F***ing cyclists

[Crankarm]

in which lack of hi-vis was cited as an example of irresponsibility

Errr .................. no. The irresponsibility was riding fast on the pavement weaving in and out of peds causing them to scatter no lights, wearing dark colours, riding through pedestrian crossings on a red light, etc. The lack of hi-viz was an observation which would not have changed the wrong doing. It is irrelevant ................ Stop TROLLING.

 

[adds21]

This isn't going to make me popular here, but I genuinely believe there are more bad cyclists than there are bad car drivers. Of course car drivers need to take a test, which could be part of the reason.

 

[monkeypony]

For those who don't wear some sort of high vis garment, when cycling at night, how do you make your turn signals obvious to cars following you?

The dozy cow I nearly ran over last night as she turned right in front of me had her arm out but, as she was wearing a black coat, was completely invisible until I was about a bonnet length away from her.

And that is with me being a cyclist and showing other cyclists more respect than a lot of other road users probably do.

If you ride in the dark and don't wear high vis, it doesn't make you a bad cyclist but does make you a bit of a moron.

 

[Origamist]

This isn't going to make me popular here, but I genuinely believe there are more bad cyclists than there are bad car drivers. Of course car drivers need to take a test, which could be part of the reason.

In collisions involving adult cyclists and motorised vehicles, who do you think is most often apportioned blame (according to police collsion files) - the driver or the cyclist?

 

[Sheffield_Tiger]

I will challenge the attitude of "should be wearing hi-vis" wherever I see it. It is not trolling, it is IMPORTANT that this attitude of "no hi-vis" as contributory negligence is challenged.

Should I be injured or worse due to the actions of someone else I don't want some idiotic judge saying "ah well, the driver was indeed careless but the cyclist wasn't wearing a little jellow jacket so must share some of the blame for the incident"

The more "AND he wasn't wearing hi-vis" is added to public perception to bulk up the list of "charges" against "what cyclists do", the more this influences the idea that a cyclist who isn't wearing a helmet or isn't wearing hi-vis must share culpability.

Challenge the wrongdoing by all means, but other things which are irrelevant should not be added to pad it out

Crankarm, you are indeed correct that the hi vis is an irrelevance. This is why I challenge the mention of it - it was not relevant to the wrogdoing and should never have been included in the OP (lights too are partly an irrelevance since whatever time of day or night, those bikes should not have been riding on the pavement.

 

[fossyant]

Bl00dy cyclists, and they don't pay road tax........ Im off to join a car forum.......

 

[marzjennings]

For those who don't wear some sort of high vis garment, when cycling at night, how do you make your turn signals obvious to cars following you?

The dozy cow I nearly ran over last night as she turned right in front of me had her arm out but, as she was wearing a black coat, was completely invisible until I was about a bonnet length away from her.

And that is with me being a cyclist and showing other cyclists more respect than a lot of other road users probably do.

If you ride in the dark and don't wear high vis, it doesn't make you a bad cyclist but does make you a bit of a moron.

Wow, nice job on taking a personal opinion, flipping into a fact of life from which you’re now able to denigrate others who don’t follow this new definition of cycling correctly.

I guess I’ll have to stick to just keep sticking my un-hi-vized arms out to indicate my desired direction of travel. ‘Cos, like, it’s only worked for me for the last 35 years.

 

[Dan B]

Is there any wonder that motorists treat all cyclists with contempt, when cycling like this happens?

I saw a car the other day that drove straight through a zebra crossing at speed, as I was walking across it. I had to jump backwards to avoid being hit. Is there any wonder that motorists treat all motorists with contempt, when driving like this happens?

What? They don't? Well you tell me what the difference is then

 

[monkeypony]

Wow, nice job on taking a personal opinion, flipping into a fact of life from which you’re now able to denigrate others who don’t follow this new definition of cycling correctly.

I guess I’ll have to stick to just keep sticking my un-hi-vized arms out to indicate my desired direction of travel. ‘Cos, like, it’s only worked for me for the last 35 years.

Cool, I might stop using the indicators in the car too, after all no-one else needs to be aware of what my intentions are when out on the roads do they.......

 

[slowmotion]

This isn't going to make me popular here, but I genuinely believe there are more bad cyclists than there are bad car drivers. Of course car drivers need to take a test, which could be part of the reason.

If RLJing counts as bad cycling, I don't see how anybody could possibly disagree with that.

 

[Sheffield_Tiger]

Cool, I might stop using the indicators in the car too, after all no-one else needs to be aware of what my intentions are when out on the roads do they.......

I'm curious as to how you know that the woman already had her arm out if she was, as you suggest, completely invisible to you? Which suggests no lights which is quite a different thing.

Whether or not she put her arm out late or turned without looking is also quite a different kettle of fish.

Perhaps the discussion of hi-vis might be better in a separate topic, my original mention of it quoting the OP was simply to challenge that as a valid addition to the list of other genuine transgressions

 

[Norm]

in which lack of hi-vis was cited as an example of irresponsibility

No it wasn't, it was a statement of fact.

That you picked up on it, in the first response on this thread, as if it was the only thing JamesAC posted is nothing more than your interpretation of it as an excuse to ignore all the other stuff that the cyclists were doing wrong.

If you read the OP, the piece you quoted, it says "...No lights, no hi-viz. No concern at all." There is no judgement there.

 

[ThePainInSpain]

Terrible state of affairs. An old tightly firled umbrella can come in handy ...............

or a quick nudge with the shoulder.

Knock the twats off, they'll think twice about doing it again...............

 

[marzjennings]

Cool, I might stop using the indicators in the car too, after all no-one else needs to be aware of what my intentions are when out on the roads do they.......

Another excellent attempt, but missing my point entirely, that it’s not necessary to wear hi-viz to give a clear indication by hand. I wasn’t saying you shouldn’t indicate at all.

 

[Origamist]

If RLJing counts as bad cycling, I don't see how anybody could possibly disagree with that.

If speeding counts as bad driving, I don't see how anybody could possibly disagree with that.

See what I did there?