preferred-google-button
log in
register

So why do cyclists get a bad name?

  • Creator
    Topic
  • July 28, 2014 at 6:11 pm #22011
    Eebijeebi

    I haven’t cycled into central London to work for many years now but often have to drive in and out. Yes, there’s bad driving and riding on both sides, but to give an idea of why so many have a downer on cyclists, here are my observations from just one short leg of a journey in this afternoons rush hour.

    At cyclist coming towards me from opposite side of a crossroads who was chatting on a mobile phone, makes a left and all the way to the next lights and who knows where one handed still chatting.

    A minute later, I overtake a lady well in front of red light cross roads. She rolls up my inside through the stop line, sees that the traffic crossing us is stationary, then swings a left straight through the pedestrians crossing on the green man.

    A mile down the road, ladies ambling two abreast swinging out past stationary vehicles etc with not a look or signal or a care in the world. Only went to single file to get up the inside of queuing traffic before resuming two abreast in font of said vehicles.

    Within another mile, three kids (teenage at a guess), all on one bike riding on the wrong side the road against the traffic (as in opposite kerb).

    Why post? Admittedly they may have been ‘fair weather’ non-commuting cyclists this afternoon, but they were a let down. I see enough bad with the commuters too to understand both sides of the argument.

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 46 through 60 (of 69 total)
1 2 3 4 5
  • Author
    Replies
  • July 29, 2014 at 11:29 am #806125
    0
    Jimmy Ray Will

    The title question is
    The title question is actually the really important one… why do cyclists have such a bad name?

    We are all trotting out the usual; red light jumping, mobile use, blah, blah, blah, but these are all things that those calling cyclists out will witness daily from car drivers/pedestrians, without labeling or bad mouthing complete user groups…

    What I am trying to say is that the obvious behavioral stuff is merely the justification for the label, but the label is already there… why is that?

    Its important, as to me, doing as some people say and behaving impeccably on the road will make no difference, as its not addressing the root cause of the problem.

    To have a stab at why, may I put forward;

    1. The hierarchical nature of our society in action… car drivers are seen as richer and better than lowly bike riders… when cyclists are seen to be getting ahead in queues etc, this goes against the hierarchical system and only deepens animosity.

    2. Dealing with cyclists in a car will highlight our own short comings as car drivers – many are not comfortable with how, when and what is appropriate overtaking procedures – which will generate resentment for the thing (cyclists) that is highlighting this shortcoming. Again this is compounded when cyclists are seen to be doing stuff that makes it harder to overtake.

    3. Media coverage and the tribe mentality. Society can’t help itself.. the media say its OK to hate cyclists, so everyone feels that they should, and its right to hate cyclists.

    Any thoughts?

    July 29, 2014 at 11:24 am #806123
    0
    MarcMyWords

    PurpleDog wrote:MarcMyWords

    PurpleDog wrote:
    MarcMyWords wrote:
    …overtaking cars on the outside, which, by the way, means the car swerves in on me when I’m trying to go down the inside as I should.

    Are you suggesting cyclists ‘should’ overtake on the inside and never on the outside? If so, I’m afraid you’re plain wrong!

    There’s no legal or highway code rule directing us to overtake on one side or the other, but assuming there’s sufficient width available, overtaking on the inside puts you in far more danger than overtaking on the outside, where drivers have better visibility, they are used to being overtaken (and hopefully checking for motorcycles before pulling out) and you have more room to take avoiding action.

    People turning left don’t check the inside – they don’t expect anyone to be there. That’s why so many people die in London under the wheels of large left-turning vehicles.

    In the absence of a dedicated cycle lane on the left, it is terribly dangerous to overtake there so please reconsider. If you encounter slow traffic, overtake on the safer outside.

    Consider this – when you are overtaking on the inside and another cyclist is doing the same on the outside, you say the driver tends to swerve in towards you? Well, of course he shouldn’t swerve, but the reason he does is that he can see the cyclist on the outside, and he can’t see you on the inside!

    Drivers in CL are more than used to Cyclists being on the inside and when you’re riding on a reasonably clear road, where do you ride? On the inside. I’m not saying it’s illegal but you shouldn’t be overtaking a car on the outside ona road bike, half the time in the opposite lane. You ride on the inside. I believe the reason that drivers swerve sometimes when they see a cyclist on the outside of them is actually because they don’t expect to see them there and most of the time because there’s not enough room for them to be there! You shouldn’t be riding up the inside of a lorry, full stop. They have a blind spot on the outside as well so if they were turning right and you’re halfway down the side, you’d likely still get hit. People don’t die because they’ve gone up the inside rather than the outside, they die because they’ve gone beside a lorry which is simply a massive no-no.

    July 29, 2014 at 11:17 am #806121
    0
    PurpleDog

    MarcMyWords

    MarcMyWords wrote:
    …overtaking cars on the outside, which, by the way, means the car swerves in on me when I’m trying to go down the inside as I should.

    Are you suggesting cyclists ‘should’ overtake on the inside and never on the outside? If so, I’m afraid you’re plain wrong!

    There’s no legal or highway code rule directing us to overtake on one side or the other, but assuming there’s sufficient width available, overtaking on the inside puts you in far more danger than overtaking on the outside, where drivers have better visibility, they are used to being overtaken (and hopefully checking for motorcycles before pulling out) and you have more room to take avoiding action.

    People turning left don’t check the inside – they don’t expect anyone to be there. That’s why so many people die in London under the wheels of large left-turning vehicles.

    In the absence of a dedicated cycle lane on the left, it is terribly dangerous to overtake there so please reconsider. If you encounter slow traffic, overtake on the safer outside.

    Consider this – when you are overtaking on the inside and another cyclist is doing the same on the outside, you say the driver tends to swerve in towards you? Well, of course he shouldn’t swerve, but the reason he does is that he can see the cyclist on the outside, and he can’t see you on the inside!

    July 29, 2014 at 11:08 am #806119
    0
    Wookie

    “Why post?”
    Because you were
    “Why post?”
    Because you were bored and wish to troll maybe?

    July 29, 2014 at 11:05 am #806117
    0
    Matt eaton

    I don’t want to condone
    I don’t want to condone bad/illegal behaviour on two wheels but if 50% of drivers in any town/city switched to using bikes the urban environment would be a much more pleasant one, even if they were a bit naughty about red lights/mobile phone use/generally being new and wobbly cyclists etc.

    What I’m getting at is that we need more people to cycle (and walk, and to some degree choose public transport) rather than using the car for every journey. Until cycling levels are comparable with the best exampes in Europe the focus should be on increasing cycling’s modal share and we shouldn’t get too caught up in minor infringements.

    July 29, 2014 at 10:56 am #806115
    0
    PurpleDog

    zanf wrote:When it comes down

    zanf wrote:
    When it comes down to it, its not ‘cyclists’, or ‘drivers’ but people. A lot of people are arseholes and act exactly the same no matter what form of transport they use. Constantly framing it in tribalist terms is non-constructive and provides no solutions.

    Yeah, that…

    July 29, 2014 at 10:53 am #806113
    0
    Flying Scot

    Bad names:
    Tejay van
    Bad names:

    Tejay van garderen
    Bradley Wiggins
    Floyd Landis
    Levi leipheimer

    All entered cycling just to be referred to by the number on their back.

    July 29, 2014 at 10:53 am #806111
    0
    MarcMyWords

    As someone who cycles through
    As someone who cycles through Central London every day, I see both sides of the argument. Buses and Taxis are the very worst at running reds and stopping without a warning. it seems buses also have no idea how long they are, once the cab is past you, they just start pulling in. How they don’t injure or kill more cyclists, I really don’t know. Drivers on their phones, see it every day. Drivers putting on make-up, reading maps or papers!? See it all the time. I also see cyclists jumping reds into oncoming traffic, swerving all over the road and overtaking cars on the outside, which, by the way, means the car swerves in on me when I’m trying to go down the inside as I should. Motorbikes using the cycling lane and sitting in the bike box, drives me mad!!

    Honestly, there are some people who think cyclists can do no wrong and cars are accountable for everything but everyone is responsible for their own behavior including cyclists. As a driver and a cyclist I like to think I can understand both view points. You can’t say every cyclist is bad/good in the same way you can’t say every driver is bad/good.

    It’s about infrastructure as much as anything else, surely? We need an infrastructure that allows us to share the road rather than fight over it.

    July 29, 2014 at 9:50 am #806109
    0
    Shades

    The ‘occasional’ summer
    The ‘occasional’ summer cyclists; kind of entertaining in a scary sort of way :O . Only a few more weeks and they’ll be hibernating again.

    July 29, 2014 at 9:49 am #806107
    0
    Eebijeebi

    jacknorell wrote:kcr

    jacknorell wrote:
    kcr wrote:
    Perhaps we should start challenging the “cyclists give themselves a bad name” statement, instead of repeating it, and point out the road users who are really earning themselves a bad name by actually causing accidents, injuries and deaths?

    +1

    Because for most other road users it’s not about the deaths and injuries but about their everyday life, and their ‘perception’ of what cyclists do (wrong). IMHO opinion it’s highlighted to the larger and majority groups, i.e. motorists and pedestrians.

    As the minority I suggest that cyclists need to be seen to be squeakier clean to get a better hearing amongst that majority and stop portraying the motorist in general as ‘the enemy’. An acceptance that there is a lot of bad cycling going on (as any reasonable motorist accepts in their case) may go some way to a better understanding and hearing.

    July 29, 2014 at 9:37 am #806105
    0
    jacknorell

    mrmo wrote:Something else I

    mrmo wrote:
    Something else I have noticed is London is full of ***** be they on bikes or in cars, I get the impression that no one actually bothers with any traffic regulations, and it does seem far worse than other places I have been to in the UK?

    Virtually the only time I see metropolitan police they’re either parked by the side of the road or blue lights hurrying away somewhere.

    OK, so see the occasional other vehicles, but they’re never ANPR marked, so not traffic police.

    It’s been months since I saw anyone pulled over.

    July 29, 2014 at 9:34 am #806103
    0
    divingrob

    Because they are vulnerable
    Because they are vulnerable and a easy target.

    July 29, 2014 at 9:32 am #806101
    0
    jacknorell

    kcr wrote:Perhaps we should

    kcr wrote:
    Perhaps we should start challenging the “cyclists give themselves a bad name” statement, instead of repeating it, and point out the road users who are really earning themselves a bad name by actually causing accidents, injuries and deaths?

    +1

    July 29, 2014 at 9:29 am #806099
    0
    zanf

    Everyday I see people using
    Everyday I see people using various methods of transport with little consideration to others, whether they be more or less vulnerable than themselves.

    I constantly see pedestrians walk into roads either staring into their mobile or in another world with it glued to their ear, completely oblivious to their surroundings. I see the same with vehicle drivers constantly looking at (the obvious mobile in) their lap.

    I see cyclists who jump red lights (doing a very very late “amber gamble”) or position themselves in unsafe places. ‘Shoaling’ I’ve heard it termed as: slow cyclists that cut right in front of you while waiting at the lights so when you pull off, you have to take extra action to pull around them.

    When it comes down to it, its not ‘cyclists’, or ‘drivers’ but people. A lot of people are arseholes and act exactly the same no matter what form of transport they use. Constantly framing it in tribalist terms is non-constructive and provides no solutions.

    July 29, 2014 at 9:26 am #806097
    0
    farrell

    Eebijeebi wrote: anti

    Eebijeebi wrote:
    anti car/driver jihadists

    Eebijeebi wrote:

    I for one won’t be beaten down by zealotry.

    When language like this is used, it makes me think you are the one with the chip on your shoulder.

    Eebijeebi wrote:
    It is a sad fact

    These usually aren’t facts.

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 46 through 60 (of 69 total)
1 2 3 4 5
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.