Another dumb rule proposed by the EU

[thop]

at least jaywalking is still allowed ...

[breezer]

Dogbert

Breezer, I wouldn't recommend it cause in order to really mess up your c-dales, you'll need to hit the car pretty hard, which isn't going to be so nice for your neck.

Been there done that, though not intentionally

Ant

I think if this is the case then is should be made illegal for cyclists to use the road when there is a cycle path provided. For the majority of my route to work there are very good cycle paths, but are they used? Nope the bulk of cyclists decide they are going to use the road, a very busy road, which means traffic is constantly bottle necking and swerving to miss these morons.

1. You forgot to mention the moron motorists who park in the cycle lanes, and,
2. Where I live some of the cycle lanes have been created without fixing the road first so they are full of pot holes.
3. Have you seen the signs 'cyclists dismount' at buzy junctions where it is nearly impossible to walk across, it is best to cycle on the road and become part of the trafic flow, on roundabouts and junctions the motorist has to give way. (try this on the A45 in Coventry by the Canley firestation)
4. I can cycle to work in 14 minutes, it takes me 20 in the car.
5. I agree that this rule is silly, though it does give the insurers this years excuse for adding 20% to your car insurance
and,
6. Today I the car I get pulled over by the police for diving carefully.

I'm in a happy mood.


Breezer

[Ant]

Well I'm talking about the cycles paths on my route to work, which are all practically brand new, very wide with not accessible for cars to park on.

I'm not saying cyclists don't have the right to use the road but when there is a viable alternative they should use it rather than amble along the middle of a dual carriageway putting their own lives and the lives of others at risk. If you think they should be allowed to possibly maim and kill themselves and others just so they have the right to be on a road where they have a perfectly good track provided for them then I'm sorry but I totally disagree. I simply cannot understand the mentality of someone cycling along an extremely busy dual carrigeway, narrowly escaping being mown down by buses, lorries etc etc when they are a metre from a perfectly safe cycle track. And before anyone starts branding me as a typical car owner then I should tell you I only passed my car test 18 months ago before which I spent 35 years of my life cycling and using public transport to get everywhere. I had these same opinions about these people back then when I was cycling myself on this route.

[The PIT]

Originally posted by breezer
Dogbert

1. You forgot to mention the moron motorists who park in the cycle lanes, and,

No it's moronic councils who paint cycles lanes where people already park.

2. Where I live some of the cycle lanes have been created without fixing the road first so they are full of pot holes.

Where I live we have pot holes in the middle of the road.
Also it doesn't give you the right to ride slap bang down the middle of road. I've also noticed car users like following the centre line as well.

3. Have you seen the signs 'cyclists dismount' at buzy junctions where it is nearly impossible to walk across, it is best to cycle on the road and become part of the trafic flow, on roundabouts and junctions the motorist has to give way. (try this on the A45 in Coventry by the Canley firestation)

How about cyclists who get in the wrong lane and make themselfs a huge hazard. Just as dumb as car users who get in the wrong lanes accept in cyclist case it's more likely to result in a dead cyclist.

4. I can cycle to work in 14 minutes, it takes me 20 in the car.

Takes me forty minutes to walk 10 minutes in the car in the morning twenty or more in the evening. Forty minutes via bus.

5. I agree that this rule is silly, though it does give the insurers this years excuse for adding 20% to your car insurance
and,

I don't think it will get passed the law is too stupid.

6. Today I the car I get pulled over by the police for diving carefully.

Well if you were diving no wonder they pulled you over.

I'm in a happy mood.



Breezer

[LvR]

Where 2 parties are involved, there are 2 sides to the story - its as simple as that.

[Sasq]

As far as fines go, my home state implimented a helmet rule for cyclists. no helmet = $47 fine (last time i checked i think it crept up to $60) which actually equalled the price of a helmet. Even kids got the fine - well they were taken home and the parents were served with it anyway. So fines can and do work.

[Wombat]

In New Jersey, where I grew up, there's a $50 fine for kids under (14? 16?) years old bicycling without a helmet.

For contrast, here in Colorado you are not required to wear a helmet on a motorcycle, although you do need to have a special motorcycle license.

[Sasq]

Its everyone Adults/kids doesn't matter, I'm not sure where the law draws the line, but basically if the bike has any ability to fall over and cause a head injury, you got to wear a helmut. If your not you (or you parents, get a fine)

[The PIT]

Originally posted by rubank
Bah, you´re just a bunch of terrorists. What makes you think that ownership of a car grants you the right to decide what vehicles should be allowed on public roads, or that you´re entitled to go from A to B at a certain speed regardless of circumstances.

This thread isn't about ownership of the road it's about a silly law that forces drivers to pay for inconsiderate cyclists. Yes everyone has the right to use the road. However they need to use it sensibly and safely. Thats all users including, shock horror cyclists. What right does a cyclist have too decide that you've got to go at 10mph all the way. None. Next time when your causing a huge jam (chatting to a friend) you maybe preventing a doctor going to see a urgently ill patent.

With your logic buses and trucks should be banned as well, not to say anything about tractors, since they really can jam the traffic flow. What effect will that have on the economy you think, to which you owe the possibility to buy a car in the first place.

Sorry don't follow that load of nonsense about banning.
At one time tractors used to pull over and let you past after a set distance. However they too have fallen into the ignorant class.

If all cyclists were to drive a car instead, you might really see some jamming of the roads. What´s your solution to that – build more roads? Nice.

Again I have no problem with proper considerate cyclists I even thank them for being considerate. The same applies to considerate motorists. As for the traffic problem. Can you cycle say from Luton to London. You either have too drive or catch the train or use a coach.

Quit whining and adjust your way of life to the demands of the common good, and cycling enhances the common good in the way of better health, less hospital bills and no evironment pollution (save a fart or two) and last but not least less traffic jamming for you to whine about.

How about walking everywhere instead ?? At the moment cyclists clog roads with ignorance clog up the pavements with ignorance and ruin many walks in the countryside.

[I]

[breezer]

Ant,
Where I live it seems that cycle lanes have been an after thought and cycling on them means you have to dodge pot holes and cycle over the drains, I don't think that a 'cyclist' designed them as they are crap.
Whats the use of having a track then a dismount sign at every junction.

I used to drive to work but brought a bike (which cost more than my car) and now save about £60 per month on fuel.

Breezer

[The PIT]

Originally posted by breezer
Ant,
Where I live it seems that cycle lanes have been an after thought and cycling on them means you have to dodge pot holes and cycle over the drains, I don't think that a 'cyclist' designed them as they are crap.

Funny someone at work says the same thing. We got cycle lanes that go three feet. Whats the point? Theres a side road that goes past the pub I go too. For some reason they've put a cycle track on it. I've seen one cycle come down the road in 30 odd years.

Whats the use of having a track then a dismount sign at every junction.

Thats too stop pulling striaght out and killing yourself. Sorry the silly cyclist who thinks he's/shes wearing a UT force shield belt.

I used to drive to work but brought a bike (which cost more than my car) and now save about £60 per month on fuel.

Geez what car were you driving?

Breezer

[rubank]

TP,

what the h... is the meaning of your way of quoting and answering withing the quote?
It makes it almost impossible to read since your text is indistinguishable from the quote, and renders the text within the quotation bars anything but a clean quote.

rubank

[The PIT]

Nah forces you too read it. Too hard for a cyclist I know. Just tried reformatting it and it won't play ball.
Ha now is that any better ????

[az]

TP, however good your arguments may be, you totally ruin them by the open hatred to cyclists you show here. Prejudice never is a good thing, and showing yours doesn't help you in an argument

AZ

[YngwieM]

There should be some rules to adapt better the bicycles to be used on traffic... like front and back lights, even a horn should be a must to have...

That said, I guess that respect is what we're talking about, not the kind of transportation.