the petty rules of the road only apply to proles like you."

 

[BentMikey]

bomb dodgers. They've brought their lousy attitudes with them when they got off public transport and onto their bikes. Same lousy 'super-men/women' attitudes they have behind the wheels of their cars. "Get out of my way plebs, I am on the road, I am considerably more important than you, and the petty rules of the road only apply to proles like you."

Oh come on, surely that says more about you than it does about other people?

 

[hackbike 666]

I don't think "bomb dodgers" are the problem in London I just think it's the general attitude of must save a few seconds which applies to every road user.

 

[thegrumpybiker]

Bomb dodger???

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Bomb dodger???

People who took to cycling in London after the bombings of July '05 on the basis that it is safer than public transport. Most of them were utterly clueless and have stayed that way; they ride like they drive.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Oh come on, surely that says more about you than it does about other people?

I'm intrigued. What does it say about me?

I'll say a few things about myself. I have zero sympathy, empathy, or tolerance of those who, on busy streets, RLJ, who pavement ride, who don't have lights on their bikes at night, who ignore one way streets; who law break. If they don't consider themselves 'above the law' or at least have a cafeteria approach to the rules of the road then I don't know what they are thinking. If they are thinking at all, as opposed to being driven by their egos.

They put themselves at risk, which I can live with, they put other road users, including pedestrians at risk, which I resent as I and my loved ones share road space with them, and worst of all they make my life as a law abiding cyclist more difficult than it needs to be by hardened public opinion against ALL cyclists.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I don't think "bomb dodgers" are the problem in London I just think it's the general attitude of must save a few seconds which applies to every road user.

Not me. Not you either I expect. Nor the OP.

 

[BentMikey]

I'd argue instead that the more cyclists we have out there, especially unpredictable and clueless ones, the safer the roads become for all of us. It's drivers that bring the danger to us and to pedestrians, and safety in numbers is causing a big swing in safety for us all. Drivers are far more careful around unpredictable clueless cyclists than they are around competent roadies.

We are all supposed to avoid getting wound up by the bad antics of other road users - why let their behaviour affect you? Especially when the bad cyclists are very unlikely to bring any real danger to others. And how would you know that most/all the bad cyclists are "bomb dodgers", or that those who are, are still cycling the way they did in 2005?

 

[Cab]

I'd argue instead that the more cyclists we have out there, especially unpredictable and clueless ones, the safer the roads become for all of us. It's drivers that bring the danger to us and to pedestrians, and safety in numbers is causing a big swing in safety for us all. Drivers are far more careful around unpredictable clueless cyclists than they are around competent roadies.

We are all supposed to avoid getting wound up by the bad antics of other road users - why let their behaviour affect you? Especially when the bad cyclists are very unlikely to bring any real danger to others. And how would you know that most/all the bad cyclists are "bomb dodgers", or that those who are, are still cycling the way they did in 2005?

I think you're correct, as far as you go.

A muppet on a bike is still a muppet, and while the direct risk they carry is low, the knock on impact on others is quite high. If a motorist takes risks with the safety of other cyclists because they're angry at the muppets, then its entirely clear that this is still the fault of the motorist, but its also clear that the actions of the muppets do matter.

And yes, an individual behaving erratically on a bike may get more space than an individual competent rider. But 'strength in numbers' doesn't depend on having a vast army of muppets, it depends simply on having more people on bikes.

 

[thegrumpybiker]

I'll say a few things about myself. I have zero sympathy, empathy, or tolerance of those who, on busy streets, RLJ, who pavement ride, who don't have lights on their bikes at night, who ignore one way streets; who law break. If they don't consider themselves 'above the law' or at least have a cafeteria approach to the rules of the road then I don't know what they are thinking. If they are thinking at all, as opposed to being driven by their egos.

They put themselves at risk, which I can live with, they put other road users, including pedestrians at risk, which I resent as I and my loved ones share road space with them, and worst of all they make my life as a law abiding cyclist more difficult than it needs to be by hardened public opinion against ALL cyclists.

+1 there, couldn't agree more.