Stop Killing Cyclists

[VDG]

Said cyclist didnt stop!

That's terrible, accidents do happen it's how people handle them what matters.

[hhhh]

Like many on here, I drive a car, ride a bike and also a motorbike. People really need to learn to co-exist and stop being so angry and righteous when out and about.

Having said that, on only one of those modes of transport can I use it on the public highway without any formal training, completely anonymously and therefore with complete impunity. And as has been proved on more than one occasion, you don’t need to be surrounded by “a ton of metal” to kill a pedestrian or other road user.

I therefore cannot see why cycles shouldn’t be subject to the same licensing and taxing as every other vehicle on our roads. It would certainly moderate behaviour if a cyclist considering jumping a red light thought he might get a PCN through his letterbox from a fixed camera.

And if the number plates were fixed at the rear of the bike saddle, it might encourage cyclist to wear long coats to cover them, also saving me from having to look at their sweaty Lycra clad arses when I’m stuck behind them.

[mart broad]

Said cyclist didnt stop!

Typical of a lot of these people as i said insurance should be compulsory but as with us all getting along in a society it is about respect

[teadazed]

Vehicle Excise Duty has very little to do with actual emissions and everything to do with the publicly acceptable face of the government grabbing money.
If it was actually in line with emissions it would be charged per mile. A low polluting car that is driven tens of thousands of miles will produce far more emissions than a sports car that is driven once per year, yet which is charged more?
The sports car because it is more publicly acceptable as the owner is perceived as having more money.

If everyone bought a vehicle rated at zero VED then you can guarantee the basis for the charge would change sharpish.

The VED also has no bearing on what is spent on maintaining the roads, it is just a tax stream. If everyone cycled, there would be a cycle tax as the government needs to maintain revenues.

Bit of a tangent, but back on topic, all road users need to be aware and obey the relevant laws.
Speaking as both a city pedestrian and rural car driver I've seen some of the worst of cyclists. But pedestrians and drivers can and are idiots at times too. We all just need to be aware and be careful.

[bry nylon]

I’m sorry I posted this thread now. As someone suggested, not going to end well. I will know better the next time . Still it has been useful for me in one respect - I’m now aware of the self hating cyclist phenomena ...
For the record, I cycle responsibly, not on the pavement ( few people in Lycra on road bikes do so - the wheels aren’t strong enough to hop up kerbs) & I stop at red lights. That did not help me when I got wiped out in April by a transit van and had 4 months of work. Police said civil matter, no further action, without even taking a statement from me..
as I said upthread , every day driving home from work I see Some motorists driving like James hunt’s - having a reg plate does not deter them at all...
Bry


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

[vortgern]

Said cyclist didnt stop!

Typical of a lot of these people as i said insurance should be compulsory but as with us all getting along in a society it is about respect

I agree but insurance wouldn’t help if the cyclist didn’t stop and couldn’t be identified.

Cycles need the equivalent of a vehicle licence plate, and cyclists need to be identifiable via a DVLA style database.

[grandconjuration]

Cyclists must be the only road user that gets treated as a ‘collective’. It’s demonstrated in many comments within this thread. Look at the comment above, “these people...” being used to refer to cyclists.

I cycle. The actions on one, a few or even many cyclists you see doing something you perceive is wrong does in no way reflect upon me.

I understand that riding a bicycle on the road comes with a level of risk. However, I do not expect that risk to come from motorists who consciously (and sometimes deliberately) perform dangerous and close overtaking manoeuvres.

I’m going to look on this thread positively. Since many comments are from drivers with little anecdotes about things they’ve seen cyclists do, or gross generalisations about things that all cyclists allegedly do, I can only conclude that their driving is beyond criticism.

These comments must be from drivers who have never run a red light or gambled on an amber, never used a phone while driving, never parked illegally, never parked in a way that is inconsiderate to other road users or pedestrians, never driven knowing that they’ve had just a bit too much to drink, never tailgated, never been distracted, never driven aggressively, always signal correctly, and of course - never ever break a speed limit. Well done.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[nunya]

On the way to work this morning

A bicyclist.........
Ran a red light
Speeding in a 20 zone outside of a primary school
Cycled across a zebra pedestrian crossing
Cycled on the pavement
Cut up a lorry on the inside that was turning left
Had both front white and rear red led lights on strobe.
Headphones on

But, I still managed to get him!!

[Mathif]

Whom ever you are just be mindful of others... taking lives shouldn't happen in such silly conditions...

Sent from my SM-G935F using TZ-UK mobile app

[jaytip]

From your own admission below where you say that priority isn't clear on unsigned crossings,I don't understand how you can say he would have had priority.
I was waiting there for some time before he even pulled up- no wonder it's hard for car drivers to preempt cyclist actions if they can jump across the road in front of someone like that.

Based on your original description of the junction, you were in the wrong. If there are no road markings showing priority then a vehicle coming toward you going straight on will have priority over you if you need to turn right because you would effectively be cutting them up.

[lughugger]

They do pay a road tax, the same one as car drivers. It's called income tax. Or do you mean vehicle excise duty, a tax based on emissions?

You mean Council Tax rather than income tax, surely?


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

[Franky Four Fingers]

Based on your original description of the junction, you were in the wrong. If there are no road markings showing priority then a vehicle coming toward you going straight on will have priority over you if you need to turn right because you would effectively be cutting them up.

Show me where it states that in the Highway Code.
My original post made no mention of road markings and only that it wasn't controlled.
There are no giveaways signs or anything to indicate priority.
As I said show me the link and I'll bow down to the greater knowledge.

[lughugger]

Cyclists must be the only road user that gets treated as a ‘collective’. It’s demonstrated in many comments within this thread. Look at the comment above, “these people...” being used to refer to cyclists.

I cycle. The actions on one, a few or even many cyclists you see doing something you perceive is wrong does in no way reflect upon me.

I understand that riding a bicycle on the road comes with a level of risk. However, I do not expect that risk to come from motorists who consciously (and sometimes deliberately) perform dangerous and close overtaking manoeuvres.

I’m going to look on this thread positively. Since many comments are from drivers with little anecdotes about things they’ve seen cyclists do, or gross generalisations about things that all cyclists allegedly do, I can only conclude that their driving is beyond criticism.

These comments must be from drivers who have never run a red light or gambled on an amber, never used a phone while driving, never parked illegally, never parked in a way that is inconsiderate to other road users or pedestrians, never driven knowing that they’ve had just a bit too much to drink, never tailgated, never been distracted, never driven aggressively, always signal correctly, and of course - never ever break a speed limit. Well done.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Or who have never happily driven on the opposite side of the road into on coming traffic rather than brake and let a signalling cyclist commuting to work turn right, which would delay their own commute by, oh, 5 seconds?


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

[nunya]

i always thought that right turning traffic had priority...perhaps I'm wrong.

You're crossing the path of traffic and should give way.

Based on your original description of the junction, you were in the wrong. If there are no road markings showing priority then a vehicle coming toward you going straight on will have priority over you if you need to turn right because you would effectively be cutting them up.

Show me where it states that in the Highway Code.
My original post made no mention of road markings and only that it wasn't controlled.
There are no giveaways signs or anything to indicate priority.
As I said show me the link and I'll bow down to the greater knowledge.

Actually, no one has right of way / priority

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/answ...ked-crossroads

[Captain Morgan]

I’m sorry I posted this thread now. As someone suggested, not going to end well. I will know better the next time . Still it has been useful for me in one respect - I’m now aware of the self hating cyclist phenomena ...

I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so...

So many seemingly reasonable people on here show a shocking ability to dehumanise cyclists and treat them as a thing, as a inconvenience to their rightful want to make progress.

We see sniggering at intentional close/punishment passes, at riders being knocked off, complaints at cycling too fast & too slow.

Everyone makes mistakes be they a pedestrian, cyclist or driver.

It might pay some of these posters to consider how they’d feel if there partner, son or daughter were involved in an altercation with a driver such as described in this and other cycling threads.

[Stanford]

Just out of genuine impartial interest, rather than presenting / relying on anecdotal evidence, can someone confirm how many road users (and or pedestrians) were charged, prosecuted and convicted in relation to the 1000 cyclist deaths?

[VDG]

French. Always taking it a step further.

British restaurant owner shot dead by hunter while cycling in French Alps

A British man has been shot dead by a hunter while cycling in the French Alps.
The victim, named in reports as 34-year-old restaurant owner Mark Sutton, was riding a mountain bike when he was shot on Saturday evening.

Prosecutors in France said they were investigating the gunman on suspicion of "aggravated manslaughter".
Prosecutor Philippe Toccanier said the death was believed to be an accident but the cyclist "couldn't be confused with game, as he had a coloured helmet and a coloured mountain bike".

LINK

[bry nylon]

Just out of genuine impartial interest, rather than presenting / relying on anecdotal evidence, can someone confirm how many road users (and or pedestrians) were charged, prosecuted and convicted in relation to the 1000 cyclist deaths?

Don't know but a Government inquiry had these findings;

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-party-inquiry

This has some useful stats;

https://fullfact.org/health/cyclist-deaths/

from that page ; Almost 26,000 pedestrians were seriously injured by vehicles from 2012 to 2016. 2% of these involved a bike, and 81% involved a car. In 2016, 108 pedestrians were seriously injured by a bicycle, compared to 4,156 by a car.

[Saint-Just]

Don't know but a Government inquiry had these findings;

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-party-inquiry

This has some useful stats;

https://fullfact.org/health/cyclist-deaths/

from that page ; Almost 26,000 pedestrians were seriously injured by vehicles from 2012 to 2016. 2% of these involved a bike, and 81% involved a car. In 2016, 108 pedestrians were seriously injured by a bicycle, compared to 4,156 by a car.

And your point is? That cars are dangerous? In that case you are correct.
Of the 4,156, how many were seriously injured when on the pavement?
The rest, presumably, were on the road.
Even at a red light and zebra crossing people get injured by idiots who ‘did not see them’. But what exactly were the other pedestrians doing? They have the same total absence of protection as cyclists. They (usually) are aware that if they collide with a car they will suffer. So why chance it? Why assume that the driver has seen you, is not distracted, or in a rush, nor looking at his phone because it’s forbidden, and will give you the care and attention that you so richly deserve ?

I have driven more defensively in some countries than most cyclists I encounter on the roads.

[bry nylon]

And your point is? That cars are dangerous? In that case you are correct.
Of the 4,156, how many were seriously injured when on the pavement?
The rest, presumably, were on the road.
Even at a red light and zebra crossing people get injured by idiots who ‘did not see them’. But what exactly were the other pedestrians doing? They have the same total absence of protection as cyclists. They (usually) are aware that if they collide with a car they will suffer. So why chance it? Why assume that the driver has seen you, is not distracted, or in a rush, nor looking at his phone because it’s forbidden, and will give you the care and attention that you so richly deserve ?

I have driven more defensively in some countries than most cyclists I encounter on the roads.

my point is, quoted from that linked report:

"Police and courts fail cyclists over road safety, says cross-party inquiry"

That is all from me - I should have heeded Cpt Morgan's wise words..

Drive and cycle safely with respect for other road users,

Bry

[adg31]

my point is, quoted from that linked report:

"Police and courts fail cyclists over road safety, says cross-party inquiry"

That is all from me - I should have heeded Cpt Morgan's wise words..

Drive and cycle safely with respect for other road users,

Bry

Because politicians know the facts so much better than either the Police and Courts who are actually reviewing evidence on a case by case basis to reach their verdicts - really???
On the news the other day they were showing how some countries are now putting traffic light repeaters on the pavement to warn pedestrians who are too engrossed in their mobiles to see that it was unsafe to cross the road!
Like you say, it all comes down to the individual assuming responsibility for their actions not blindly relying on others - and then complaining if someone else didn't watch out for them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[WarrenVrs]

I'd say bring overtaken is probably the most dangerous part of cycling. Which makes cyclists behavior at traffic lights baffling.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

[Rodder]

Based on your original description of the junction, you were in the wrong. If there are no road markings showing priority then a vehicle coming toward you going straight on will have priority over you if you need to turn right because you would effectively be cutting them up.

Or they would enter the main road then turn right effectively meaning they have priority. Technically they ont be cutting them as they will have entered the main road and will have priority. Hence why you give way when someone is turning right.

If both are turning right etiquette dictates who was there first had priority.

[Rodder]

Actually, no one has right of way / priority

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/answ...ked-crossroads

So it is all down to social etiquette. Civilised whether car or bike would agree on first come. Make eye contact, quick thanks and off you go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Coops365]

I haven't ridden a bike in years, but it's clear that half the drivers in this thread shouldn't be allowed loose on the public highway.

[Kingstepper]

Actually, no one has right of way / priority

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/answ...ked-crossroads

That's not the highway code, is it? It's largely attempting to explain which of the 2 crossing roads has priority. From the highway code: -

Turning right

Rule 180

Wait until there is a safe gap between you and any oncoming vehicle. Watch out for cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and other road users. Check your mirrors and blind spot again to make sure you are not being overtaken, then make the turn. Do not cut the corner. Take great care when turning into a main road; you will need to watch for traffic in both directions and wait for a safe gap.

No you jumped to a conclusion that the cross roads had giveway signs which they didn't.
There are also no road markings indicating priority.
Traffic was on the road going from left to right and cars were coming from straight ahead.
Once they had gone it was just him and me.
Show me where it states he had priority over me and I'll admit my mistake.

Didn't jump to any conclusion at all. Any signs/marking irrelevant as it was just you and him. If there were signs would normally be on both sides of the same road so wouldn't help here.

[Franky Four Fingers]

That's not the highway code, is it? It's largely attempting to explain which of the 2 crossing roads has priority. From the highway code: -
Didn't jump to any conclusion at all. Any signs/marking irrelevant as it was just you and him. If there were signs would normally be on both sides of the same road so wouldn't help here.

Rule 180 whilst applicable doesn't really cut the mustard in my 'example"

If I hadn't have been observing this I would have had an accident when I pulled up because I wouldn't have given way to users coming from the right and left.
So again using the cross roads as I described show me the proof that I was in the wrong.
I know you can't because otherwise you would have done it way by now.

[Matt8500]

I’m a cyclist, ride motorbikes and drive a car. All groups can be d*cks but where I live in Hampshire it’s the cyclist clubs that cause the most strife.

As one example: We have a local club that meet at a pub and regularly block the road whilst stationary and meeting up. When they ride out I have met them coming the other way in a group that is 4-5 abreast and over the centre line. Another: The guys that come down a single track hill at 40-50 mph into th village and get agro when you don’t dive in a ditch to get out of their way. Another: the time trial riders on the A31 that are so concerned with their splits they will weave across the road and not stop at roundabouts.

I cycle most weeks and try and get on with others by riding considerately, yes there is the occasional idiot in a car but it’s not as wilful as the middle aged, aggressive, guys on racers.

Any road death is a tragedy, but of those 100 a year I do question how many are preventable by the rider. Same as motorbikes, many deaths in that case involve no other vehicle, on a bend. Car drivers equally are accountable for their safety.

The point being that you are responsible for your own safety, and the relative vulnerability of groups on the road seems to be the inverse of the care they take.

[TheFlyingBanana]

Have you tried to contact your local MP/Council and tell them of inadequate state of the local roads infrastructure and suggested building a separate cycling route/s which would reduce risk to cyclists and improve journey times for the motorists, not to mention roads safety for all involved?

As a matter of fact I was consulted in a professional capacity on cycleways in a part of my region and I argued strongly for one to be put in between two small towns. It was. But that was some years ago and there is no money in the local authorities anymore due to austerity measures.

[jaytip]

Rule 180 whilst applicable doesn't really cut the mustard in my 'example"

If I hadn't have been observing this I would have had an accident when I pulled up because I wouldn't have given way to users coming from the right and left.
So again using the cross roads as I described show me the proof that I was in the wrong.
I know you can't because otherwise you would have done it way by now.

Let’s picture a slightly different scenario and then tell me if you are still correct.

You are on a main road, stopped and indicating to turn right. There is a cyclist in the other lane coming toward you. Would you cut across or would you wait for him to pass? I’m going to guess the later, so why should it make a difference just because there are no lines on the road?

[Kingstepper]

Rule is good enough for me. If you want to do otherwise and cut across oncoming traffic whilst filling your boots (assuming that the other driver knows your rule) good luck.
Interesting that you’ve back-tracked somewhat by editing one of your earliest posts.

[Franky Four Fingers]

Let’s picture a slightly different scenario and then tell me if you are still correct.

You are on a main road, stopped and indicating to turn right. There is a cyclist in the other lane coming toward you. Would you cut across or would you wait for him to pass? I’m going to guess the later, so why should it make a difference just because there are no lines on the road?

You mean a totally different scenario where I'm already on the carriageway?
What gives you the impression that I'd pull in front of a cyclist based on the other real scenario?

Still waiting to see who had the right of way on an unmarked cross roads?

[Franky Four Fingers]

w

Rule is good enough for me. If you want to do otherwise and cut across oncoming traffic whilst filling your boots (assuming that the other driver knows your rule) good luck.
Interesting that you’ve back-tracked somewhat by editing one of your earliest posts.

And?

I edited my post to remove a bit about all users being aware.....I'm not back tracking at all.
Still waiting btw.

[MrSmith]

Just out of genuine impartial interest, rather than presenting / relying on anecdotal evidence, can someone confirm how many road users (and or pedestrians) were charged, prosecuted and convicted in relation to the 1000 cyclist deaths?

I can tell you that since this thread was started 9.4 people have been killed by motorists.and let’s not forget the many more that were seriously injured.

But as can be seen by the majority of attitudes in this thread it’s not really a problem

[jaytip]

You mean a totally different scenario where I'm already on the carriageway?
What gives you the impression that I'd pull in front of a cyclist based on the other real scenario?

Still waiting to see who had the right of way on an unmarked cross roads?

I give up. It’s not a TOTALLY different scenario at all, it’s slightly different. There is another road user in the lane opposite coming toward you and they are going straight on. You want to turn right. Those are facts in this instance. The only difference is it’s an unmarked box junction.

Clearly you believe you were in the right and that’s your choice. Me personally, I will ALWAYS give right of way to a vehicle whose path I want to cross over.

[Franky Four Fingers]

I give up. It’s not a TOTALLY different scenario at all, it’s slightly different. There is another road user in the lane opposite coming toward you and they are going straight on. You want to turn right. Those are facts in this instance. The only difference is it’s an unmarked box junction.

Clearly you believe you were in the right and that’s your choice. Me personally, I will ALWAYS give right of way to a vehicle whose path I want to cross over.

Its really quite simple, you don't need to change any scenario from the one given.
I will once again ask you who has priority at an unmarked and uncontrolled cross roads?
Lets assume I give you a scenario and as a learner I need to find this information.
Point me in the direction of it and as I said about 40 posts ago I will admit my mistake.

[Captain Morgan]

I can tell you that since this thread was started 9.4 people have been killed by motorists.and let’s not forget the many more that were seriously injured.

But as can be seen by the majority of attitudes in this thread it’s not really a problem

What an absolute crock of...

If those slain road users had stayed at home they wouldn’t have inconvenienced the person who killed them...

[adg31]

On an excellent defensive driving course some years back we were told to look at how many lines you were crossing - the vehicle crossing the least number of lines had priority.
As such at a junction where I was turning right I'd be crossing the line into the junction plus the centre line so should give way to traffic coming from the other direction going straight on which was only crossing the line into the junction.
It may not be in the Highway Code but it seems to have worked quite well for the last 20-years
Just as an aside, in my last job we did a lot of work looking at shared spaces where road markings, traffic signals and conventional kerbs demarcating the pavement are removed giving all road users have equal priority.
Evidence seems to show that this results in reduced average traffic speeds and road users taking more care around one another thereby reducing overall accident levels.
This may not work everywhere but it is interesting how having more respect for other road users can help reduce accident levels.
All this said, I still find it incredible that a cycling club in our area regularly runs time trials on a stretch of the A1 thereby mixing cyclists with traffic moving at 70mph on a dual carriageway. Having been on coned off motorway construction sites earlier on in my career this isn't something I'd like to try!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[guinea]

I'd say bring overtaken is probably the most dangerous part of cycling. Which makes cyclists behavior at traffic lights baffling.

Ever sat right behind a hot exhaust when you're breathing heavily?

It's pretty obvious why you want to get to the front when you actually cycle.

[WarrenVrs]

Ever sat right behind a hot exhaust when you're breathing heavily?

It's pretty obvious why you want to get to the front when you actually cycle.

I've cycled regularly (at rush hour) through Birmingham, and occasionally London. Trucks and buses, yes I'd try not to stop behind. But cars? Move just past the rear bumper and it's no different to any other point of the journey.

Bring overtaken in a busy environment isn't fun. Space is at a premium, and you know drivers aren't simply going to sit there. Why put ourselves in a position where we're investing the exposure, and creating frustration for surrounding road users?

So many cyclists are desperate to shift the blame and responsibility onto others.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

[Captain Morgan]

I'd say bring overtaken is probably the most dangerous part of cycling. Which makes cyclists behavior at traffic lights baffling.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk

Perhaps you might find this interesting?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_stop_line

As a cyclist I guess you’ll recognise some of the reasoning...

[optix]

Living in london I’d be more worried about being hit by a Cyclists then a car, they just don’t seem to care about pedestrians. I walk a lot living and working in zone 1 and I can tell you everyday I’ll see cyclists skipping red lights & cutting in front busses. I’ve even been shouted at for crossing the road when a cyclists was going the wrong way down a one way road.




Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

[trident-7]

You mean Council Tax rather than income tax, surely?


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

Both, & cyclists pay both the same as motorists

[thegreatdogwood]

Ever sat right behind a hot exhaust when you're breathing heavily?

It's pretty obvious why you want to get to the front when you actually cycle.

Ever sat behind a cyclist for miles waiting for a safe spot to overtake and then shortly after you finally get past them, you come up on some red lights and they then barge to the front of the queue and you're back to square one following someone doing 1/4 of the normal speed for that road.

It's pretty obvious why that would test the patience of most people when you actually drive.

[Captain Morgan]

This might help remind some of us, that apparently it’s not only cyclists who make poor and ill informed decisions on the road.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-eng...suffolk-police

[Xantiagib]

Ever sat behind a cyclist for miles waiting for a safe spot to overtake and then shortly after you finally get past them, you come up on some red lights and they then barge to the front of the queue and you're back to square one following someone doing 1/4 of the normal speed for that road.

It's pretty obvious why that would test the patience of most people when you actually drive.

Yes thats annoying - but that is the bi-product of lights, jams etc... councils and govts have a lot to say for traffic design - hasnt changed for years yet the fabric and diversity has and it needs to catch up and adapt. if it works you up too much you shouldn't be behind a wheel.... or handlebars
accept that a gap will open up soon and usually five to ten seconds after you make that dangerously close pass/manouvre

[cbh]

Ever sat behind a cyclist for miles waiting for a safe spot to overtake and then shortly after you finally get past them, you come up on some red lights and they then barge to the front of the queue and you're back to square one following someone doing 1/4 of the normal speed for that road.

Never seen a cyclist barge a car out of the way before! How dare a pushbike have the temerity to overtake a queued line of cars to get to the front in the same way that motorbikes and scooters do, shocking.

There's some very interesting thinking going on in this thread, it's not an us and them thing, most cyclists that I know are also drivers so have cars and pay "Road Tax" (vehicle excise duty), I pay for 3 cars, but I don't expect to have 3 times more rights to clog up the road than someone that has only one car.

[trident-7]

I see, another insinuation that drivers should have a priority because they “contribute”. The total revenue raised from motoring taxes comes nowhere near the total cost needed to maintain the road network. The road system is funded through general taxation.

I’m all for cyclists paying a little towards the upkeep of the roads, just so these “drivers pay but cyclists don’t” arguments can be put to bed once and for all. However, maybe the level of tax should be calculated according to the magnitude of damage that each vehicle does to the road.

The damage that each vehicle does to the road follows the fourth power rule. Roughly, a car does 38,000 times more damage to a road than a bicycle. I’m happy to pay one pound cycling road tax a year if you’re happy to pay 38,000 pounds for a car. Or, drivers can continue to pay 100-200 pounds a year, and cyclists pay 0.002 pence.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I've done nearly 7000 miles on my bike so far this year, & only 1800 miles in my car. I think I'm due a refund.

[dougair]

Ever sat right behind a hot exhaust when you're breathing heavily?

It's pretty obvious why you want to get to the front when you actually cycle.

You don’t get many hot exhausts on trails or DH courses. One of the many reasons I’ve never been a road rider. That and the fact the wheels are stupidly thin and the clothing ridiculously tight. Why anyone would want to ride among HGVs, buses and Uber drivers is beyond me...breathing in all that rubbish.

[WarrenVrs]

Perhaps you might find this interesting?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_stop_line

As a cyclist I guess you’ll recognise some of the reasoning...

That only applies at certain junctions, and there's often an accompanying cycle lane which makes the overtaking issue almost none existent.

In Birmingham, they're few and far between. And the same behaviour is exhibited at all junctions, not just those with a left hand turn.

A decent number of cyclists don't seem to want to accept any responsibility for their own safety. Saw one last night, dressed in dark clothes, a tiny led flashing front and back (barely visible amongst street lights, other vehicles in the dark/rain). No helmet.

Can you imagine getting in your car, not bothering with a seatbelt, then driving on a dark and rainy night with headlights off? Ridiculous.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk