Isn't it now time for them to prove their case?

[downfader]

We've all read the letters, seen the comments online and in the media. Yes I know there will always be those that will just say "ignore it" but I think we do so at our peril.

I'm talking about antisocial and illegal cycling.

A few years back I got into cameras because I would talk to family and friends about some of the stuff that would happen. People just wouldnt beleive it, and on a few occassions I was asked to prove these things happened. I strapped a nikon compact to the bike with a manfrotto clamp and the rest is history.

So. All those non-cyclists who protest that every cyclist they see is misbehaving... shouldnt they now be told "prove it!?"

With cyclists representing only around 2% of all national traffic how can it be that prolific and that much of a problem?

Let the floods commence...

 

[Tommi]

Never let facts get in the way of your emotional arguments... ;-)

 

[downfader]

Never let facts get in the way of your emotional arguments... ;-)

Emotional?

Myself or those of which I speak? I'm simply analysing

 

[GrumpyGregry]

We dedicate entire threads to bad drivers, who are only the teeniest tiniest minority of those we encounter on the roads. People get hot under the collar when affronted. The scale of the problem from the perspective of the affected individual is attenuated by the experience.

 

[StuartG]

Anti-social and illegal cycling are not the same. You do one. the other or, if you are a complete a***, both at the same time.

Anti-social is what we should be targeting , illegal or not.

Causing death and destruction is anti-social. Annoying people is too. But there is a difference. So even that has to be nuanced. And then annoying also requires us to differentiate between what is unacceptable to society as opposed to what an individual may be annoyed by.

Which comes down to avoiding glib global statements and point to specific behaviour changes which can be beneficial, political acceptable and then targetted. Like what we did over drink driving.

 

[Dan B]

Anti-social and illegal cycling are not the same. You do one, the other or, if you are a complete a***, both at the same time.

Or the fourth possibility is that you do neither, but I think that's reserved for the saints


That's a minor nitpick, though: I agree with you wholeheartedly

 

[downfader]

We dedicate entire threads to bad drivers, who are only the teeniest tiniest minority of those we encounter on the roads. People get hot under the collar when affronted. The scale of the problem from the perspective of the affected individual is attenuated by the experience.

True.

And very beautifully put.

I think for me when I looked at a lot of the things that scared me or annoyed me on the bike, and saw it on camera - most of it was pretty easy to avoid or ignore. I began to see things as less problematic than I had originally interpreted.

Perhaps, slightly optimistic thinking I know, if these objectors filmed and reviewed they'd adapt their philosophy?

 

[blockend]

It depends where you cycle. On some rides the greatest problem is jay walking sheep, others are through the dog end of post industrialisation and all manner of bad driving and cycling are evident (plus lots of other anti-social behaviour).
At the risk of coming over Blimpish, the rise in cycling uptake has included new constituencies, some of whom will be bad drivers and other villains in mufti. I don't believe in the us and them, angels and demons take on cycling and it isn't my job to out or excuse complete gits because they happen to be on a saddle. Better to assume cycling has the same percentage of a-holes as the rest of the population.

 

[subaqua]

It depends where you cycle. On some rides the greatest problem is jay walking sheep, others are through the dog end of post industrialisation and all manner of bad driving and cycling are evident (plus lots of other anti-social behaviour).
At the risk of coming over Blimpish, the rise in cycling uptake has included new constituencies, some of whom will be bad drivers and other villains in mufti. I don't believe in the us and them, angels and demons take on cycling and it isn't my job to out or excuse complete gits because they happen to be on a saddle. Better to assume cycling has the same percentage of a-holes as the rest of the population.

never seen one of them. do they wait for the don't walk sign and then baaaaarge across the road.

 

[mickle]

Anti-social cycling is less of a problem than they make out. The simple fact is that, for whatever reason a large minority of the general population simply hates cyclists and will use any stick they can to beat us with. Today it's the 'They jump red lights' stick, tomorrow it's the 'riding on pavaments' stick.

The fact that more cars drive through red lights and drive on pavements escapes them. Because they don't really give a shoot about the red light jumping and pavement riding. They just hate cyclists. And that's what we need to address.

 

[Norm]

Anti-social cycling is less of a problem than they make out. The simple fact is that, for whatever reason a large minority of the general population simply hates cyclists and will use any stick they can to beat us with. Today it's the 'They jump red lights' stick, tomorrow it's the 'riding on pavaments' stick.

I had a bizarre anti-cyclist rant aimed at me the other day, someone having a go at a car which was 'always' parked on the zig-zags outside the local school. It was anti-cyclist as the owner was the local bike training instructor.

So, even when it is a car driver at fault, some peeps see it as a cyclist problem if that car driver even owns a bike.

 

[downfader]

Anti-social cycling is less of a problem than they make out. The simple fact is that, for whatever reason a large minority of the general population simply hates cyclists and will use any stick they can to beat us with. Today it's the 'They jump red lights' stick, tomorrow it's the 'riding on pavaments' stick.

The fact that more cars drive through red lights and drive on pavements escapes them. Because they don't really give a shoot about the red light jumping and pavement riding. They just hate cyclists. And that's what we need to address.

Mikey2gorgeous on the Bournemouth Echo website leaves comments to that effect. I think he noticed the same as I have down here in Southampton - there are problems localised to specific areas, but to not see the bigger picture is a failure. It tends to say more about attitude than anything else when these ranters cant differentiate. I don't always agree with the guy but as you say - there just isnt the problem with cyclists that some are saying.

I'm reminded of the Bear Tax in The Simpsons (one of the three reasons I found myself drawn to the Homer jersey, LOL)

 

[StuartG]

But, for a moment, look at yourselves from the other side.

You whizz passed me in jams, but complain when I whizz past you on the open road. You ride close enough to twang my wing mirrors, yet if I come within 3 feet of you I am being demonised on YouTube. You deliberately ride out to block my lane and ignore my request to move over. In other words you think you own the road. And if I wind down my window I am likely to get an earful of obscenities. You want me to spend money on making your cycling conditions better and my driving conditions worse.

You have to be joking!

Of course YOU don't see that even if you are driving because you understand the cyclist's situation unlike the majority. Gone are the days when most motorists were cyclists or ex-cyclists. Its just going to happen. Pleasure has been taken out of motoring and the frustration is looking for a victim. Transport ministers try and duck & weave which leaves us plum in the firing line. We escape the congestion they can't. For free!

Nothing personal. The solution has nothing to do with cycling. It is sorting out road transport and, in particular, private motoring. Governments are too weak to do it (hence the road pricing fiasco) and self denial is a hard nut to crack.

 

[downfader]

But, for a moment, look at yourselves from the other side.

You whizz passed me in jams, but complain when I whizz past you on the open road. You ride close enough to twang my wing mirrors, yet if I come within 3 feet of you I am being demonised on YouTube. You deliberately ride out to block my lane and ignore my request to move over. In other words you think you own the road. And if I wind down my window I am likely to get an earful of obscenities. You want me to spend money on making your cycling conditions better and my driving conditions worse.

You have to be joking!

Of course YOU don't see that even if you are driving because you understand the cyclist's situation unlike the majority. Gone are the days when most motorists were cyclists or ex-cyclists. Its just going to happen. Pleasure has been taken out of motoring and the frustration is looking for a victim. Transport ministers try and duck & weave which leaves us plum in the firing line. We escape the congestion they can't. For free!

Nothing personal. The solution has nothing to do with cycling. It is sorting out road transport and, in particular, private motoring. Governments are too weak to do it (hence the road pricing fiasco) and self denial is a hard nut to crack.

Whenever I've been faced with those critisisms my response is to tell them to be logical. Look deeper. Theres always a reason behind this from a cycling perspective ...and even if they still disagree its not an argument against cyclists, I tell them - its an argument for better and more effective segregation in trouble spots.

We can encourage empathy when we have new cyclists speak up. I have seen letters from them in my local paper, the type that goes "I've only been cycling for a year ...trying to save money ...this happened... now I understand!" They are the bridge between noncyclist and cyclist, as are family and friends of cyclists.

I know my friends and family have been quick to speak up. Not just for the negative aspects but for the many positive too.

 

[StuartG]

Whenever I've been faced with those critisisms my response is to tell them to be logical. Look deeper. Theres always a reason behind this from a cycling perspective

But cycling is not usually the issue. The issue is motoring. It was once a joy. It gets worse and more expensive every year. You daily run the risk of being criminalised. The future is not bright.

Many motorists are looking for a motoring solution. 2p off petrol, more roads, less laws, getting to home/work/seaside faster and in better humour. They know it isn't going to happen. But get out of the car onto a bus/train/bike/shank's pony? That they do not see as an option. Cars were the escape from that. To return just does not compute.

I can't convince my own family to give up the habit. Most families don't have a regular utility cyclist to even raise the issue. So they see our pontificating from afar as irrelevant at best, undermining them at worse.

OK I don't have a solution. I'd back anybody who did. I haven't found them yet ...