h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I cycle a lot and generally abide by the rules.

There is one spot where I need to go 100m on the pavement to avoid 2km up and down a dual carriageway. I could get off and walk of course. But I can't be a*s*d.

I don't normally run red lights, unless it's 1am and it's clear that I'm not going to inconvenience anyone.

I also note that whilst it's true that cyclists flout the law, so do nearly all motorists. For cyclists it is red lights and pavement use, for motorists it is speed and parking infractions.

So, pot and kettle and all that.

I also agree with the previous posting about helmet use - I want to use my bike regularly, and a helmet is one additional hassle that I don't need, with very limited additional safety benefits.

sprout

I agree that cyclists are hard done by and that people should be encouraged to cycle by making cycling less scary than it is especially in an urban enviroment. I think more cycle lanes which have edges on them to stop car drivers driving in them are a good thing as a lot of car drivers can be bleepers especially in London. As a motorist although it's not their fault cyclists are hard to drive round as you have swerve out enough to give them lots of room but to change lanes to do so is overkill. If they exist in a special space that helps car drivers too. BUT (and this is where I get flamed) it drives me nuts that cyclists think they have the right to ignore red lights especially at pedestrian crossings - one cyclist retorted "well you can stop and let me past" but hello guys - these are PEDESTRIAN crossings - that is they are there for PEDESTRIANS to cross at and it's just plain selfish to drive over them and expect the pedestrian to give way. It's equally inconsiderate to pedestrians to drive on the pavement which is their space - you are road users guys - if you can't drive on the road save your cycling for the park - which brings me nicely around to point of the second in the next paragraph.

As an in-line skater I also have issue with how rude some cyclists in Hyde Park are and the arrogant way they just expect you to get out of their way at double speed because god forbid you slow them down for even a second. You may not be aware of this but if you hear a tesily rung bell coming from behind you are not always aware exactly which directly the said bell is coming from or at least not quickly enough to get out of the way in seconds flat. Yes we use cycle paths but if you use the pedestrian bits then the pedestrians get narked with you especially if you are travelling at twice the speed they are. A lady in pink deserves naming and shaming for being downright obnoixous because I didn't get out of her way fast enough for her liking.

When I am a cyclist the thing that most p*sses me off is the state of the edge of the road which occasinally forces me to drive around large pot holes, drains, bits where the tarmac doesn't reach the path, etc. Drivers seem to regard the area between the first yellow line and the pavement to be the cycle lane and regard it as an act of supreme aggression to slow them down by cycling (bod forgive me!) outside of the second yellow line. I am rarely caused any problem by pedestrians as I don't tend to cycle on their walkways. I usually stop for red lights, one exception near my home where the light is halfway up a hill and it is hard overcomming the inertia of me + bike + shopping if I have to stop. However I go through this red light as a pedestrian would cross a road - ie only if there is nothing coming.

As a motorist, I find the erratic behaviour of cyclists difficult to cope with and it is irritating when I have to slow to a crawl behind them on a hill, especially if the road is too narrow to get past safely. I don't want the guilt of killing one of these guys - why can't they be more careful

As a pedestrian I hate *slower* pedestrians, especially if I'm in a hurry, also cyclists who seem to come from nowhere and attempt to mow me down (my nan broke her arm and had 28 stiches in her head after being knocked over by a cyclist on a zebra crossing - it is no joke) or push me in the road. Drivers annoy me when they don't let me cross a line of semi-stationary traffic when it would cost them 10 seconds and (temporarily) about 5 feet - especilly when it is raining.

Basically whatever the mode of transport I am currently using, all other modes p*ss me off. As does everyone else using my current mode of transport.

k

>>Drivers seem to regard the area between the first yellow line and the pavement to be the cycle lane and regard it as an act of supreme aggression to slow them down by cycling (bod forgive me!) outside of the second yellow line.<<

That reminds me of another problem with motorists. They constantly drive too close to the pavvement, so if I'm cycling along and I come to a traffic jam, I have to go onto the pavement to get past the cars because there's no way I can gt past them on the road. Also sometimes when I'm cycling down the road, the cars pull in a small bit as if they have a vendetta against all cyclists, and so I'm forced to move right up next to the curb, and I can't pedal like that because the pedals would hit the curb if I tried, and that would cause me to lose balance and fall over. This can be especially annoying when going up steep hills as you have to keep momentum up or else you start going backwards.

Another one that annoys me about cyclists is them cycling 2 or more abreast. a) they shouldn't be any way and b) it shoves me out into the path of oncoming traffic should I wish to respect their lives and drive round them safely. And it is usually the dayglo powerrangers that do it.

It's now 3 days since I had my near collision as a pedestrian with a cyclist on a pelican crossing - and I've calmed down a bit. One thing that occurred to me about the particular problem where I live, is that you have to be stark stare raving bonkers to cycle on the roads in London. So maybe the personality of the average cyclist in London accounts for their often crazy behaviour.

Blimey! I'm almost starting to feel sorry for them.

>>Interesting the way you justify this to yourself. And what's your position on looting<<

Reddy, this is quite possibly the worst analogy ever made. Quite an achievement. How on earth does cycling through a red light when I've got a clear road in front of me harm/damage/affect *anybody* in any possible way? And just how does it relate to theft of property?

the point is its illegal and shouldnt be done.
ever.
full stop.


i do get quite anoyed with taxi drivers who purposly pull into the curb more so you cant get back during a traffic jam at lights etc.
i also hate it when they pull out in front of me

I understand the logic behind pulling into the kerb to stop cyclists creeping up the nearside, i do it all the time. I drive a truck and am driven scatty by cyclists who squeeze past me on the inside at lights, then wobble about slowly when they change, forcing me to overtake them(again). Alternatively they get halfway up the side of the vehicle,handlebars rubbing the side, wheel wedged between kerb and my tyres, and the lights change. I now have to wait til they've completed their improvised suicide mission until i can pull away.
Just wait will you, you're in a queue like everyone else.

And why when the tax payer has provided safe, clear, expensive cycle paths down the side of busy roads, do the lycra clad 'urban warrior' types still have to cycle on the road? Does it seem a little safe and sissy for them ?, will it ruin their street cred ?, do they own a mirror ?

Having to overtake again.

Tsk what a terrible strain, my heart bleeds

Yep, i suppose i didn't explain that one too well. What i meant was, it requires a good deal of manouvering to pull 40 foot of vehicle out and around said wobbler. Chaos caused to all around, just to have the plank pull the same stunt at the next set of lights, and away we go again.
Why not wait behind the large vehicle? Can't be much fun being persued by one.

>>the point is its illegal and shouldnt be done.
ever.
full stop<<

No, if a law is stupid and puts me in more danger, rather than less, I'll ignore it.

Reddy, do you want to answer my earlier questions, or do you want to apologise for what I found to be a quite offensive post?

>>And why when the tax payer has provided safe, clear, expensive cycle paths down the side of busy roads, do the lycra clad 'urban warrior' types still have to cycle on the road?<<

My guess is that they're idiots. I don't see why anybody would prefer a road over a nice, fast and safe cyclepath. Apart from the occasional unaware pedestrians causing a minor hazard.

I have no problem breaking the law if the law makes it more likely that I'll break my neck.

Pretty much what Iago said, just adding my

As a prospective motor cyclist I agree with the lorry driver. Taking any two wheeled vehicle up the inside of a truck is stupidity.

Also as a student nurse I have to say anyone who rides any kind of bike has a death wish as many drivers are inconsiderate ers who don't care about anyone else on the road but themselves, hence why I nolonger drive.

Profesional drivers, taxi and bus drivers especially, are often the worst. Busses stop over pedestrian crossings, busses, taxis, cars and vans, never seen a truck do it, stop on the big bit of cyclepath which streches across the entire lane at junctions and taxi and BMW drivers don't seem to have to obey any road laws.

>>And why when the tax payer has provided safe, clear, expensive cycle paths down the side of busy roads, do the lycra clad 'urban warrior' types still have to cycle on the road?<<


It's usually because the cycle path is none of the things mentioned, having been put there by someone who appears never to have even seen a bike. The surfacing also often leaves much to be desired: one might conclude whoever put it there thinks we all get around on 6" travel full sussers...

i stick to cycle lanes when they are there.
my route home from work however onle has a stretch on the way home for about 10metres.
thats it.
i have to stick to the roads to get anywhere.

guys just because you dont agree with a law doesnt mean you can flaunt it.
if you dont like it and think it endangers you then contact the right people and sort it out.
i feel safer stopping at red lights than ignoring them and cycling off regardless

How does stopping at red lights put you in more danger? Surely *not* stopping at a red light is worse given that if it's on a pedestrian crossing you could hit said pedestrian and if it's on a junction you could get mown down by the traffic coming from your side.

Cool, so I'll just call up the local government and they'll... what? Ban cars?

The only way I can make myself safe without breaking the law is to not cycle on any major roads, which means that I can't actually go anywhere.

The only law I break is one that I consider to be extremely stupid, namely not being allowed to ride on the footpath. In ten years of riding I have never had an accident on the footpath, and in the 15 minute drive home from uni today I saw one driver tailgating another and weaving all over the road, looking as if he was going to try and overtake in the incoming lane, in an 80km/h zone, approaching a corner, and then changing his mind and deciding to overtake on the left. Then at a roundabout a car that was indicating left (ie was going to leave the roundabout before passing us) *didn't*, and instead drove right in front of us as we were about to pull out. I can almost guarantee that if I rode on the road I would be in an accident within a year. I won't risk that. If it came down to that I would just stop riding my bike.

your lucky you havent had an accident of the path.
ive not had an accident on the road and ive been cycling for ages.
if your careful as was everyone else it would be ok. the danger comes from people breaking the laws. if everybody stuck to them there wouldnt be as many accidents. you cant just decide to break laws because everybody else does