[Closed] Bad cycling - whats the answer?

Would I get shouted at if I suggested to a certain extent there is a reliance on Darwinian principles?

bombers, pwning
shoes, weeing

set me off down [b]tis[/b] road.

Bad typing - whats the answer.? 😉

neilsonwheels - Member

Bad typing - whats the answer.?

Speeelchequer and the edti button

Easy!

Get on with your own life, and mind your own business.

Threaten them with being locked in a room with me and TJ battling, that would sort it pretty quick 😛

Don - it does impact on us all tho - as it leads to intolerance from car drivers and the extra accidents give rise to pressure for bad laws to restrict cycling.

Folk will always take chances whether it is cycling, driving or walking for that matter, especially in a busy city. As mentioned in the first thread about that fixie video it's an adrenalin thing or some are just c0cks. Most people can be educated and I believe the vast majority of cyclists aren't that bad but you will always get a certain percentage that will only learn from making a mistake. Unfortunately some of the mistakes that are made are fatal.

I think this is called natural selection.

Speeelchequer and the [b]edti[/b] button

Easy!

Sorry. 😉

Getting [url= http://www.dft.gov.uk/bikeability/ ]Bikeability[/url] into more schools might help.

err...

But hat will do nothing

Oh FFS! bloody Speeelchequer

NOW in "missing the point" shocker!

I hate that edti button

Its got to be for all cyclists, compulsory helmet use, registration plates & a hefty Tax to use a bike on the road 😉

I think the answer is to get the cyclists off roads completely, make it law for cyclists to cycle on all pavements wherever possible.

The short term solution is deal with the pavements we've got to work with, in the long term, transform all of them (and build new ones along areas where pavements don't exist) into smooth cycle lanes.

As for pedestrians, learn to live it, learn to stick to the non cycle marked area of pavements, learn to buy a cycle and join the revolution.

Drivers want it, cyclist want it, you know it too. 🙂

i was thinking the same thing as i followed an old ctc type up my road the other day.

i was C. 1m from the kerb, a big 4x4 pulled out and round me and then in between me and the first cyclist.

the 4x4 then went to overtake cyclist, who was hugging the kerb, the 4x4 almost hit a refuge island and then had to brake suddenly and pull back in.

if the cyclist was further out the car would have never attempted that over take. the cyclist was encouraging bad driving imo.

I think that cycling and driving standards can only be improved together.

There isn't an answer. If the Government thought for a second it could regulate (and make money out of) cycling, it would have done so.

Compulsory coaching, a "bicycle test" etc would cost too much to implement - it needs facilities, coaches/officials who have been through all the training, not to mention the cost of deciding what that training should be, publishing it, promoting it, you're talking tens (if not hundreds) of millions of pounds for very little discernible benefit. Lets face it, there's a driving test yet there's still a huge number of shockingly shit drivers on the road. 😉

The old arguments about number plates, tax discs, insurance etc for cyclists have been discounted so many times it's not worth going into here.

Police can't even enforce existing traffic legislation and deal with the tens of thousands of untaxed/uninsured cars and drivers on the roads so introducing yet more legislation to stop a few errant cyclists isn't going to work. A decent crackdown by police (as they do occasionally) on RLJs is a good starting point but there's not enough police to do it everywhere (and personally I'm all in favour of police pulling cyclists for dangerous riding).

More education - hmm, but a lot of that is just going to be explaining to the car driver that actually, in the grand scheme of things, a cyclist (carefully) jumping a red light really isn't a crime. It doesn't inconvenience them, it's not (usually) dangerous so just let it go. All it does is reduce the motorist to an impotent raging blob, unable to move yet thinking that, because they've paid their "road tax" they *should* be able to move freely.

Live and let live. Behave to others as you would want them to behave to you. Hope for the best, expect the worst.

I certainly do not want to go down the licence and insure route. I don't think anyone has been able to make it work anyway.

Education for cyclists - but how to get it to the ones who need it most? The inattentive student and the aggressive adrenaline filled commuter?

I see cyclists who are clearly experienced and cycle a lot using the strangest road positions and not looking behind themselves ever. I nearly rode into one the other day.

Carrot and stick to increase the amount of folk taking up training - but what carrot and stick?

Hmm, Mental Mickey - serious?
So all those roads I ride along with junctions on the left... riding on the pavement, stopping at every junction...?

Education for cyclists - but how to get it to the ones who need it most? The inattentive student and the aggressive adrenaline filled commuter?

As we have seen in the fixie video and hopefully he will learn from it, getting squashed between a bus and a 4X4 should be the only education that plank will understand. He may be slightly less enthusiastic next time.

ban cycling let cars run them over on sight
TBH there are two problems niche cyclists in busy towns and non cyclists who own a bike.
one lot has no road skills because they are clueless the other dont care as they are so skilled they can avoid all danger.
No idea what the solution is tbh education of all road users? bit more space and sepration between the two users?

More people on bikes, fewer people in cars, is the answer.

You'll still get the odd stunt muppet mind.

The guy in the video was just an idiot. Police already check cyclists at junctions around Old Street in London.

IMO Much of the "bad cycling" is just people struggling to cycle on roads designed around the motorist. I've been cycling 15 years and i find it immensley difficult sometimes.

Its all very well to scoff at other peoples road position when your a bike enthusiast, but most people aren't and it would be good if they were still able to cycle around in safety. Thats not going to happen without some proper cycle infrastructure. Cycle lanes that are built to be safe and useful, rather than just slotted around everything else to fill some quota.

Oh and other cyclists giving bad cyclists abuse for riding like a moron works too - one chap on the Gloucester Rd in Bristol last year was so intent on hurling expletives at me for daring to suggest he should not RLJ he almost got run over. Which would have solved that particular problem nicely 😀

HoratioHufnagel

I was not intending to sneer at the bad road positioning - that one is simply a lack of education surely?

Lol @ ADH

Maybe* adopt a cycling policy from a country that has been reasonably successful integrated cycle network - Holland, springs to mind?

In the end its down to, £££ & I can never see a time where the public as a whole will swallow that pill, sadly.

*sorry, not clever enough to have a better answer 😉

DezB - Member
Hmm, Mental Mickey - serious?
So all those roads I ride along with junctions on the left... riding on the pavement, stopping at every

To be honest, the real solution would be cycle lanes on every road to help counteract that very problem you describe but that means widening all roads, not going to happen either.

I agree with the post that says 'there is no solution'. 🙂

What's the problem with riding though red lights anyway? People are able to tell when it's safe to go through so leave them to it. It should at least be legal to turn left through a (edit)red light providing you give way. We should be revoking laws not making more up

I think cycle education at school would be a start, I still base quite a bit of my life on things i learnt at school, like maths, speling, rolling doobies, ummm

Do you even get the cycle proficiency test these days? or do kids do it on a laptop or by text or something.

scottidog - Member
What's the problem with riding though red lights anyway?

One thing that pisses me off is seeing other cyclists jump red lights - there's no need, it pisses people off, motorists, pedestrians and the cyclists who DO stop at lights.

They don't gain anything except a few seconds, but are a potential accident.

the 4x4 then went to overtake cyclist, who was hugging the kerb, the 4x4 almost hit a refuge island and then had to brake suddenly and pull back in.

if the cyclist was further out the car would have never attempted that over take. the cyclist was encouraging bad driving imo.

Personally I see that as the $x$ driver being sh1t.

Not sure, as others have said, that there is a solution as such. It's down to people. More education may help cyclists when they are younger with their technique and to teach them the right road etiquette. But then it will still boil down to how individuals ride. Given the club I have recently joined and cycle with some seem to have no issue with batting down the footpaths, jumping red lights and generally riding as if they are the most important thing on the road / path / bridleway.

Given that all car drivers have been through (or should have been through) a formal test and a percentage of them drive in an inappropriate manner it would suggest that education won't work. Perhaps all we can do is ride in what we see is the right way and lead by example. If no one pays any attention then at least you can be comfortable (or unbearably smug) that you are "in the right"

From what I see, there are many many more [u]motorists[/u] who need educating.
Just one little incident from my ride home yesterday. But I'm sure the type of "cyclist" who would start a thread entitled "bad cycling" will think it was my fault. Ha.

[url] http://s142.photobucket.com/albums/r90/dezb99/Junk/?action=view&current=fiestaorseat.mp4 [/url]

cynic-al - Member
scottidog - Member
What's the problem with riding though red lights anyway?

Would you say that if cars did it

Cars are bigger, less manoeuvrable and cause more damage to things they hit for a start.

Some people are ****ing idiots. Some of them ride bikes. It's a bigger issue than just bad cycling!

Not a lot you can do about it really?

I guess this one has already been done but can't be bothered searching? [url]

What's the problem with riding though red lights anyway?

Would you say that if cars did it

Load of cars round here [i]do[/i] RLJ - almost as many as cycling RLJ'ers.

I'm hoping that more bikes + fewer cars = fewer traffic lights.

... but then we'd have the issue of cyclists running Zebra crossings.

Cars are bigger, less manoeuvrable and cause more damage to things they hit for a start.

Like a cyclist going through a red?

Need to vent some anger - cycling back from the physio and use a very wide cycle & pedestrian path. It was me against the college kids, I pinged my bell no movement, I shouted "move" still not movement. I would like to point out that they are walking towards me. When I knock them over like a strike in bowling - is that classed as bad cycling?

No - I think you get bonus points for that. Extra points if they have bad haircuts

It's a bit of a no-brainer - you want to cycle on the road with the motorists. Then obey the same laws they have to.

prezet - but the point is how do we get cyclist to ride safely skilfully and close to lawfully ( given that hardly a car ever completes a journey without breaking the law)

It's a bit of a no-brainer - you want to cycle on the road with the motorists. Then obey the same laws they have to.

We do, thanks. We're discussing how to get all people on bikes to do the same.

Like a cyclist going through a red?

100kg all up, 2 foot wide, 30mph to 0 in 10 feet, turning circle of 4 ft, capable of looking beyond the end of their nose. Versus 2 tonnes, 6 feet wide, 30mph to 0 in 5 hours, turning cicle of 1 nautical mile, blissfully unaware.

If streets were laid out for bikes, becuase the primary mode of transport in cities was bikes, not long car parks for cars, then we'd need about 1/10th of the amount of traffic lights currently used.

But the question is, how to get people to stop RLJ'ing, not what the relative consequences are.

prezet - Member
Cars are bigger, less manoeuvrable and cause more damage to things they hit for a start.

Like a cyclist going through a red?

Sorry, I don't get what you're implying?

Its a big problem. Whenever cycling comes into a conversation at work the conversation turns to how they are all law breaking red light jumpers.

When the majority of cyclists start respecting the laws of the road, drivers will start respecting our right to be on the road. You don't get cars jumping red lights just because they can see its clear to go.

And I don't think the argument that cyclists only endanger themselves by going through red lights has any weight either...if a driver finds a cyclist in his path, they have three options, brake, swerve or both. All three options (especially the third) have the potential to cause a crash between other cars or pedestrians. Its the same with irresponsible motorbikers...I'm only endangering myself, except when a car leaves the road trying to avoid the motorbike or the rider ends up headbutting the driver through the windscreen.

You don't get cars jumping red lights just because they can see its clear to go.

Just to re-iterate, you do. I see it every day.

Education and training from an early age and ongoing IMO.

A lot of what I call bad cycling - whether experienced people or newbies - I think comes from a lack of understanding of the law, their rights, and the dangers they are in. Of from a lack of confidence which also comes from a lack of understanding of how to ride assertively and defensively.

If you think about it, if some people are aware of how to cycle safely then it's possible for everyone to be aware how to cycle safely. The knowledge exists but not everyone has it.

Training and education transfers that knowledge to the cycling masses. Proven courses (Bikeability) already exist.

I guess the debate really has to be around how to fund it and whether it should be made compulsory.

The odd car going through on amber/red is a bit different to lingering over the line and then driving through a junction still on red.

Its very rare I see a car properly jump a red light, and usually its an inattentive driver rather than deliberate. The last deliberate jumper I saw was 18 months ago on a small cross roads, I sounded my horn as I stopped and at the same time the two cars crossing the crossroads both did an emergency stop with their horns going, the three of us scared the **** out of the driver and he ended up stuck in the middle of the junction 🙂

Actually there is an answer. It's general attitude. I reckon that within about 20 years (probably less in London) the entrenched attitude will have shifted enough for it to make a real difference.

Fuel isn't going to get any cheaper. More people are riding more and more. More cyclists on the roads = safer roads, motorists more used to seeing and dealing with cyclists etc.

What needs to change is the almost constant stream of stereotyped articles in certain areas of the press (yes Daily Mail, I'm thinking of you) portraying cyclists as a bunch of tax-dodging poor people who deliberately go round looking to run over old ladies and cut up those poor hard-done-by car drivers.

spooky_b329

When the majority of cyclists start respecting the laws of the road, drivers will start respecting our right to be on the road. You don't get cars jumping red lights just because they can see its clear to go.

I actually believe that one is the other way around - because of the lack of respect for cyclists they feel they have nothing to lose by ignoring traffic law.

RLJ can be done perfectly safely. Many junctions where you can see in all directions or where you can go thru on the greenman slowly and carefully

I am convinced at some badly designed junctions its safer to RLJ sometimes.

Crazy legs - I think I have seen an attitude shift in Edinburgh over 20 years as more folk cycle. Buses now are no great issue wheras they sued to be. Cycles ar so normal now on the roads.

When the majority of cyclists start respecting the laws of the road, drivers will start respecting our right to be on the road. You don't get cars jumping red lights just because they can see its clear to go.

I was in the middle of typing out a reply to this but TJ has summed it up far better. If you believe that motorists will suddenly give cyclists respect cos every rider obeys every single road traffic rule, you're very deluded.

The odd car going through on amber/red is a bit different to lingering over the line and then driving through a junction still on red.

How about the lights cycling red, then 2 or 3 cars driving through anyway?

Or driving through becuase you had to give way to an emergency vehicle and lost 'your' chance to slip through?

Or becuase everything is backed up apart from your lane, so you'll nip through while it is gridlocked?

Or nipping through on the buslane and veering back across?

Or using the left filter lane, then U turning round the reservation, then filtering left again?*

... and that is just on the RLJ question, pot calling the kettle black.

*this one is a favorite trick of mine on the bike now. I got the idea after watching a First Bristol Bus do it.

Good cycling.

There is a diffrence between poor cycling and reckless

Round here I don't see reckless riding

I think that in London the Police might need to patrol a few high profile spots. Catch the total idiots and fine them ot in pound their bikes for a bit

How about a change to the high way code so bicycles give way at red lights?

spooky_b329 - Member
The odd car going through on amber/red is a bit different to lingering over the line and then driving through a junction still on red.

Its very rare I see a car properly jump a red light, and usually its an inattentive driver rather than deliberate. The last deliberate jumper I saw was 18 months ago on a small cross roads,

You obviously don't live around here.

I have to cross a main road to take the kids to school and bring them home. I would say that I'll have about 20+ cars deliberately driving through the red lights per week, across a pedestrian crossing, sometimes stopping on the crossing itself in the queue of cars. I once counted 9 cars in a row going through the (very obvious) lights.

It's a problem to the extent that we have approached the police and council, and I will happily step back into the traffic to stop the RLJing car and point out what a moron the driver is.

The problem isn't purely at this set of lights - throughout Swansea you have to be careful when crossing a road on a green man.

And of course the relevance is that I don't care, really don't care whether it's a car or bike that jumps the lights - if they injure my kids, the only difference will be the severity.

In the STW perfect world a cyclist will scan for anybody waiting to cross, in the real world it won't happen.

Would I get shouted at if I suggested to a certain extent there is a reliance on Darwinian principles?

Darwin is too slow - and the merely incompetent - what about them?

If Darwin doesn't get them then they're competent enough.

We do, thanks. We're discussing how to get all people on bikes to do the same.

My point was aimed at the riders who seem to think it's acceptable to run red lights.

Sorry, I don't get what you're implying?

I was implying the damage they do when they do actually hit a rider who's run a red.

Even if car drivers are seen to run red, we shouldn't see it as a "if they can do it, why shouldn't I" attitude. We should be setting a good example to motorists, as well as other cyclists.

I have no hesitation to pull other riders up on running reds why I catch their slow arses up...

I believe discussing it at great length on a forum will sort it.

I have no hesitation to pull other riders up on running reds why I catch their slow arses up...

I want to see a big public info campaign aimed at pricking people's consciences. Aimed at BOTH motorists and cyclists. We're all in it together, less of this tribalism.

I've rode through about 40 million red lights in my time and never came close to causing an accident of any sort..I remain unconvinced that it's dangerous, wrong or even bad cycling..

I'm of the same view as Seosamh77.

I have never caused an accident or injury to others as a result of my riding.

I want to see a big public info campaign aimed at pricking people's consciences. Aimed at BOTH motorists and cyclists. We're all in it together, less of this tribalism.

I have never caused an accident or injury to others as a result of my riding.

No and I can sympathise with this but aren't you missing a bit of an important point? You are a road user and subject to the rules of the road. Whenever I get drawn into conversations with motorists about cycle use it's people like you that they use to support their arguments for regulation, segregation and banning outright.

I always stop at red lights, signal properly etc. Not because I want to, not because I have to. Because by playing the game I feel like I'm helping in some small way to get a bit more respect for me and fellow cyclists. Plus it's good for practising track stands.

Maybe I'm the mug and maybe my approach is naive. I cannot see cyclists ever being treated equally by road planners or the judiciary. We need to influence other road users first and foremost. After all they are the ones trying to kill us!

Personally i think the biggest issue is that cyclists aren't pedestrians and we aren't motorists, we inhabit the limbo inbetween.

Laws should probably be changed to reflect this as expecting us to follow every rule of the road and excluding us from pavements is probably unrealistic, so people follow what they feel is safe..

Change the law and advertise the **** out of it may be an idea, showing what you can/can't do.

For example of the top of my head: I reckon there are far too many red lights that really should be give ways for cyclists, easy enough to come up with simple rules much like you are taught as a child about crossing roads with out lights. Or that at busy periods some times it's acceptable to ride on the pavements and allow traffic to flow especially for slower riders. Riding 2 up during busy periods is unacceptable. When you ride on a pavement the pedestrian always has the right of way.. etc etc, really needs a proper group to have a look at it.. But as I say the current laws are unrealistic IMO, I know the rules of the road myself, well mostly, most of the time i choose to ignore them..

I'm of the same view as Seosamh77.

I have never caused an accident or injury to others as a result of my riding.

That's called 'tempting fate'.

So what if, as a result of obeying every single law of the road, I caused an accident or injury to someone? What would you say then? 'Tempting fate'?

I always stop at red lights, signal properly etc.

I usually stop at red lights. I only jump the ones where it's completely 100% safe to do so. I don't really care what the car drivers think. They're probbly too busy texting or fiddling with their sat-nav to notice me anyway, if my experiences are anything to go by. What I do doesn't affect how they view cyclists anyway. A carful considerate driver will always look out for cyclists and drive with appropriate caution. Saying that I might in some way 'set a bad example' is suggesting then that car drivers will then deliberately drive badly and dangerously around cyclists as a result. What utter nonsense. They just drive badly anyway, and want to foist the blame onto someone else. The cyclist is an easy target.

seosamh77 - Member
Personally i think the biggest issue is that cyclists aren't pedestrians and we aren't motorists, we inhabit the limbo inbetween.

You still haven't explained why any one set of road users should expect to be treated differently from other. If a bike can go through a red light when it seems to be safe for him, why can't a car? If there's a big enough gap for a bike, that's more than enough for a car. Oh hold on, it would turn into a free-for-all with everyone saying, 'well that gap is big enough for me'.

Or that at busy periods some times it's acceptable to ride on the pavements and allow traffic to flow especially for slower riders.

I'm waiting for the day when one of the dipstick pavement riders collides with my dog as I step out of my front door.

Seosamh, you are looking at road use in a very selfish way.

Pavements are bike free so that I can step out of my door in safety, can run across the road and onto the pavement without being hit by a bike who wasn't aware of my presence, can walk around the corner happily, etc, etc.

You still haven't explained why any one set of road users should expect to be treated differently from other.

It's quite obvious though really, isn't it? Come on, think about it.

I'm waiting for the day when one of the dipstick pavement riders collides with my dog as I step out of my front door.

And I'm waiting for the day some dipstick dog owner steps out in front of me with their stupid mutt not under proper control, oh no wait, that happens all the time.... 😐

You still haven't explained why any one set of road users should expect to be treated differently

Because they are different.

If a bike can go through a red light when it seems to be safe for him, why can't a car?

There's definitely a case for reviewing the laws for motorist too probably, I'm not a motorist though, so that's not my battle..

Seosamh, you are looking at road use in a very selfish way.

Yep same as every other road user out there.

Pavements are bike free so that I can step out of my door in safety

I'm waiting for the day when one of the dipstick pavement riders collides with my dog as I step out of my front door.

And I'm waiting for the day some dipstick dog owner steps out in front of me with their stupid mutt not under proper control, oh no wait, that happens all the time....

And if you are on the pavement it will be entirely your fault, obviously.

Erm, it happens on cycle paths, towpaths, roads, all over the place actually...

So, what exactly would you do if a cyclist ran into your precious hound whilst riding on a pavement then?

You still haven't explained why any one set of road users should expect to be treated differently from other. If a bike can go through a red light when it seems to be safe for him, why can't a car? If there's a big enough gap for a bike, that's more than enough for a car.

Last time I checked, my bike was a lot narrower than a car and fitted through gaps about 18" wide. I'm not going to try and fit my car through a gap like that. Bikes just merge with traffic, cars don't.

Modern roads, junctions, traffic lights are designed for cars. It's often safer and more convenient both for motorists and cyclists if the bike can just nip through [b]provided it's done safely[/b].
There's a right turn at a complicated junction with various light phases on my commute. It's FAR safer for me to jump the first set (when safe) then wait at the second, it buys me an extra 20m of clear road space. If I waited til the first set changed, I'd be trying to negotiate a narrow right hander on a very dodgy road surface with all the cars trying to get round me at the same time. If I jump the first set it means the drivers don't have to deal with a moving slalom post and I get some clear space.

No one is saying "ignore red lights, they don't matter". What people are saying is "red lights can, on occasion, be safely negotiated with care". Most motorists unfortunately only think "bastard cyclist jumping light" rather than thinking "oh, that kind considerate cyclist has actually got out of my way thus allowing me to proceed more quickly".