Why I hate RLJ, pavement cyclists etc

[Cab]

Oh come off it, only one person made such a joke and you assume we all think like that?

No, I don't, but it is clear to me that no one stood up for what is right and held him to task for that. Anyone who took part in such a discussion without condemning something as sick as that is complicit.

It really is that simple. You don't choose to condemn someone absolutely for that kind of behaviour, any reasonable person would. End of story.

 

[Cab]

What I meant by bad car drivers being easier to spot is that someone speeding is more likely to be caught by a speed camera, or if they jump a red like they can be caught by a red light camera, or be spotted by a police patrol. Also the results of bad car driving are usually far more catastrophic than bad cycle riding, and thus more likely to appear in the news.

Yet the vast majority of motorists break all of those laws and get away with it; don't take my word for it, look at the surveys already quoted on this forum. You're speaking rubbish, the facts do not support your claims at all; its just another obvious chip on your shoulder.

 

[Cab]

Oh i see cab your just as bad as the rest who tar people with the same brush,i trust you have nothing better to do than stand over a motorway with a speed gun i may add because thier is no way you can know for sure every one is doing 80 plus.Get off your high horse there are a lot of safe drivers out thier.

Sometimes someone posts something daft and I can laugh with them. In your case, however, its just too tragic.

What are you trying to achieve by posting here? Why are you even contributing to this forum?

 

[spindrift]

What I meant by bad car drivers being easier to spot is that someone speeding is more likely to be caught by a speed camera, or if they jump a red like they can be caught by a red light camera, or be spotted by a police patrol.

I am afraid that this is not true.

Onlt 6000 speed cameras cover the whole of the UK, as has been pointed out here over and over and over and over again.

The chances of bad drivers getting caught, let alone charged with anything, are very slim indeed.

 

[magnatom]

Sometimes someone posts something daft and I can laugh with them. In your case, however, its just too tragic.

What are you trying to achieve by posting here? Why are you even contributing to this forum?

Come on Cab, settle down! They are more than welcome to post here and have just as much right as you have (it is a public forum after all).

I think there is a lot of hair splitting going on here (go on Cab admit it).

We all agree that there are bad drivers, bad cyclists, bad people in every walk of life. Lets just leave it at that.

Much more can be achieved of we work together, than if we bicker and fight.

 

[Cab]

Come on Cab, settle down! They are more than welcome to post here and have just as much right as you have (it is a public forum after all).

I think there is a lot of hair splitting going on here (go on Cab admit it).

We all agree that there are bad drivers, bad cyclists, bad people in every walk of life. Lets just leave it at that.

Much more can be achieved of we work together, than if we bicker and fight.

Nope. Not hair splitting at all.

If someone made a comment like that on any moderated forum to which I post, and the comment not moderated, I'd leave. If I had opportunity to refute or criticise such a statement then on a forum that I'm a member, I would do so.

The simple reality is that they're trolling here; they're representative of a bunch of cyclist hating nutters.

It would of course be easy for them to refute this claim; all they have to do is go back to their bus drivers forum and challenge some of those totally abhorrent statements. Hasn't happened, despite them being challenged to do so, and it won't happen. Fact is, the best evidence we have is that they don't have any problem with that kind of claim or that kind of behaviour.

There is nothing to be gained by working 'together' with someone who behaves like that. They are opposed to us, our lifestyles and our chosen mode of transport, they're not interested in working together.

 

[nethalus]

What I meant by bad car drivers being easier to spot is that someone speeding is more likely to be caught by a speed camera, or if they jump a red like they can be caught by a red light camera, or be spotted by a police patrol.

I am afraid that this is not true.

Onlt 6000 speed cameras cover the whole of the UK, as has been pointed out here over and over and over and over again.

The chances of bad drivers getting caught, let alone charged with anything, are very slim indeed.

Perhaps I should explain with a hypothetical situation. A cylist rides on the pavement and is seen by a copper. But then some idiot in a car, either drunk, impatient or stupid decides to copy the cyclist and drive their car on the pavement too. Who is more likely to get nicked?

 

[Cab]

Perhaps I should explain with a hypothetical situation. A cylist rides on the pavement and is seen by a copper. But then some idiot in a car, either drunk, impatient or stupid decides to copy the cyclist and drive their car on the pavement too. Who is more likely to get nicked?

If the policeman is following guidance from the Home Office, then it depends on why the cyclist is on the pavement. In most cases, the cyclist is more likely to get nicked. Don't believe me? Go walk down any back street and count the number of cars driven on the pavement to park so as not to interfere with traffic (often making passage of push chairs and wheelchairs impossible). How many people get nicked for that?

But more importantly, would you care to speculate on the comparative number of casualties caused by bikes and cars to pedestrians on the pavement?

 

[BentMikey]

I must admit I'm also shocked that neither nethalus nor random chose to cry foul on those awful bus driver comments, and still refuse to do so. This is one of the few fair points I've seen from Cab lately, IMO.

 

[nethalus]

No, I don't, but it is clear to me that no one stood up for what is right and held him to task for that. Anyone who took part in such a discussion without condemning something as sick as that is complicit.

And no one in their right mind took it seriously either, it was someone trying to be outrageous and start an argument! Do you really think that anyone would actually go out of their way and deliberately injure a cyclist whilst driving a bus? I certainly would not. If I was involved in a such an accident with a cyclist or pedestrian it'd probably be the end of me.
I was involved in an accident last year in which an 82 year old man driving a mini pulled out 10ft in front of me while I was doing 30 mph (in a 40mph zone). At 30mph you need at least 75ft to stop a vehicle, plus the road was wet and so that distance should be doubled. The man just pulled straight out of a side road with out looking and I was unable to avoid a collision. One of the coppers, for some reason, decided to inform me that they didn't think the old boy would make it due to his age. I was absolutely horrified at the suggestion (the old boy did make though and I believe had his license removed for dangerous driving).
For days, even weeks afterwards I could not close my eyes without seeing that red mini pulling out in front of me, and feeling that same sicking sensation that I was going to hit it. I could still feel and hear that awful bang when my bus struck the car and see it being spun round and round. It was awful and no way do I want anything like that to happen again.

 

[magnatom]

Nope. Not hair splitting at all.

If someone made a comment like that on any moderated forum to which I post, and the comment not moderated, I'd leave. If I had opportunity to refute or criticise such a statement then on a forum that I'm a member, I would do so.

The simple reality is that they're trolling here; they're representative of a bunch of cyclist hating nutters.

It would of course be easy for them to refute this claim; all they have to do is go back to their bus drivers forum and challenge some of those totally abhorrent statements. Hasn't happened, despite them being challenged to do so, and it won't happen. Fact is, the best evidence we have is that they don't have any problem with that kind of claim or that kind of behaviour.

There is nothing to be gained by working 'together' with someone who behaves like that. They are opposed to us, our lifestyles and our chosen mode of transport, they're not interested in working together.

Cab,

I think it is a stretch to say that because they didn't chastise him for his comments that they are complicit. Sure they should have said something, but going by the reactions of this guy to my comments, they may have already known that it wouldn't make a difference. He doesn't appear to care what others think, so whats the point in saying anything.

As I said before, nethalus and random might not have the same views as we have, but they are at least coming over and trying to talk to us.

As I am sure you are aware, Cab, you have a very confrontational approach to your posts (which by the way is not a problem!), and nethalus and random probably aren't aware of that and probably feel they are being assassinated! Give them a break, let them settle in, they have both stated that they bear no grudge or bad will against good cyclists. In fact they probably get annoyed by the same cyclists that annoy us, the RLJ's, pavement cyclists etc.

Make love not war

 

[nethalus]

If the policeman is following guidance from the Home Office, then it depends on why the cyclist is on the pavement. In most cases, the cyclist is more likely to get nicked. Don't believe me? Go walk down any back street and count the number of cars driven on the pavement to park so as not to interfere with traffic (often making passage of push chairs and wheelchairs impossible). How many people get nicked for that?

But more importantly, would you care to speculate on the comparative number of casualties caused by bikes and cars to pedestrians on the pavement?

It doesn't matter why the cyclist is on the pavement, or the car for that matter. The point I was making is that you are more likely to take notice of a car being driven along a pavement that a cycle. Which is what I meant originally, bad car driving sticks out more than bad cycling. That does not mean I condone bad driving, far from it but it is more noticable.
Unfotunately though not all bad drivers are caught, and far too many think that because they have got away with bad driving previously it's ok to carry on like that. Tragically many bad drivers carry on with bad driving until it results in death.

 

[gambatte]

count the number of cars driven on the pavement to park so as not to interfere with traffic (often making passage of push chairs and wheelchairs impossible). How many people get nicked for that?

As I’ve previously said, I’m attempting to get the parking outside our local school policed more closely. It’s difficult that thanks to our local council the police no longer have powers over yellow lines and can only ticket for obstruction etc.

I actually got a copper say to me that “When the roads were built, we didn’t have that many cars. Parkings now more difficult, so we now use our discretion and turn a blind eye to cars parking on the pavement. So long as theres enough room to get a buggy past we won’t ticket the vehicle”

So whats the point in passing laws, putting up restrictions etc, if the police choose not to enforce them….

I had an even wetter response from the council enforcement team. It took a 2 year old getting hospitalised to kick start them into action.

 

[Cab]

It doesn't matter why the cyclist is on the pavement, or the car for that matter.

Yes, it is a matter of why the cyclist is on the pavement.

I quote the Home Secretary from when fixed penalty notices for cycling on the pavement were introduced:

'The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle in the road... sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required'.

Or, in other words, the copper is meant to use his judgement on whether or not to do a cyclist for being on the pavement.

The point I was making is that you are more likely to take notice of a car being driven along a pavement that a cycle. Which is what I meant originally, bad car driving sticks out more than bad cycling.

And my counter point (which you have ignored) is that bad driving (in which I'm including pavement parking and speeding) can easily disappear into the background of bad driving. I give as evidence the sheer number of pavement parkers and endemic speeding on our roads. You are less likely to notice bad driving than cycling.

Theres also some psychology going on here too of course; bad speeding motorists who don't see what they're doing as wrong form a large part of the road using public (see stats quoted elsewhere here). They're the ones who complain about cyclists... Which group gets more easily noticed, the one cyclist occasionally crossing a pavement or ten speeding motorists?

 

[Cab]

And no one in their right mind took it seriously either, it was someone trying to be outrageous and start an argument! Do you really think that anyone would actually go out of their way and deliberately injure a cyclist whilst driving a bus?

(further comments cut unread)

Then condemn him for making such an outrageous claim. Do I believe he would do that? Well, he said he has. Heavens forbid we judge someone on what they actually said...