Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

The price of a cyclist's life: 240 hours unpaid work


  • Please log in to reply
141 replies to this topic

#21 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 01:16 PM

Whilst not relevant to the OP, cyclists are not always innocent parties.  A few months ago, in a queue of traffic, a cyclist overtook me on the right then cut sharply in front of me to pass a right-turning lorry on the left. I did stop next to him a little further up the road to recommend that he purchased and read a copy of the Highway Code.  Cyclists riding through red lights and up one-way streets the wrong way is common-place. A little acceptance of their own vulnerability would be sensible.


Oh you won't get any argument from me about this, and I think the occasions when the cyclist may be in someway culpable for an incident cloud this issue. Which is probably why we are where we are, but as Severus says car drivers can be far worse, and the only way to stop it is the fear of punishment.

#22 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 01:34 PM

 

As a driver and a cyclist I can assure you that drivers are far worst than cyclists for not following the rules of the road.



The point you seem to be missing is that car drivers can afford to be worse at it, seeing as they have the protection of a steel cage fitted with airbags surrounding them. It is understandable why drivers are like that in their safe little cocoons. On the other hand, Cyclists have no protection yet many still insist on putting themselves in dangerous situations which could be avoided. If I were a cyclist, and knowing that many car drivers are idiots, I'd be less inclined to put myself in situations where I am going to come off worst whether its my fault or not. To that extent, the cyclist has to be responsible for their own safety and make responsible decisions.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#23 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,026 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 01:35 PM

 


The point you seem to be missing is that car drivers can afford to be worse at it, seeing as they have the protection of a steel cage fitted with airbags surrounding them. It is understandable why drivers are like that in their safe little cocoons. On the other hand, Cyclists have no protection yet many still insist on putting themselves in dangerous situations which could be avoided. If I were a cyclist, and knowing that many car drivers are idiots, I'd be less inclined to put myself in situations where I am going to come off worst whether its my fault or not. To that extent, the cyclist has to be responsible for their own safety and make responsible decisions.

 

Could you give us some examples?


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#24 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,900 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 01:50 PM

Well it took longer than i thought but here we go with a "bash the cyclist" frenzy


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#25 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 01:57 PM

 

Well it took longer than i thought but here we go with a "bash the cyclist" frenzy


As opposed to a "bash the motorist" one you mean ?

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#26 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:03 PM

 

Could you give us some examples?


Lots, but what'd be the point ?

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#27 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,900 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:04 PM

 

As opposed to a "bash the motorist" one you mean ?

 

Yeah, this motorist by his own admission was culpable, but halfway down the thread we get the "cyclists are dangers to themselves bla bla"

 

So your point is?


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#28 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,026 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:06 PM

 

Lots, but what'd be the point ?

 

We may have an interesting discussion resulting from it.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#29 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,900 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:08 PM

 


. If I were a cyclist,

 

 

 

 

But you're not, and I'd add get out there and try it for a week or so, you'll come back with your hair turned white.


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#30 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:20 PM

 

Yeah, this motorist by his own admission was culpable, but halfway down the thread we get the "cyclists are dangers to themselves bla bla"
 
So your point is?


My point is that, like any road user, you can not put your safety in the hands of others. You need to be aware of the dangers you cause to yourself and others, and that goes for motorists and cyclists alike. The big difference being, as I said, the motorist is nicely coccooned in steel when he/she does something stupid whereas the cyclist isn't. That's not condoning bad drivers or bashing cyclists, its a fact of life that the cyclist will come off worse in any collision therefore you would expect them to have a more heightened sense of danger than motorists and to therefore take a more cautious approach.

When I was a young lad learning to drive my dad used to say to me "treat every other road user like they're a bloody idiot" and that has stood me in good stead on many occasions.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#31 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,026 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:44 PM

 

My point is that, like any road user, you can not put your safety in the hands of others. You need to be aware of the dangers you cause to yourself and others, and that goes for motorists and cyclists alike. The big difference being, as I said, the motorist is nicely coccooned in steel when he/she does something stupid whereas the cyclist isn't. That's not condoning bad drivers or bashing cyclists, its a fact of life that the cyclist will come off worse in any collision therefore you would expect them to have a more heightened sense of danger than motorists and to therefore take a more cautious approach.

When I was a young lad learning to drive my dad used to say to me "treat every other road user like they're a bloody idiot" and that has stood me in good stead on many occasions.

 

The thing is a lot of cyclists - certainly the smart ones - do that.  And part of realising that most drivers are morons is that you have to, at times, ride aggressively and visibly.

 

And then this means that you'll get a comment like yours which I highlighted in bold.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#32 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,764 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:44 PM

 

My point is that, like any road user, you can not put your safety in the hands of others. You need to be aware of the dangers you cause to yourself and others, and that goes for motorists and cyclists alike. The big difference being, as I said, the motorist is nicely coccooned in steel when he/she does something stupid whereas the cyclist isn't. That's not condoning bad drivers or bashing cyclists, its a fact of life that the cyclist will come off worse in any collision therefore you would expect them to have a more heightened sense of danger than motorists and to therefore take a more cautious approach.

When I was a young lad learning to drive my dad used to say to me "treat every other road user like they're a bloody idiot" and that has stood me in good stead on many occasions.

When I used to ride my motorbike it annoyed me every time seeing other motorbike riders making idiot, aggressive moves that would see them flattened by an HGV if they mistimed their move.  It's common sense really, if you're in a 50/50 situation and the other side can flatten you with only minor paint scratches then you really should be thinking about your defensive riding lessons.

 

It's a damnably small consolation that you may be legally in the right when you're in A&E fighting for your life.  If you can't make eye contact with a car or HGV driver at a junction then you must assume he hasn't seen you.

 

The story is just puzzling... he admitted he did it, he admitted he was reckless, he clearly breached many Highway Code guidelines, someone died, so why didn't he go to jail for a substantial amount of time?


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#33 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,026 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:45 PM

The google ad at the top is suggesting I sign up to a dating site for single cyclists.

 

I say.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#34 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,026 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 02:46 PM

 so why didn't he go to jail for a substantial amount of time?

 

Because motorists very rarely do.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#35 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:33 PM

 

The thing is a lot of cyclists - certainly the smart ones - do that.  And part of realising that most drivers are morons is that you have to, at times, ride aggressively and visibly.
 
And then this means that you'll get a comment like yours which I highlighted in bold.


Ok Jon, I'll give you 2 examples that I have seen in the past 2 weeks.

Firstly, on the dual-carriageway A64 between the A1 and York on Monday, the road was extremely busy with it being a bank holiday and I saw 2 cyclists riding together 2 abreast forcing drivers to filter into the outside lane to pass them safely which caused problems with traffic braking suddenly. Now, that might be ok on straight roads with plenty of time to see the cyclists, but the A64 has quite a few bends and it only takes one car to come round the bend and not have the opportunity to move out due to other vehicles and you've got a dangerous situation. That's a reckless piece of cycling which is easily avoidable.

Secondly, a cyclist went through a red light into a busy yellow box junction and wanted to turn right. Then suddenly seemed surprised that he was stranded in the middle of the junction sideways on to the traffic which was now passing him on either side, with buses and lorries missing him by very narrow margins. Again, a very avoidable situation and nobody's fault but his own if he had got wiped out.

It's about risk assessment and not putting yourself in dangerous situations which you have manufactured yourself. I rode powerful motorbikes for years, still do occasionally, and there is a time and a place to be a bit reckless - peak time traffic is not one of them.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#36 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,536 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:36 PM

When I used to ride my motorbike it annoyed me every time seeing other motorbike riders making idiot, aggressive moves that would see them flattened by an HGV if they mistimed their move.  It's common sense really, if you're in a 50/50 situation and the other side can flatten you with only minor paint scratches then you really should be thinking about your defensive riding lessons.

 

It's a damnably small consolation that you may be legally in the right when you're in A&E fighting for your life.  If you can't make eye contact with a car or HGV driver at a junction then you must assume he hasn't seen you.

 

The story is just puzzling... he admitted he did it, he admitted he was reckless, he clearly breached many Highway Code guidelines, someone died, so why didn't he go to jail for a substantial amount of time?

 

Just about the best thing to come out of taking my motorbike test was the awareness of other (idiot) road users it drilled into you during the training. I still rely on some of the defensive driving techniques I learned now some 20 years later on a day to day basis both when I'm in the car or on my bike. If you pay attention, motorbike training is an excellent addition to any road user.

 

Perhaps such training should become mandatory for all two wheeled road users? (This is nothing to do with blaming cyclists for their own injuries, it just makes sense IMO to be taught the extra awareness needed when you are so much more vulnerable).


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#37 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,764 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:45 PM

Ok Jon, I'll give you 2 examples that I have seen in the past 2 weeks.

Firstly, on the dual-carriageway A64 between the A1 and York on Monday, the road was extremely busy with it being a bank holiday and I saw 2 cyclists riding together 2 abreast forcing drivers to filter into the outside lane to pass them safely which caused problems with traffic braking suddenly. Now, that might be ok on straight roads with plenty of time to see the cyclists, but the A64 has quite a few bends and it only takes one car to come round the bend and not have the opportunity to move out due to other vehicles and you've got a dangerous situation. That's a reckless piece of cycling which is easily avoidable.

From what you describe the cyclists are riding completely within the law and in a manner that is encouraged by British Cycling and CTC. According to the highway code, a car should give a cyclists as much room as if it was a car to overtake. If the cyclists had been riding in single file and the road was a single carriageway, a car would still have to cross the centre line to overtake safely and therefore it makes little difference whether they are riding two abreast or not. It is the responsibility of the overtaking vehicle to make sure they can do so safely.
 

Secondly, a cyclist went through a red light into a busy yellow box junction and wanted to turn right. Then suddenly seemed surprised that he was stranded in the middle of the junction sideways on to the traffic which was now passing him on either side, with buses and lorries missing him by very narrow margins. Again, a very avoidable situation and nobody's fault but his own if he had got wiped out.

Totally agree there, that cyclist is an idiot.

What riles me and many other cyclists is that despite the fact that we ride safely, within the laws and using good practice, barely a day goes by when I am not having to do a defensive manoeuvre because of a car driver's incompetence. Sometimes they generally don't see you or know they are doing wrong for some reason, sometimes they know full well they are in the wrong but do it because they are in a two tonne vehicle. I just try and stay safe and hope my luck will hold out.

Edited by Severus, 29 August 2013 - 03:46 PM.

Fides invicta triumphat

#38 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:54 PM

 

From what you describe the cyclists are riding completely within the law and in a manner that is encouraged by British Cycling and CTC. According to the highway code, a car should give a cyclists as much room as if it was a car to overtake. If the cyclists had been riding in single file and the road was a single carriageway, a car would still have to cross the centre line to overtake safely and therefore it makes little difference whether they are riding two abreast or not. It is the responsibility of the overtaking vehicle to make sure they can do so safely.


What is "within the law" and what is "safe" are two different things altogether. IMO you'd have to be an idiot to actually want to cycle along an extremely busy high-speed dual carriageway in the first place, but to then make yourself even more vulnerable while doing so is just madness. Its not about the technicalities of the law or who's morally right or wrong, its about being sensible and not taking unneccessary risks.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#39 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,764 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 04:29 PM


What is "within the law" and what is "safe" are two different things altogether. IMO you'd have to be an idiot to actually want to cycle along an extremely busy high-speed dual carriageway in the first place, but to then make yourself even more vulnerable while doing so is just madness. Its not about the technicalities of the law or who's morally right or wrong, its about being sensible and not taking unneccessary risks.

If all road users ride/drive within the laws/recommendations then we would all be safe. By riding two abreast is actually safer than single file. It reduces the length that the overtaking vehicle has to pull out in order to safely overtake. Also for a single rider, 'taking the lane' (I.e., riding in the centre of the lane) is safer as there is less likely risk of pot holes and debris than at the side of the carriageway and discourages dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.

Edited by Severus, 29 August 2013 - 04:32 PM.

Fides invicta triumphat

#40 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,865 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 04:49 PM

If all road users ride/drive within the laws/recommendations then we would all be safe. By riding two abreast is actually safer than single file. It reduces the length that the overtaking vehicle has to pull out in order to safely overtake. Also for a single rider, 'taking the lane' (I.e., riding in the centre of the lane) is safer as there is less likely risk of pot holes and debris than at the side of the carriageway and discourages dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.


That may well be the case but every situation is different and my point is not about the "what" but the "where and when".

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users