BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:46 PM

Ah yes, and:   200 (forgot that).

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:48 PM

I think a lot of these posts just come from someone who likes to bait others. And they are very good at it. In fact... Wait for it...

A master baiter.

Oh, and 200!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:48 PM

DAMN YOU DAVIES!

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:20 PM

Uh, it does pay to read the posts sometimes, Dave.    But, tell you what, I'll leave #300 for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 03:30 AM

Awww, C'mon, Ron. There was less than 2 minutes between our postings so you only just beat me to it! I know I am good but not that good :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 06:43 AM

You're right, Dave.   It was the luck of the draw. I've had the same problem.

And cheers to you too.

Not to mention good luck with #300.

Will you be at Sidmouth this year?    Might see you there.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:31 AM

No - Sorry Ron. Never been to Sidmouth. Used to regularly do Whitby and Fylde but not done them recently. I will definitely be at Moira Furnace and may be at Fylde. Can I take my bike and ride it through crowds of Morris Dancers on the roads? :-)

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:37 AM

I have a confession to make. This morning, on the way to work I cycled on the "sidewalk". It was only for a few seconds, but I cannot tell a lie and pretend it didn't happen. I was proceeding in an orderly fashion along a dedicated cycle path that runs alongside a main road. It's a bit of a farce of a cycle path, because drivers park on it thus rendering it useless for cyclists and in places it ceases to exist for no apparent reason, but that's all by-the-by. Anyway, a car just in front of me cruised off their bit of the road and into the cycle path - again, for no apparent reason. I didn't take it personally - I think it was probably a combination of poor lane discipline and dozy sod syndrome. I had to slam the brakes on, whilst simultaneously checking there were no pedestrians on this stretch of pavement so I could hop onto it rather than crash into the back of the errant car.

Can I be excused my fine please? I know I've committed the sort of terrible crime that passing motorists may clock as another example of what rules-of-the-road defying BASTARDS us cyclists are, but at least no-one got hurt, no cars got scratched and the only person at risk of injury was me - and injury was only averted because as a cyclist I had my wits about me.

I'm not telling this story because it's unusual, but because it's increasingly the norm.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:53 AM

""but let's not get carried away with the notion that all cyclists are devils incarnate and all car drivers are paragons of virtue.""

Help me out here Steve. Point out exactly where I made any such claim.

Every single instance I have mentioned actually happened, notwithstanding Keith A's woeful inability to recognise the truth when it bites him in the arse.

Every person, group, organisation or country whose cause Keith espouses, automatically becomes lily white pure and incapable of error or misdeed, and everyone who disagrees with him is a dreamer, liar deluded fool or terrorist.

Don't take my word for it, go read the bastard's posts on every contentious topic under the sun.

Always the same tunnel vision, blinkered, one dimensional viewpoint.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:58 AM

So you expect us to believe that your walking stick accidentally put a cyclist in hospital, who was then fined for "furious cycling"?
Google does not believe you either.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:06 AM

"You can only be convicted of this offence (furious cycling)if you injure someone while you're cycling in a way which is wanton or furious or shows wilful misconduct or neglect. There's no definition of what counts as wanton or furious or wilful – it all basically depends on how a jury would judge your cycling.

Since 2008 there have been two reported prosecutions of cyclists for this offence, both involving cyclists who rode onto the pavement at speed and knocked over a pedestrian, who later died. Both were jailed, and one was disqualified from driving. (R v Lambert [2008] EWCA Crim 2019; R v Hall [2009] EWCA Crim 2236 – BBC report here)"
http://ukcyclerules.com/2010/09/27/can-you-lose-your-driving-licence-for-a-cycling-offence/

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:50 AM

Funny you should mention that Mr Cringe as it is exactly what I have been saying - I got that fed up of having to quickly avoid becoming another statistic that it became second nature to me to hop on the pavement to go around cars parked in the cycle lane. I never saw anyone on those pavements let alone run anyone over. My cycling days are strictly limited to leisure at the moment but when my fitness improves I would like to cycle/train or bus the 15 miles to work. I drive at the moment and can see the danger spots already! I have invited anyone to report me to the police but no-one has taken me up on it :-)

Every single instance I have mentioned actually happened So have mine, Don. As I said earlier, if you want to fight a war of who can provide the most anecdotes about driver v cycle v pedestrian stupidity you are on a loser strait away. Quoting from this excellent article, which I recommend anyone to read -

Despite this there may have been some genuine grounds for complaint, pavement cycling is annoying, (it irritates me), but it certainly isn't anything like as dangerous as often portrayed in the media and the public swallow that garbage.
Essentially, we must do what we can to be responsible and be seen to be responsible. I'm not sure quite how do do this, but it must involve adolescents, largely because these are the group who would seem to be heavily involved in antisocial cycling. There is little doubt that some of these will continue their antisocial ways into adulthood. All cyclists then get tarred with the same brush.

*What the available statistics say
Using DFT figures, from 2007-2008, 60.7 pedestrians were killed on the pavement by motor-vehicles, whereas 0.5 were killed on the pavement, by pavement cyclists. This is based on 10% of pedestrian casualties being on the pavement or verge as was the case 2007-2008. The ratio of pedestrians killed on the pavement by motor-vehicles to those killed by cyclists is therefore 121.4:1. The ratio from 1998-2008 is 820.1:3 or 273:1

We could, therefore provide at least 273 stories of driver stupidity to every one of yours about idiot cyclists.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:58 AM

We could, therefore provide at least 273 stories of driver stupidity to every one of yours about idiot cyclists.

And that, of course, exonerates the idiot cyclists.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:16 AM

Not at all, Greg. Just that there is no point in this type of anecdotal evidence. If we compare the number of cyclists on the road to the number of car drivers and pedestrians there are bound to be more idiots in the later two categories simply because there are more of them. It does not excuse stupid behavior by anyone nor is it an indication of the attitude of the majority in any category. I am just saying that in an exchange of examples there will inevitably be more showing drivers in a bad light and going down that road (pun intended) is a waste of time.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:03 AM

Greg, it's not about exonerating but contextualising. The 'idiot cyclist' clearly isn't a mythical beast but the statistics consistently show the threat is grossly exaggerated.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:41 AM

And that, of course, exonerates the idiot cyclists.""

They don't exonerate the idiots. They just deny that they exist. That's modern cyclethink.

It does of course carefully avoid acknowledging the percentage of cyclists killed by motorists where the cyclist was at fault and the motorist had no chance of avoiding the collision.

It also fails to recognise the number of instances of cyclists causing damage and simply pissing of, immune to prosecution because they can't be found.

But that is the way they justify their blinkered insistence that there isn't a problem.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:55 AM

Don: here are some recent statistics to try to help you understand the reality for those of us who chose to cycle. No-one is denying that a minority of cyclists are idiots (as are a minority of any group of humans undertaking any activity). What we are denying it that it is any bigger a problem than that. While you may claim not to be 'anti-cycling' what you actually write betrays you time and time again. And please don't make this issue just about Keith - he's far from the only cyclist in the village...

In the UK as a whole, the number of people killed cycling increased 10% last year and serious casualties were up as well. The Department for Transport acknowledged today that "There is a well-established upward trend in pedal cyclist casualties; this is eighth year that the number of seriously injured cyclist casualties has increased." (Cyclists in the City 24th June 2013).

RoSPA said:

The provisional road casualty figures for Great Britain in 2012, published today by the Department for Transport (DfT), show that overall road deaths fell by 8 per cent to 1,754 in 2012. This appears to show that the rise in road deaths in 2011 was not the start of a trend.   

The DfT report highlights that unusually heavy rainfall in the spring and summer of 2012 probably led to less walking, cycling and motorcycling, which may be part of the reason for the fall in overall casualty figures.   

However, despite this, the number of pedal cyclists killed rose by 10 per cent to 118 and the number of seriously injured cyclists rose, for the eighth year in a row, to 3,222. The increase in deaths was mainly among the young with the number of child cyclists killed doubling from six in 2011 to 13 in 2012, although the number seriously injured fell by a fifth.

There were also increases in the number of child car passengers killed from 21 in 2011 to 27 in 2012.   

Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at RoSPA, an accident prevention charity with a history stretching back nearly 100 years, said: "The good news of a large drop in road deaths in 2012 is marred by an increase in cyclist deaths, which occurred despite the poor weather in the main cycling seasons of spring and summer, which probably meant fewer cyclists were on the road. If the weather had been better, there may have been even more cyclists killed and injured.   

"Even though road deaths in 2012 were at their lowest level since records began, we need to redouble our efforts to make sure that cyclist deaths and injuries are reduced as the popularity of cycling increases.   

"The fact that most of the increase in cycling deaths was among child cyclists is particularly worrying. As well as increasing the provision of cyclist training and trying to make the roads safer for cyclists, we also need to hammer home the message to drivers to keep their speed down, watch out for cyclists and give them enough room on the road.   

"It is also vital to create a coherent safe network for cyclists by introducing the appropriate cycle lanes, linking quieter streets, developing routes alongside rivers, canals and through parks, and lowering speed limits."

http://www.rospa.com/news/releases/detail/?id=1221

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:56 AM

This article makes interesting reading, too:

http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.co.uk/

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:59 AM

And finally, merely as food for thought, here is an impassioned defence of pavement cycling:

http://thinkingaboutcycling.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/heroes-of-british-cycling-bradley-wiggins-and-the-pavement-cyclist/

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM

Really finally, this one's for Don. One for a reflective moment...

Why some people get angry with cyclists: and why it's time to do something about

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 12:34 PM

Don - They don't exonerate the idiots. They just deny that they exist. That's modern cyclethink.

Me, 2 posts ear;ier, - It does not excuse stupid behavior by anyone nor is it an indication of the attitude of the majority in any category

Neither I nor, as far as I can see, has ever denied that idiot cyclists exist. Just who is stretching the truth a little here?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM

here is an impassioned defence of pavement cycling

Impassioned, without a doubt. Also total bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 02:59 PM

Some research.
Two-thirds of collisions between vehicles and cyclists in central London are the fault of the driver, research revealed today.

Westminster council found that drivers were to blame in 68 per cent of incidents while cyclists were responsible for 20 per cent. In the remainder of cases, both were to blame or the cause could not be attributed.

The figures emerged in the council's draft cycling strategy, which aims to build on plans from Boris Johnson to double the number of people cycling in London in the next decade.

It said the most common contributory factors in vehicle-cyclist collisions were drivers failing to look properly (21  per cent), drivers being careless or reckless or in a hurry (13 per cent), drivers failing to judge the cyclist's speed or path (10 per cent) and drivers passing too close to the cyclist (10 per cent).

It revealed there were 133 collisions between cyclists and pedestrians in the past three years, with 60 per cent attributable to pedestrians and 40 per cent to cyclists.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/drivers-to-blame-for-twothirds-of-bicycle-collisions-in-westminster-8602166.html

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 04:10 PM

Hmmm. I disagree with the article to the extent that I would not, personally, be militant enough to make that sort of stand. But it is far from total bullshit, Greg. He is quite right in saying that if enough people cycle on the pavement then something would have to be done. Whether that something would be positive or negative for cyclists I cannot say!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 04:14 PM

OK, Dave; can we come to a meeting of minds on "largely bullshit"?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 04:22 PM

I'll do a deal - How about half and half :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 06:06 PM

Roger - OK.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,jeff
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 06:06 PM

Have been cycling most of my life. Recreationally in my youth and practically in my adulthood. Started cycle-commuting in 1987 in Chicago 10 years before they had a cycle-friendly mayor. Have done 2 tours of the UK/Ireland and countless week or two mixed camping/credit card tours in the US. My background in dealing w/hazzards of ALL varieties is extensive. So, I came to this realization many years ago. ANY collision w/a vehicle, pedestrian, parking meter, roadsign or pothole is THE FAULT OF THE CYCLIST. PERIOD. Why?

If one has a collision w/a car, regardless if the auto operator right or left hooks you, hits you from behind or is blind running drunk. If one is going to cycle in traffic one has to realize a bike is 200-225 lbs max and a car is 2-4 tons. The odds are NOT in your favor, so YOU must be constantly aware of your surroundings and anticipate that EVERYTHING is a potential hazzard. A rearward mirror in traffic is a MUST. When one gets used to functioning in THAT realization commuting, utility cycling and touring is a challenge and a JOY.

If one collides with a pedestrian even if they cross against a light or the middle of the block one should be in contol of one's bike to the extent that you either swerve and miss or be able to brake hard enough to come to a halt. Without doing an over-the-handlebars somersault. Shift your weight rearward and hold BOTH brakes firmly. Lay it down if you have to, but do everything in one's power to avoid hitting a pedestrian. They're helpless and vulnerable even if clearly in the wrong. You're not. It requires SKILL and needs to be practiced. Just like a musical instrument.

One needs to understand a bicycle is a mode of transportation where the rider is the motor AND operator and NOT a toy. NEVER take risks in dealing w/traffic, pedestrians, etc. Obey all traffic laws and be courteous to ALL drivers even if they are rude to you. If you notice a build-up of autos behind you signal and pull into the next driveway and let them pass. They WILL appreciate it, I can assure you. It isn't a game and shouldn't be treated as such. That being said it is FUN to be part of the traffic flow and keeps one's reflexes sharp. They HAVE to be sharp. Your safety and well being depends on it. Practice memorizing license plate numers in anticipation of dealing with harrassment. YOU WILL BE HARRASSED IF CYCLING LONG ENOUGH. Can't stress that point enough. Report it. Better yet mount an unobtrusive camera to one's helmet as video is invaluable to LEOs. A California doctor is serving aa lengthy hardtime sentence as I post this for attempted vehicular homicide when running over several cyclists climbing a hill to 'teach them a lesson'. One of the cyclists had a camera mounted to his helmet and it was THE main piece of evidence as he said those very words when asked by one of the cyclists why he did what he did.

ALWAYS have a white light on blink mode in the front along w/at least a 150 lumens steady light in the front for night riding. They're plentiful and cheap. The technology in bike lights has improved dramatically in the last 5 years. Rearward have as many red lights of AT LEAST 5 watts on blinking mode as one wishes to have. I have a Cygolite Hotshot which is 2 watts that I use in daytime as it is clearly visible in full sunlight. Wear bright clothing that is BIKE SPECIFIC as they will often contain refective material visible even in full daylight. Rearward lighting needs to be both low and high, so clipping 'blinkies' to one's helmet AND shirt or backpack are to one's advantage in safely negotiating traffic. ALWAYS have one low...maybe under the saddle as cars are mostly at that height.

Ok, dogs. One rarely encounters a dog in an urban setting, but if one does DO NOT try to outrun it. Dogs can do 30-35 mph in short bursts and have enough mass to knock one off one's bike if large and aggressive enough. Get off and keep your bike between you and the dog and don't try to ride off until it loses interest. Walk and give a commanding NO! if it moves towards you. Keep them in your peripheral vision as a direct eye to eye is considered a challenge and may result in an attack, especially 'guard' breeds. They're primordial instinct is to chase and render prey(which you are like it or not)weak by disabling the tendons in the rear legs. If necessary use one's bike like a set of antlers to keep the dog at bay and hollar for help. Back up while keeping your bike between you and the dog. Usually someone is within earshot and knows the dog by name. That can help alot in diffusing a given situation. All of that being said keep a can of wasp spray on one's bike as it shoots a narrow stream at least 20-30 ft, can temporarily blind a dog and smells really bad. Forget papper spray, Mace, Doggone, etc. Those products have too broad and short of a spray pattern. They can very well end up on YOU given the right wind conditions. Take the benefit of my experience. Been there. Done that and have road rash scars to prove it.

Now rural dogs. Get a Crosman C31 CO2 pistol and keep it mounted to your steering tube in a holster. SPRAY PAINT IT ORANGE! One doesn't want a LEO to mistake it for a real firearm. Again been there. Done that. Believe me, you wont have time in many circumstances to have it anywhere else on your bike. This particular model shoots a BB @ 485 fps and that velocity REALLY stings, but is not anywhere close to being lethal. It's got an 18 shot magazine. All dog owners can be confrontational when one shoots their precious, but it's legal when they hit the pavement and there are leash laws in my state. I keep the Sheriff's department on speed dial in my cell phone. Anyone who thinks this is harsh is either naive, a fool or both. A dog can easily knock one from their bike and if there's more than one a swam isn't likely it's a reality. Again take the benefit of my experience. I was bitten several times before the dogs' owner was able to calm them.

Sorry to have run on for so long or been guilty of thread drift, but this is a subject with which I'm well aquainted and very passionate about. Feel free to be offended or disagree w/any or all of this post. I could care less. One more thing: STAY OFF THE FREAKING SIDEWALKS WHILE CYCLING!! WALK IT!!

Sincerely, Guest Jeff in rural Tennessee, USA

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:19 PM

I have never said, nor would I ever say, that children should not ride on the pavement (sidewalk).

They should never ride anywhere else unaccompanied by an adult.

The figures regarding blame in London are suspect, to say the least, given that any cyclist causing a collision and lucky enough to avoid injury, will inevitably piss off, skewing the figures.

Children are most likely to ride out into the road without thinking, and with the best will in the world cars simply cannot stop dead. To blame drivers automatically, because the victim is a child, is out and out nonsense, but that IS what happens.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST,Spleen Cringe
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 02:41 AM

Jeff: "ANY collision w/a vehicle, pedestrian, parking meter, roadsign or pothole is THE FAULT OF THE CYCLIST. PERIOD.

I'm afraid I can't agree with that. It presupposed a lot about drivers and pedestrians and doesn't chime with reality or the statistics.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 03:00 AM

The figures regarding blame in London are suspect, to say the least, given that any cyclist causing a collision and lucky enough to avoid injury

The figures are accepted as reliable except only by you Don.
No-one else has ever heard of a collision caused by but not involving cyclists.
You claim to personally know of five.
That is because you are a liar and make stories up to make your case.

You tell a ludicrous story of sending a cyclist to hospital with your stick.
You claim he was fined for "furious riding"
Such a charge is extremely rare and always reported on.
The last one in Kent was in 19th Century.
Furious Riding has to involve injury to a pedestrian.
You forgot to make up the injured pedestrian Don.

You foolish, foolish man.
You make a liar of yourself to make a pathetic point on a miniscule Mudcat spat.
Twat.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 03:03 AM

A lot of that is true when you replace bicycle with motor vehicle. There's no absolutes here, we all have a responsibility, to ourselves if not to others, to avoid accidents whether in control of a motor vehicle, bicycle, horse or pair of feet.

Cyclists need to be aware that pedestrians can't always hear them coming up behind and that pedestrians can't jump out of the way as quickly as you'd like. Cyclists need to be aware that drivers can't hear them, can't always see them and can't react as quickly as you'd like.

Motorists need to be aware that they are much heavier than anything else, that they come up on pedestrians and cyclists faster than expected and that they are not always seen.

Pedestrians need to be aware of the above.

There are things we can do. We can make ourselves more visible, turn our music down, drive or ride a bit slower, observe traffic lights, stop signs, road priorities and just do one thing at a time and put down that mobile phone.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:06 AM

any cyclist causing a collision and lucky enough to avoid injury, will inevitably piss off

So now cyclists are not only anti-social and dangerous but they are also dishonest? I think this says a lot more about attitudes toward cyclists than it does about cyclists. Keep 'em coming Don. The more you dig...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:29 AM

and I will repeat that figure from a Danish survey - cyclists save the state 8p per km, motorists cost the state 13p per km. Who's anti-social here?

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM

Adelaide, Australia. A study by the University Centre for Automotive Safety Research showed that 21 percent of bicycle-motor vehicle accidents were caused by the cyclist.
www.adelaidenow.com.au

The article goes on to discuss briefly the main types of accidents. A common one involved a motorist turning at an intersection, and hitting a bicyclist going straight.

In my city (Calgary, Canada), it is illegal for anyone 14 or older to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. In San Francisco, the age is set at thirteen. However, in case of injury to a pedestrian, the parent of the child is liable for damages according to the cases I could find by googling.

Advertising on the net, a number of law firms offer services in accidents involving bicycles and pedestrians, so accidents are not infrequent.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 01:36 PM

Ah, jeez, Q, you're in trouble now - confirming the existence of a growing nuber of jackass cyclists.

They'll be down on ya in no time.....

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 02:48 PM

Are you really that stupid Greg? If 21% of cyclists are at fault that means 79% of motorists are at fault. Confirming that there is a large number of jackass motorists. As you seem to be identifying with motorists.....

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 03:29 PM

A common one involved a motorist turning at an intersection, and hitting a bicyclist going straight.

So, let me get this right. In both the UK and Australia we drive on the left. So a cyclist is going strait on. A driver turns left in front of him and hits him. It is the cyclists fault? Going the other way a cyclist is going strait on. A driver turns right in front of him and hits him. It is the cyclists fault.

Sorry, but I can't figure that one out. Probably me being thick.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 03:38 PM

"motorist turning at an intersection and hitting a cyclist going straight"
.
   In the US there is often right turn on red for motorists---sometimes when the pedestrian ( or cyclist) has the green walk signal.   Motorists are in theory to give way to pedestrians (and cyclists) in this situation.   However this often seems to be honored in the breach.

And there's no question who has the power of intimidation here (clue:   not the pedestrian or cyclist).   Which motorists often use, it seems.   And, as a frequent pedestrian, I find extremely annoying.

But it does not seem reasonable that cyclists should always or even mostly be found to blame for the type of accident cited. Unless of course the cyclist is running the red light or stop sign.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 03:58 PM

Hey, Dave, we're on the same wavelength here.    And this time it's I who didn't see your post--though it was several minutes before mine, it seems.

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:12 PM

Confirming that there is a large number of jackass motorists.

Jackass motoroists? Absolutely.

But that doesn't negate the fact that there is a large and ever increasing number of jackass cyclists.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:48 PM

Jackass motoroists? Absolutely.

But that doesn't negate the fact that there is a large and ever increasing number of jackass cyclists.

Absolutely spot on Greg. I don't think anyone has ever seen it any other way.

But a lot of motorists seem to be of the opinion that because some cyclists are idiots then no cyclist should be on the road. Surely by that same token if there are some idiot drivers, no cars should be on the road and because there are some idiot pedestrians, no-one should ever leave their front doors!

All I am saying, and as far as I can see all other cyclists are saying, is don't tar us all as idiots because a minority are.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:51 PM

Glurp! I see jackasses everywhere. It's such hard work being perfect.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 13 - 06:01 PM

don't tar us all as idiots because a minority are

No intention of doing so. Was a cyclist myself until age had its way with me. Would help, tho, if responsible cyclists would at least admit that there are substantial numbers of idiot cyclists (and #'s growing daily) out there & help to self-police the "sport" instead of being apologists for jackasses, as far too many are. ( Not saying your'e one of said apologists).

Cheers,

Greg

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 13 - 03:22 AM

there are substantial numbers of idiot cyclists

Now, there's the rub. What is a 'substantial' number? 1%? 10% 20% And is it any higher than the substantial number of idiots in any walk of life? Yes, we all know that they exist but some seem to make more of an issue and use it as an excuse to demonise all cyclists. Yes there are apologists but equally there are those who would use the actions of a few to engender bad feeling about the majority.

Do you see any parallels here? There are those who use the 'substantial number', whatever that is, to class the substantial majority as the anti-social, dangerous law-breakers. That, as I said earlier, is very lazy thinking and is as bad as saying the Irish are stupid, Moslems are terrorists and Blacks are lazy.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Jul 13 - 04:39 AM

The Adelaide figs suggest idiot drivers outnumber idiot cyclist by about 4 to 1, with no indication that idiot cyclists are increasing Greg.
Natural selection would tend to cause a decrease.

In those figs we can assume that all the drivers were adults, but not all the cyclists, which makes the comparison slightly unfair to adult cyclists.

As with the Westminster figs, it establishes that cyclists are a non-problem and not a danger.
This thread exposes some of the irrational prejudice that cyclists face, and the lengths to which some will go to justify that irrational prejudice.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 13 - 08:24 AM

Do you see any parallels here?

I sure do. There's idiots & jackasses on both sides of any issue.

This comes as a surprise? Give over, Dave - no-one is "demonizing all cyclists".

You're starting to sound like the National Rifle Association.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jul 13 - 09:49 AM

This pains me beyond belief to have to say, but Greg is absolutely right on this:    nobody is "demonizing all cyclists".

And you are in fact starting to sound like the NRA.

There, I've said it.   Now I'll have to go somewhere to recover. But I'll survive somehow.

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 13 - 11:06 AM

Well, Simple Seeker, maybe there's hope for everyone, eh? Or perhaps its just a broken clock being right twice a day.

Either way, wishing you a speedy recovery...

Subject: RE: BS: Bicycles on the sidewalk
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM

Hey, Greg, you didn't clear that with me--I've copyrighted the "broken clock" phrase. My attorneys will be in touch.