Serious M.T.B. on local pavements.

[Nigelnaturist]

I'm almost tempted to take up smoking and pavement-cycling so that I can pull off the whole shebang at once.

I know, I did think he could make rather a lot of money in the circus or such like.

 

[theclaud]

The first time I recce'd the route for the Cardiff-Swansea FNRttC, I crashed rather spectacularly into a hedge because I attempted to answer the phone whilst folding an OS map and going down a fairly steep hill. I don't think multi-tasking is my thing. Unfortunately there was no pavement, and I was on a road bike not a Serious MTB, so I'm not ticking enough arbitrary boxes to inspire disapproving threads on CycleChat. Must try harder.

 

[classic33]

I didn't say that, what I implied is that youngsters have no sense and put themselves at risk.
The responsibility is on the drive to drive in such away they can stop in the distance they can under all eventualities.

Ok lets bring into the equation drunk in charge of a bicycle, riding no handed drinking smoking on a mobile and on a pavement yes I saw a guy do all that at the same time, the rest can also be applied to cyclists to some degree though in many cases not a legal requirement.
1.2 million cars uninsured out of what 20 million 25 so lets say 1 in 25, suspect thats quite a bit higher with bikes, again not a legal requirement but if you cause an accident your just as liable. Excluding the idiots that drive prior to a test or training, drivers have to have a attained a certain level of skill, that again is not a legal requirement on bike, maybe if it was people would not have the same fears on the road as they would be trained to ride in such conditions.
However at the end of the day we as cyclists if we get our judgement wrong are likely to come off worst.

How about a 25% total. But that's a two year old government supplied figure now.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

How about a 25% total. But that's a two year old government supplied figure now.

So your saying 1 in 4, with todays technology I am surprised there are any cars on the road, or is that there is only 4.8 million cars on the road, either that or those stats are wrong some where either the 25% or 1.2 million uninsured. The three cars in use here are insured the 4th isn't however it has a S.W.O.R.N. declaration and is parked up with a cover over it, stats can be misleading or misrepresented to suit a point of view.

 

[classic33]

So your saying 1 in 4, with todays technology I am surprised there are any cars on the road, or is that there is only 4.8 million cars on the road, either that or those stats are wrong some where either the 25% or 1.2 million uninsured. The three cars in use here are insured the 4th isn't however it has a S.W.O.R.N. declaration and is parked up with a cover over it, stats can be misleading or misrepresented to suit a point of view.

The government figure on the number of vehicles on the roads without insurance, MOT or VED.

I've two pass me daily. Police have visited the owners of one(more than once), but its not stopping him.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

The government figure on the number of vehicles on the roads without insurance, MOT or VED.

So one in four has no insurance no mot or ved, just as well they don't do regular checks otherwise there would be no pickup trucks for brake downs, its also just as well cyclists don't need these, some places I ride the bikes are as bad in terms of road worthiness which bikes have got to be by law, even if an mot isn't needed, mind you these are the places I see some of the worst riding and driving.

 

[glenn forger]

Even if every single cyclist commuter rides no handed on a mobile with a drink and a fag up a one-way street with no lights dressed as a nazi they would still be outnumbered by uninsured drivers. So your claim that law-breaking cyclists outnumber law-breaking drivers is laughable.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

Even if every single cyclist commuter rides no handed on a mobile with a drink and a fag up a one-way street with no lights dressed as a nazi they would still be outnumbered by uninsured drivers. So your claim that law-breaking cyclists outnumber law-breaking drivers is laughable.

Again quoting out of context, I said per 100 I said I see more bad cycling than driving, there was no reference to breaking the law as such, though some of it might be, so its hardly laughable, its that bad riding motorists sees and calls for segregation (speaking of Nazi's), mind you I only ride a mere 5-7,000 miles a year so what do I get to see not much I suppose.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

@glenn forger is that figure actual drivers or uninsured cars as I say we have four cars here (well three at the moment the young fella back at Uni) of the four, one is uninsured, but its not used on the road, so according to D.V.L.A. its an uninsured vehicle, and whilst it is illegal an uninsured driver may not be as dangerous as some insured drivers ( I am not advocating it in anyway however), and even if uninsured the driver in the event of any accident is still liable as is a cyclist/pedestrian/horse rider ect...

 

[User482]

Ok lets bring into the equation drunk in charge of a bicycle.

My bicycle is very well-trained: when I'm drunk, it's in charge of me.

p.s. cycled on the pavement this morning, taking my daughter to school. The shame!

 

[Nigelnaturist]

My bicycle is very well-trained: when I'm drunk, it's in charge of me.

p.s. cycled on the pavement this morning, taking my daughter to school. The shame!

So its ok to be drunk in charge of a bike (note what the law is "in charge you don't have to be riding it") though it is illegal.
On the second I am not going to condemn you, but I would watch those officers down your way, they can be pretty keen on the letter of the law.

 

[User482]

So its ok to be drunk in charge of a bike (note what the law is "in charge you don't have to be riding it") though it is illegal.
On the second I am not going to condemn you, but I would watch those officers down your way, they can be pretty keen on the letter of the law.

Only if I'm not in a hurry, as I have a habit of missing my train.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

Only if I'm not in a hurry, as I have a habit of missing my train.

So its ok to be drunk in charge of a car then, this sort of smacks of its ok for me but not them, no wonder motorist are p****** off with us, if we think its ok to flaunt the law.

 

[User482]

So its ok to be drunk in charge of a car then, this sort of smacks of its ok for me but not them, no wonder motorist are p****** off with us, if we think its ok to flaunt the law.

I'm a motorist, don't drink and drive, and am not remotely annoyed if cyclists go to the pub.

You'll have to explain how one flaunts the law. Does it involve elaborate dress and dancing?

 

[Dan B]

So its ok to be drunk in charge of a car then, this sort of smacks of its ok for me but not them, no wonder motorist are p****** off with us, if we think its ok to flaunt the law.

If you've got it, flaunt it.

But yeah. There are some things it's OK to do on a bike that aren't OK in a car, just as there are some things it's OK to do when walking that aren't OK on a bike, and some things it's OK to do in a car that it's not OK to do while flying a 747. It's all about how much danger your choice of transport exposes the people around you to