What the hell is wrong with some people

[Ian Cooper]

I just asked my wife, who is a motorist. She says she feels safer in front of a cyclist. Once the cyclist is in the rear view mirror, she feels any potential hazard is past.

 

[gb155]

Had a guy pass me on a roundabout then cut me up to take the exit as I was 80% passed, he was screeching round and was millimetres off hitting me

The most scary near miss ever

It was 6am abd the roundabout and roads around it were all totally empty

 

[fossyant]

These drivers are as bad for all other road users. Just cyclists are more vulnerable.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

[sabian92]

I just asked my wife, who is a motorist. She says she feels safer in front of a cyclist. Once the cyclist is in the rear view mirror, she feels any potential hazard is past.

That I can understand if you've been driving 6 weeks but if a driver is confident then that shouldn't matter. If a driver "needs" to get past somebody to feel safe then they shouldn't be driving. The road is full of hazards so a cyclist shouldn't matter if they're in front of you.

If you don't like driving then it stands to reason you probably aren't very good at it (stands for other things as well).

 

[Ian Cooper]

That I can understand if you've been driving 6 weeks but if a driver is confident then that shouldn't matter...

Well, there's the rub, as they say. In my experience, there are two kinds of drivers - those who are not confident (the vast majority), and those who are overconfident (a small minority). In practice, both are as dangerous as one another.

 

[Crankarm]

Well, there's the rub, as they say. In my experience, there are two kinds of drivers - those who are not confident (the vast majority), and those who are overconfident (a small minority). In practice, both are as dangerous as one another.

It has nothing to do with confidence. Maybe riding stateside is totally different to the UK but here there are a small but significant minority of people who see cyclists as fair game not to mention all the vitriol against cyclists and cycling that frequently surfaces in the media. This is why I gave up riding on the roads as well as being knocked down twice and in each instance the driver did not give a shoot about me.

I value my life, but as others clearly don't, I don't see why I should risk becoming yet another statistic just to make the people who support safety in numbers to feel good about themselves. There simply isn't the desire or political will in the UK to make cycling truly safe and free from the threat of being run down and killed on a daily basis. The whole system is fecked as homicidal maniac drivers don't even get jail for their first offence these days. You get fined more for excess parking then you do for running down and killing a cyclist.

 

[Electric_Andy]

It has nothing to do with confidence. Maybe riding stateside is totally different to the UK but here there are a small but significant minority of people who see cyclists as fair game not to mention all the vitriol against cyclists and cycling that frequently surfaces in the media. This is why I gave up riding on the roads as well as being knocked down twice and in each instance the driver did not give a shoot about me.

I value my life, but as others clearly don't, I don't see why I should risk becoming yet another statistic just to make the people who support safety in numbers to feel good about themselves. There simply isn't the desire or political will in the UK to make cycling truly safe and free from the threat of being run down and killed on a daily basis. The whole system is fecked as homicidal maniac drivers don't even get jail for their first offence these days. You get fined more for excess parking then you do for running down and killing a cyclist.

I totally agree. Also too many car drivers do not know the highway code, and never did cycling proficiency at School. I think lots of motorists are bitter, and becasue they "pay their way" through fuel and VED, think that they deserve more of the road than a cyclist.

The government do not care about cyclists becasue we do not give them money by buying petrol.

 

[Ian Cooper]

I was talking about the general reality on the road. I wasn't talking about a miniscule minority who see cyclists as fair game. These people are very rare indeed. The idea that these folks are 'significant' is only true in terms of the vast numbers of cyclists who allow fear of these psychopaths to undermine their own safety. The idea that there's a large minority of nutcases on the road who are perfectly willing to kill cyclists is, in my view, ludicrous. Hanlon's Razor is far better at finding the reality of situations like these. It is a mistake to ascribe danger on the road to malicious motorists.

The fact is, if a cyclist routinely gets knocked down on the roads, he is doing something wrong (usually it's riding too close to the kerb and thereby encouraging attempts to pass in the same lane). On the road, it takes two to tango. Only very rarely indeed is a collision on the road purely one person's fault.

And (having cycled for years in Britain and in the US, I can assure everyone that the motorists' anger vs. cyclists situation is worse in the US than it is in Britain.

 

[will golden]

People are peanuts when they get in cars. For some reason perfectly sane individuals turn into borderline murdering psychopaths when they get behind the wheel. I used to be and I can now admit I'm a bit ashamed of it. I've calmed down a lot since I've started using the road as a cyclist.

It's the whole nation, sabian. Normal passive people become the same on a PC.... even happens 2me!

 

[StuartG]

Dear me - the guy was just trying to impress you on how accurately he can judge distances to the nearest centimeter. With a bit more training he might be able to get down to millimeters - especially if you would just stop wobbling. Have you no consideration for really skilful road users?

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

I was talking about the general reality on the road. I wasn't talking about a miniscule minority who see cyclists as fair game. These people are very rare indeed. The idea that these folks are 'significant' is only true in terms of the vast numbers of cyclists who allow fear of these psychopaths to undermine their own safety. The idea that there's a large minority of nutcases on the road who are perfectly willing to kill cyclists is, in my view, ludicrous. Hanlon's Razor is far better at finding the reality of situations like these. It is a mistake to ascribe danger on the road to malicious motorists.

I agree that the number who would deliberately kill a cyclist is extremely small, but that is something of a straw man. I think the large number of drivers who reply "you were riding in the middle of the f*****g road", when asked why they passed too close, shows that there is a malicious streak in many drivers, born of a sense of entitlement to exclusive use of the roads, which in turn stems from their belief that they, and they alone, pay for those roads. It is quite clear that these drivers knew very well what they were doing, made a conscious decision to overtake unsafely, and would do the same again in a similar situation. They certainly qualify as a small but significant minority.

The fact is, if a cyclist routinely gets knocked down on the roads, he is doing something wrong (usually it's riding too close to the kerb and thereby encouraging attempts to pass in the same lane). On the road, it takes two to tango. Only very rarely indeed is a collision on the road purely one person's fault.

In just the same way that the person who forgets to lock their door is to blame for being burgled? The semantics of the phrase "doing something wrong" are a problem in a statement like this. The cyclist who cycles too close to the kerb did not do anything wrong; they simply did not take the (brave - in the case of a novice) actions to prevent someone else doing something wrong.

 

[Mike8782]

I had one this morning, I'm coming up a hill with a slower cyclist ahead of me. We're around 100 yards from a queue of traffic and I move out to overtake to go around the slower cyclist, and a car then proceeds to overtake me around 50cm off my handlebars, only to have to stop at the traffic. Why did he bother? Was I in the wrong to overtake in the first place?

 

[Ian Cooper]

In just the same way that the person who forgets to lock their door is to blame for being burgled? The semantics of the phrase "doing something wrong" are a problem in a statement like this. The cyclist who cycles too close to the kerb did not do anything wrong; they simply did not take the (brave - in the case of a novice) actions to prevent someone else doing something wrong.

Cycling too close to the kerb gets many cyclists killed because the cyclist is willfully placing himself out of the standard cone of concentration of motorists and therefore in greater danger. In my view, that means it's a mistake, and wrong. This is not akin to forgetting to lock a door and being blamed for being burgled. You don't 'accidentally' ride far left - you do so on purpose. It is more like leaving a key in the lock on purpose because you're afraid you'll lose it. The fact that they do these things out of fear doesn't make it right or safe or smart to do these things. True, it wouldn't be deemed their 'fault' if they were killed or injured (or burgled) while doing these things, but doing these things doesn't help.

When cyclists know the real dangers posed by the road, there is no bravery involved in riding well into the lane. On the contrary, this behaviour reflects the desire for self-preservation.

Anyway, I fear this subject is getting a little tense and is in danger of getting away from the 'fun and friendly' mandate of the forums, so I will bow out of this one at this point.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Cycling too close to the kerb gets many cyclists killed because the cyclist is willfully placing himself out of the standard cone of concentration of motorists and therefore in greater danger. In my view, that means it's a mistake, and wrong. This is not akin to forgetting to lock a door and being blamed for being burgled. You don't 'accidentally' ride far left - you do so on purpose. It is more like leaving a key in the lock on purpose because you're afraid you'll lose it. The fact that they do these things out of fear doesn't make it right or safe or smart to do these things. True, it wouldn't be deemed their 'fault' if they were killed or injured (or burgled) while doing these things, but doing these things doesn't help.
When cyclists know the real dangers posed by the road, there is no bravery involved in riding well into the lane. On the contrary, this behaviour reflects the desire for self-preservation.

Actually, I agree with most of your argument here. Since I became more assertive in my own riding, I have significantly reduced the number of incidents involving mistakes by drivers, which confirms your point.

Unfortunately, these have been replaced by incidents involving clear deliberate aggressive driving, sometimes involving the use of the horn; often involving the use of a vehicle to attempt to force me over to the side of the road; in other cases just involving shouting and pointing to the gutter. I also experience a significant number of very close passes when in secondary position at places where there is more than enough room to pass safely and courteously; possibly some of these cases are born of ignorance, but I am sure many are not.

In that kind of environment, I think it is brave for inexperienced cyclists to ride assertively. If I am battling a headwind, I still often find it hard to take the lane where I really should, despite being stubborn and pig-headed.

I would love to be convinced otherwise, but the evidence of my own experience seems to work against that at the moment.

 

[400bhp]

I agree that the number who would deliberately kill a cyclist is extremely small, but that is something of a straw man. I think the large number of drivers who reply "you were riding in the middle of the f*****g road", when asked why they passed too close, shows that there is a malicious streak in many drivers, born of a sense of entitlement to exclusive use of the roads, which in turn stems from their belief that they, and they alone, pay for those roads. It is quite clear that these drivers knew very well what they were doing, made a conscious decision to overtake unsafely, and would do the same again in a similar situation. They certainly qualify as a small but significant minority.

I think you are right - however the bit I would remove is the "pay for the roads". I believe most would overtake a slower moving vehicle, if they believed they had a big enough gap.

In fact this was demonstrated by a work colleague - he sticks to the limit (20mph) on a road that has a shool along it. It isn't a side street and the 20mph signs are not that easy to spot. He tells me he often gets beeped/tailgated/overtaken along that stretch.