Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Recommended Posts

BigTone    4,318

Ok given the media coverage of that guy Charlie Alliston who killed a pedestrian while riding a bike with no brakes, I ask this question:

Should cyclists be required to take a test for a license, tax their bikes, MOT their bikes and have insurance in the same way that a vehicle driver must ?  Given my own experience of cyclists I have to answer with a very large YES.  One way streets are exactly that. Red lights are exactly that. Pavements are exactly that. Why is it different if you ride a bike ?

Rant over.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erithacus    178

Judging by the number of cars and drivers who fail to meet the legal requirements (like no tax, no insurance, no licence  :bruce_h4h:, and apart from the poor standards on the road) I suspect that any attempt to enforce the laws on cyclists will still not eradicate the small percentage of those who are the cause.  :sunwon:

Demanding the same sort of regulation for cyclists as motorists do now is asking for a very big effort and whole new layer of bureaucracy - payable from the public purse, no doubt.

It really boils down to the old verity: the law is irrelevant unless it is enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WTFiGO!?!    1,686

What they need to do Tone is ban thoughtless, selfish, idiots from the roads.  It would make it nice and clear for me then.

Edited by WTFiGO!?!
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
35 minutes ago, WTFiGO!?! said:

What they need to do Tone is ban thoughtless, selfish, idiots from the roads.  It would make it nice and clear for me then.

Yes, but then I won't be allowed to drive !!

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
40 minutes ago, Erithacus said:

 the law is irrelevant unless it is enforced.

Most cyclists seem to consider themselves above any law.  Use the roads then abide by the same laws as other users. Seems fair to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
43 minutes ago, Erithacus said:

 

Demanding the same sort of regulation for cyclists as motorists do now is asking for a very big effort and whole new layer of bureaucracy - payable from the public purse, no doubt.

 

No, its payable by the cyclists in the same way as it is other road users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sixtyseconds    470
15 minutes ago, BigTone said:

No, its payable by the cyclists in the same way as it is other road users.

Yep.

Based on emissions.

Bikes have nada.

19 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Most cyclists seem to consider themselves above any law. 

Some cyclists do.

I do 100%.

One interface with Mrs Rimhole running my bike over in her death machine while I went into full break fall when I was obeying the law leads me to ...

Preserve life.

Use the pavement.

Use the red light.

I NAVIGATE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robbored    4,243
2 hours ago, BigTone said:

Ok given the media coverage of that guy Charlie Alliston who killed a pedestrian while riding a bike with no brakes, I ask this question:

Should cyclists be required to take a test for a license, tax their bikes, MOT their bikes and have insurance in the same way that a vehicle driver must ?  Given my own experience of cyclists I have to answer with a very large YES.  One way streets are exactly that. Red lights are exactly that. Pavements are exactly that. Why is it different if you ride a bike ?

Rant over.

I'm 100% in agreement Tone.

Living in country as I do il'd add horses to those that should pay road tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
34 minutes ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Yep.

Based on emissions.

Bikes have nada.

Some cyclists do.

I do 100%.

One interface with Mrs Rimhole running my bike over in her death machine while I went into full break fall when I was obeying the law leads me to ...

Preserve life.

Use the pavement.

Use the red light.

I NAVIGATE.

Lady leaves shop and looks to walk across one way street. Cyclist coming in the wrong direction creams her and puts her in hospital. He can't see what he has done wrong and wants to leave the scene. Myself and several others prevent this until the police arrive. Lady in question suffers several fractures.

Don't use the old emissions excuse because it is bull shite and you know it.

Pavements are for pedestrians.  Red lights are to be obeyed. If you don't know or understand the rules of the road then don't use it. You NAVIGATE what exactly ?

You Sir are a classic example of why cyclists should be licensed and you quite happily admit to being above the law ........... unbelievable attitude.

Are you like the Alliston idiot who would then shout abuse at his dying victim in the road ?  Something tells me you probably would and would talk yourself into believing you are in the right.

Edited by BigTone
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
8 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I'm 100% in agreement Tone.

Living in country as I do il'd add horses to those that should pay road tax.

Why not ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sixtyseconds    470
2 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Lady leaves shop and looks to walk across one way street. Cyclist coming in the wrong direction creams her and puts her in hospital. He can't see what he has done wrong and wants to leave the scene. Myself and several others prevent this until the police arrive. Lady in question suffers several fractures.

Don't use the old emissions excuse because it is bull shite and you know it.

Pavements are for pedestrians.

You Sir are a classic example of why cyclists should be licensed and you admit to being above the law ........... unbelievable attitude.

Nah..

Emissions is truth and you know it carbon head.

But its only health and asthma is no care of yours. 

The weapon of choice for a nutjob terrorist is now a vehicle.

Not a bike.

Turn the dial to left a bit and nutjobs are still there cocooned in their metal ... And behaving as they would never outside of their motor.

Get on your bike and that threat is always there.

The menace hangs with the carbon in the air.

Drivers want IQ testing and psychological profiling ... Lot of potential criminal yet to be apprehended the moment the motor kicks over.

I Sir on anther day am a classic could have been a fatality .. Got lucky that day ... Bike was beyond repair ... My torso is less resilient. ... PAVEMENT HERE I COME when my in built risk assessment says so.

Your car driven rage looking at fellow humans as targets is the reason why millions don't cycle, and millions cycle in manner to avoid those in vehicles stopping those from cycling.

No problem with cyclists REAL irresponsiblity being dealt with.

Will admit to a bit of community action myself when a van driver hurled rubbish at pedestrians heads.

Another who needed profiling.

 

  • Rubbish 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
2 minutes ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Nah..

Emissions is truth and you know it carbon head.

But its only health and asthma is no care of yours. 

The weapon of choice for a nutjob terrorist is now a vehicle.

Not a bike.

Turn the dial to left a bit and nutjobs are still there cocooned in their metal ... And behaving as they would never outside of their motor.

Get on your bike and that threat is always there.

The menace hangs with the carbon in the air.

Drivers want IQ testing and psychological profiling ... Lot of potential criminal yet to be apprehended the moment the motor kicks over.

I Sir on anther day am a classic could have been a fatality .. Got lucky that day ... Bike was beyond repair ... My torso is less resilient. ... PAVEMENT HERE I COME when my in built risk assessment says so.

Your car driven rage looking at fellow humans as targets is the reason why millions don't cycle, and millions cycle in manner to avoid those in vehicles stopping those from cycling.

No problem with cyclists REAL irresponsiblity being dealt with.

Will admit to a bit of community action myself when a van driver hurled rubbish at pedestrians heads.

Another who needed profiling.

 

You really should go back over what you have written and understand where you are going wrong.  You have an unbelievable attitude especially when comparing everything with a terrorist. There is only one nutjob here and you Sir are it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Juan Kerr    3,372
1 hour ago, BigTone said:

Why not ?

Judging by what drops out of their arses, horses would fail an emissions test.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Red Right Hand    8,744
20 minutes ago, Juan Kerr said:

Judging by what drops out of their arses, horses would fail an emissions test.

It was certainly a bit of an obstacle course exiting the Lansdown on Friday night in the dark with huge lumps of equine turds spread everywhere!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Yep.

Based on emissions.

Bikes have nada.

Some cyclists do.

I do 100%.

One interface with Mrs Rimhole running my bike over in her death machine while I went into full break fall when I was obeying the law leads me to ...

Preserve life.

Use the pavement.

Use the red light.

I NAVIGATE.

Dicks who mount the pavement should be charged with riding without due care and attention. Dicks who ride on the road where there is a cycle lane should be charged with being ******* stupid.

 

Next time you navigate the pavement then be prepared to navigate your way to hospital, class one cock

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sixtyseconds    470
10 hours ago, kevinmabbuttshair said:

Dicks who mount the pavement should be charged with riding without due care and attention. Dicks who ride on the road where there is a cycle lane should be charged with being ******* stupid.

 

Next time you navigate the pavement then be prepared to navigate your way to hospital, class one cock

Hardman eh ..

Tough guy.

Almost wishing harm on others.

Or did.

Hospital

Teeny weensy thoughts on a forum made you angry.

And that karma is allowed to drive.

And that is the problem.

The pavement frequently offers safety from that.

 

 

 

  • Snake 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sixtyseconds    470
15 hours ago, BigTone said:

You really should go back over what you have written and understand where you are going wrong.  You have an unbelievable attitude especially when comparing everything with a terrorist. There is only one nutjob here and you Sir are it.

Simple analogy.

Bikes are not used as weapons.

Vehicles are.

Bike v car only one winner there.

Its the power your have.

Your merry first post.

No thought for why or kids or anything.

Don't like cyclists.

Hate even.

I like drivers .. Most of them. 

Don't hate anybody.

But cyclists have to contend with people who change the moment they sit behind that wheel. 

Its why Bristol is covered in speed bumps.

20 signs.

Cycle paths to go round you. avoid you.

People change the moment they sit behind that wheel.

The road is no communal space.

Because there is communal thought.

Many car drivers are contestants, contesting merging into lanes with anger in their minds, finger on the horn, hand signs at the ready ...  

And at times it is sensible to use what ever is there to avoid the really rotten ones.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Sixtyseconds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eddie Hitler    2,034

Your attitude to cyclists depends upon where you live.

When I lived in central London I thought that cyclists were selfish, arrogant, and dangerous.  Because they were.

Now I live in a small town I find cyclists pleasant and considerate. Sure they cycle on pavements as it's safer for them, but slowly and even more slowly when coming up to people.  They will even stop.  Red lights are obeyed 

I have even been known to cycle myself.

 

So back to the OP I would require these things to ride bikes in zones in busy city centres but not as a general requirement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
2 hours ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Simple analogy.

Bikes are not used as weapons.   - Tell that to the family of Charlie Allistons victim

Vehicles are.      - many things can be used as a weapon

Bike v car only one winner there.     - why so ?

Its the power your have.     - nonsensical comment 

Your merry first post.   - and your point is ?

No thought for why or kids or anything.   - kids should be taught how to ride and the rules of the road same as anyone else

Don't like cyclists.   - nonsensical comment

Hate even.   - nonsensical comment

I like drivers .. Most of them.   - good for you

Don't hate anybody.  - good for you

But cyclists have to contend with people who change the moment they sit behind that wheel.   - nonsensical comment

Its why Bristol is covered in speed bumps.   -  and your point is ?

20 signs.   - nonsensical comment

Cycle paths to go round you. avoid you.  - nonsensical comment

People change the moment they sit behind that wheel.  - nonsensical comment

The road is no communal space.  - nonsensical comment

Because there is communal thought.  - nonsensical comment

Many car drivers are contestants, contesting merging into lanes with anger in their minds, finger on the horn, hand signs at the ready ...   - and bike riders don't ??

And at times it is sensible to use what ever is there to avoid the really rotten ones.  - not if putting others at risk

 

 

 

 

Interesting posts always done in a Power Point format using bullet points to try and push the point of view home. Problem is most of the points make no sense.

Edited by BigTone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
1 hour ago, Eddie Hitler said:

Your attitude to cyclists depends upon where you live.

When I lived in central London I thought that cyclists were selfish, arrogant, and dangerous.  Because they were.

Now I live in a small town I find cyclists pleasant and considerate. Sure they cycle on pavements as it's safer for them, but slowly and even more slowly when coming up to people.  They will even stop.  Red lights are obeyed 

I have even been known to cycle myself.

 

So back to the OP I would require these things to ride bikes in zones in busy city centres but not as a general requirement.

I would go along with that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhistleHappy    3,878

Thankfully the tragic accident referred to in the opening post is a rarity and most cycling accidents if fatal involve the cyclists themselves... (cycle at your own risk sort of thing as its always been).

By far the most annoying kind of vehicle/pedestrian/cycle incidents are of a more trivial nature (& if the law took more robust and positive action regarding law breaking cyclists... no lights, ignoring rules of the road, riding on footpaths etc... there would be far fewer of these incidents occurring) come on Police, when was the last time you actually took action in these cases? You see it everyday the same as the rest of us so get your bloody books out and start prosecuting/issuing fixed penalties... please!

For motorists the bloody annoying and expensive consequences of cycle/vehicle scrapes are usually busted light clusters, damaged paintwork and smashed off door mirrors, accidents often caused by anonymous cyclists when cars are parked, or in traffic when the unknown cyclist makes off leaving a driver helpless to stop them and with a costly repair bill.

I've often thought that cyclists should be registered and have compulsory third party annual insurance cover (shouldn't be too costly) . The insurance and registration being personal to the cyclist themselves not the bike.

Registered cyclists should have a personal registration id number (similar to the lucence plate on vehicles) and this number should be printed clearly onto hi vis vests which MUST BE WORN every time the cyclist takes to the road (an offence if caught riding without it) .... this way the anonymity of cyclists involved in minor, but costly, accidents would be less of an issue because hopefully there would be no point in riding off as chances are someone would have noted their reg number anyway.. and their third party insurance will pick up the tab..

Similarly other road 'offences' would be easier for police to follow up, and penalties for wearing false reg numbers should be severe, or riders without vests would be instantly stoppable and dealt with.

I'm sure a scheme similar to the above would work and is what is needed today on Britains hectic roads. (prob needs tweaking a bit but its workable) isn't it?

Most sensible and honest cyclists wouldn't have a problem (they'd be safer thanks to compulsory hi vis vests for one thing), they wouldn't necessarily welcome the small insurance charges but must see the sense and fairness to other road users of it, the idiot unregistered/insured cyclists would soon feel the deterrent effect once they get a fixed penalty or two.

Who knows it could even begin to make relationships between the various road users/payers a bit less resentful..

(car drivers who sometimes take to peddle power could prob have bike cover added to their existing car insurance for a nominal extra..)

Penalties for non compliance must be strict though and the police would have to be 'on it' ....

 

That's my thoughts anyway, for what they're worth... :sunwon:

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhistleHappy    3,878
15 hours ago, Red Right Hand said:

It was certainly a bit of an obstacle course exiting the Lansdown on Friday night in the dark with huge lumps of equine turds spread everywhere!

It's never good when the shit hits the fans!

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
6 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

Thankfully the tragic accident referred to in the opening post is a rarity and most cycling accidents if fatal involve the cyclists themselves... (cycle at your own risk sort of thing as its always been).

By far the most annoying kind of vehicle/pedestrian/cycle incidents are of a more trivial nature (& if the law took more robust and positive action regarding law breaking cyclists... no lights, ignoring rules of the road, riding on footpaths etc... there would be far fewer of these incidents occurring) come on Police, when was the last time you actually took action in these cases? You see it everyday the same as the rest of us so get your bloody books out and start prosecuting/issuing fixed penalties... please!

For motorists the bloody annoying and expensive consequences of cycle/vehicle scrapes are usually busted light clusters, damaged paintwork and smashed off door mirrors, accidents often caused by anonymous cyclists when cars are parked, or in traffic when the unknown cyclist makes off leaving a driver helpless to stop them and with a costly repair bill.

I've often thought that cyclists should be registered and have compulsory third party annual insurance cover (shouldn't be too costly) . The insurance and registration being personal to the cyclist themselves not the bike.

Registered cyclists should have a personal registration id number (similar to the lucence plate on vehicles) and this number should be printed clearly onto hi vis vests which MUST BE WORN every time the cyclist takes to the road (an offence if caught riding without it) .... this way the anonymity of cyclists involved in minor, but costly, accidents would be less of an issue because hopefully there would be no point in riding off as chances are someone would have noted their reg number anyway.. and their third party insurance will pick up the tab..

Similarly other road 'offences' would be easier for police to follow up, and penalties for wearing false reg numbers should be severe, or riders without vests would be instantly stoppable and dealt with.

I'm sure a scheme similar to the above would work and is what is needed today on Britains hectic roads. (prob needs tweaking a bit but its workable) isn't it?

Most sensible and honest cyclists wouldn't have a problem (they'd be safer thanks to compulsory hi vis vests for one thing), they wouldn't necessarily welcome the small insurance charges but must see the sense and fairness to other road users of it, the idiot unregistered/insured cyclists would soon feel the deterrent effect once they get a fixed penalty or two.

Who knows it could even begin to make relationships between the various road users/payers a bit less resentful..

(car drivers who sometimes take to peddle power could prob have bike cover added to their existing car insurance for a nominal extra..)

Penalties for non compliance must be strict though and the police would have to be 'on it' ....

 

That's my thoughts anyway, for what they're worth... :sunwon:

 

 

You've got my vote  :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowshed    889
6 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

Thankfully the tragic accident referred to in the opening post is a rarity and most cycling accidents if fatal involve the cyclists themselves... (cycle at your own risk sort of thing as its always been).

By far the most annoying kind of vehicle/pedestrian/cycle incidents are of a more trivial nature (& if the law took more robust and positive action regarding law breaking cyclists... no lights, ignoring rules of the road, riding on footpaths etc... there would be far fewer of these incidents occurring) come on Police, when was the last time you actually took action in these cases? You see it everyday the same as the rest of us so get your bloody books out and start prosecuting/issuing fixed penalties... please!

For motorists the bloody annoying and expensive consequences of cycle/vehicle scrapes are usually busted light clusters, damaged paintwork and smashed off door mirrors, accidents often caused by anonymous cyclists when cars are parked, or in traffic when the unknown cyclist makes off leaving a driver helpless to stop them and with a costly repair bill.

I've often thought that cyclists should be registered and have compulsory third party annual insurance cover (shouldn't be too costly) . The insurance and registration being personal to the cyclist themselves not the bike.

Registered cyclists should have a personal registration id number (similar to the lucence plate on vehicles) and this number should be printed clearly onto hi vis vests which MUST BE WORN every time the cyclist takes to the road (an offence if caught riding without it) .... this way the anonymity of cyclists involved in minor, but costly, accidents would be less of an issue because hopefully there would be no point in riding off as chances are someone would have noted their reg number anyway.. and their third party insurance will pick up the tab..

Similarly other road 'offences' would be easier for police to follow up, and penalties for wearing false reg numbers should be severe, or riders without vests would be instantly stoppable and dealt with.

I'm sure a scheme similar to the above would work and is what is needed today on Britains hectic roads. (prob needs tweaking a bit but its workable) isn't it?

Most sensible and honest cyclists wouldn't have a problem (they'd be safer thanks to compulsory hi vis vests for one thing), they wouldn't necessarily welcome the small insurance charges but must see the sense and fairness to other road users of it, the idiot unregistered/insured cyclists would soon feel the deterrent effect once they get a fixed penalty or two.

Who knows it could even begin to make relationships between the various road users/payers a bit less resentful..

(car drivers who sometimes take to peddle power could prob have bike cover added to their existing car insurance for a nominal extra..)

Penalties for non compliance must be strict though and the police would have to be 'on it' ....

 

That's my thoughts anyway, for what they're worth... :sunwon:

 

 

As somebody involved in sport via employment one of the areas I want more people involved in physical activity.

The reality is that individuals such as myself who want kids to be playing football and sports that are multi lateral is we do not recommend cycling. Its a non activity, a non considerable for many parents. Bristol's roads are too dangerous for children.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhistleHappy    3,878
6 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

As somebody involved in sport via employment one of the areas I want more people involved in physical activity.

The reality is that individuals such as myself who want kids to be playing football and sports that are multi lateral is we do not recommend cycling. Its a non activity, a non considerable for many parents. Bristol's roads are too dangerous for children.  

Agreed, any 'parent' who allows their child to ride on Britains crazy roads nowadays deserve a visit from social services.

....& wtf those 'right on'  hippy throwbacks that tow their toddlers around town behind their bloody pushbikes in those dumb ass trailer carts (safe in the knowledge that the safety flag behind them held aloft on a flexi flag pole, is keeping little Tarquin perfectly safe) are thinking #### only knows!  ...  ''That's it Tarqs get a good healthy lungfull of 'fresh air''   cough, splutter.

  bike-trailer.jpg How are these even allowed in todays health and safety obsessed Britain?

 

Take the kids and their bikes along the relatively safe network of cycle paths but ffs keep 'em well away from and off the bloody roads.!!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowshed    889
36 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

Agreed, any 'parent' who allows their child to ride on Britains crazy roads nowadays deserve a visit from social services.

....& wtf those 'right on'  hippy throwbacks that tow their toddlers around town behind their bloody pushbikes in those dumb ass trailer carts (safe in the knowledge that the safety flag behind them held aloft on a flexi flag pole, is keeping little Tarquin perfectly safe) are thinking #### only knows!  ...  ''That's it Tarqs get a good healthy lungfull of 'fresh air''   cough, splutter.

  bike-trailer.jpg How are these even allowed in todays health and safety obsessed Britain?

 

Take the kids and their bikes along the relatively safe network of cycle paths but ffs keep 'em well away from and off the bloody roads.!!!

And the irony is you will often have to drive to the cycle paths.

As a family who own a vehicle and bicycles I am the only one who cycles on the road, my family are too fearful to do likewise, I do this in the knowledge that what I do is the most dangerous activity I will do in my life, because my safety is not determined by myself.

Nowhere in my life do I face such risk and draw others animosity. Drivers being aggressive to other drivers is something we will all frequently witness, but my experience is that this animosity is multiplied on a bicycle often for no reason beyond drivers territorial attitude to the road.

Grown up discussion should always start with what is the worst that could happen to you. In a car generally not a lot versus a cyclist, the cyclist versus any vehicle?  

Edited by Cowshed
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
21 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

 

Grown up discussion should always start with what is the worst that could happen to you. In a car generally not lot, on a bicycle?  

2 questions:

1) How many people do you know killed in a car ?

2) How many people do you know killed on a bike ?

The point of my original post was simply that cyclists should be treated no different to any other road users. They should be licensed and insurance should be mandatory as it is for all other vehicles.  As mentioned in a previous post I have witnessed an accident involving a bike that put an innocent pedestrian in hospital with possibly life changing injuries.

Answering my own questions above:

1) Well into double figures

2) Zero

But hey, I appreciate that's just my experience.

Edited by BigTone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowshed    889
11 minutes ago, BigTone said:

2 questions:

1) How many people do you know killed in a car ?

2) How many people do you know killed on a bike ?

The point of my original post was simply that cyclists should be treated no different to any other road users. They should be licensed and insurance should be mandatory as it is for all other vehicles.  As mentioned in a previous post I have witnessed an accident involving a bike that put an innocent pedestrian in hospital with possibly life changing injuries.

Answering my own questions above:

1) Well into double figures

2) Zero

But hey, I appreciate that's just my experience.

You ignored the points in my post.

None (knowing) in answer to both of your questions.

I know two people killed on motorbikes in collisions with cars. 

How many cyclist do I know who were hit by vehicles due to no fault of their own. Quite a few. How many cyclist do I know who came off worse v vehicles. All of them. How many cyclist do I know who were hit by vehicles due to no fault of their own and had serious injuries several. Drivers injured v bicycles? Nil.

Cyclists are seen by too many drivers as the enemy.  As I cyclist I experience that.  I have been abused by drivers for obeying the law on the road. I experience aggression from vehicle drivers for obeying the law on the road. I have had to evade vehicles being driven at speed through cycle paths, it is a common occurrence. Confrontation with vehicle drivers for no reason beyond you occupy their road goes with cycling. This is monthly, weekly. That is the reality.

Cycling around Cities is a test of what nerve you have. Some people are scared of heights. People (many) do not dream of cycling around a City and many Towns due to the risk.

As another poster stated crazy roads, no place for kids. Too dangerous. He was not making it up. That is the reality. That is what society has lost due to the attitude of too many drivers. 

There is no parity for the cyclist.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhistleHappy    3,878

Conclusion.... Roads are dangerous places... avoid if possible, use appropriate forms of transport if not...

A nice walk along a beach in sandals us lovely... trekking uo a mountain path your likely to break a leg in those sandals, so keep off the mountain or wear appropriate boots...

In other words if there's a nice safe pavement -enjoy a walk ... 

If the road is too dangerous to safely cycle on... get off of yer bike and bloody walk, for your own and everyone else safety.

Driving motor vehicles of all descriptions on over crowded roads is a hazardous often unavoidable necessity, drivers often need eyes in the back of their heads, in poor light conditions especially when dark and drizzly it s hard enough as it is without unexpected almost invisible (even with oft missing cycle lights switched on)  cycles suddenly appearing out of the gloom from unexpected directions.... for Gods sake (& your own) get off your bikes and walk or jumps on a bus, why risk avoidable stress and injury 'just because you can'? 

If you want to walk uo that mountain in your sandals ( because you can & its your right, & no one can stop you) then go ahead ,  go bare foot if you want... but the fact remains is you'd be an idiot doing a risky thing..  Just because roads exist and its your right to use them doesn't mean its a sensible thing to do when conditions aren't good.

Got a boat? Great enjoy it, but when the sea gets rough only a tosser would leave the harbour just because you can.

It all boils down to that rare commodity, ..common sense & having respect for those around you and the circumstances they are dealing with.

Trouble ?... its ALWAYS best avoided when possible, regardless of rights and wrongs.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
51 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

You ignored the points in my post.

None (knowing) in answer to both of your questions.

I know two people killed on motorbikes in collisions with cars. 

How many cyclist do I know who were hit by vehicles due to no fault of their own. Quite a few. How many cyclist do I know who came off worse v vehicles. All of them. How many cyclist do I know who were hit by vehicles due to no fault of their own and had serious injuries several. Drivers injured v bicycles? Nil.

Cyclists are seen by too many drivers as the enemy.  As I cyclist I experience that.  I have been abused by drivers for obeying the law on the road. I experience aggression from vehicle drivers for obeying the law on the road. I have had to evade vehicles being driven at speed through cycle paths, it is a common occurrence. Confrontation with vehicle drivers for no reason beyond you occupy their road goes with cycling. This is monthly, weekly. That is the reality.

Cycling around Cities is a test of what nerve you have. Some people are scared of heights. People (many) do not dream of cycling around a City and many Towns due to the risk.

As another poster stated crazy roads, no place for kids. Too dangerous. He was not making it up. That is the reality. That is what society has lost due to the attitude of too many drivers. 

There is no parity for the cyclist.

 

No, I didn't ignore the points in your post but instead answered them. You stated quite clearly that a lot less is likely to happen to someone in a car than on a bike. I simply asked the question to what was a somewhat generalised statement.

Anyway, back to the point of my original post which seems to have been lost with the "everyone hates cyclists" brigade. I have no concern over how many cyclists use the road, however I do believe that they should be licensed, taxed and have insurance.  I understand fully that roads are dangerous places hence the reason I believe this.

Edited by BigTone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
54 minutes ago, WhistleHappy said:

Conclusion.... Roads are dangerous places... avoid if possible, use appropriate forms of transport if not...

A nice walk along a beach in sandals us lovely... trekking uo a mountain path your likely to break a leg in those sandals, so keep off the mountain or wear appropriate boots...

In other words if there's a nice safe pavement -enjoy a walk ... 

If the road is too dangerous to safely cycle on... get off of yer bike and bloody walk, for your own and everyone else safety.

Driving motor vehicles of all descriptions on over crowded roads is a hazardous often unavoidable necessity, drivers often need eyes in the back of their heads, in poor light conditions especially when dark and drizzly it s hard enough as it is without unexpected almost invisible (even with oft missing cycle lights switched on)  cycles suddenly appearing out of the gloom from unexpected directions.... for Gods sake (& your own) get off your bikes and walk or jumps on a bus, why risk avoidable stress and injury 'just because you can'? 

If you want to walk uo that mountain in your sandals ( because you can & its your right, & no one can stop you) then go ahead ,  go bare foot if you want... but the fact remains is you'd be an idiot doing a risky thing..  Just because roads exist and its your right to use them doesn't mean its a sensible thing to do when conditions aren't good.

Got a boat? Great enjoy it, but when the sea gets rough only a tosser would leave the harbour just because you can.

It all boils down to that rare commodity, ..common sense & having respect for those around you and the circumstances they are dealing with.

Trouble ?... its ALWAYS best avoided when possible, regardless of rights and wrongs.

 

 

Do we have parking for boats at Ashton Gate ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhistleHappy    3,878
36 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Do we have parking for boats at Ashton Gate ?

Psst, Dolly has the keys, she done a deal with Scotty,  not a lot of people know that, anyway if you approach slowly astern, weigh your anchor, as it were, I reckon she'll open the Gate for you Tone probsbly let you in the back way, ease gently into your docking position and tie her up... get it right first time and from then on it'll be all plain sailing, keep it to yourself Tone cos they don't want to harbour wrong 'Un's.  I've been on the port all afternoon! :) 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
1 hour ago, WhistleHappy said:

Psst, Dolly has the keys, she done a deal with Scotty,  not a lot of people know that, anyway if you approach slowly astern, weigh your anchor, as it were, I reckon she'll open the Gate for you Tone probsbly let you in the back way, ease gently into your docking position and tie her up... get it right first time and from then on it'll be all plain sailing, keep it to yourself Tone cos they don't want to harbour wrong 'Un's.  I've been on the port all afternoon! :) 

Do I need her to lower her Spinknickers first ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WTFiGO!?!    1,686

I've got in from visiting some friends tonight, cycling along the pavement from about two miles away.  Fourty minutes on foot was probably done in ten or fifteen.

The one pedestrian I encountered acknowledged me, we both moved slightly to our rights, I slowed down and we passed as amicably as ever.

An ample number of cars bombed by on a fairly busy inner-city B Road.  

What's the problem, man?  I'm home 1/2 hour earlier, have 1/2 hour more down time before sleep and will be presumably 1/2 hour more productive in societies sausage factory tomorrow.  

The motorists weren't pissed off as I wasn't in their way, neither was I putting my life at risk being in their way. 

The on-foot pedestrians are cool, as I respect them.

All good, man.  Chill, Tone.

Bollox do I use busy roads or go into town on my bike, though.  

Edited by WTFiGO!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WTFiGO!?!    1,686

Have a glass of your red and get back to some serious Syd Barrett and Pink Floyd, man. Seriously.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
8 hours ago, WTFiGO!?! said:

 

The on-foot pedestrians are cool, as I respect them.

All good, man.  Chill, Tone.

 

No problem, I'm chilled, but still I refer to my original post and the question I posed

Edited by BigTone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
4 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

If you are bringing any oars with you, take special care of your rowlocks.

Do I use WD40 or a big knob of grease ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
24 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

The oars would probably prefer a big knob.

A knob it is then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
City Rocker    945
On ‎27‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 18:26, Sixtyseconds said:

Nah..

Emissions is truth and you know it carbon head.

But its only health and asthma is no care of yours. 

The weapon of choice for a nutjob terrorist is now a vehicle.

Not a bike.

Turn the dial to left a bit and nutjobs are still there cocooned in their metal ... And behaving as they would never outside of their motor.

Get on your bike and that threat is always there.

The menace hangs with the carbon in the air.

Drivers want IQ testing and psychological profiling ... Lot of potential criminal yet to be apprehended the moment the motor kicks over.

I Sir on anther day am a classic could have been a fatality .. Got lucky that day ... Bike was beyond repair ... My torso is less resilient. ... PAVEMENT HERE I COME when my in built risk assessment says so.

Your car driven rage looking at fellow humans as targets is the reason why millions don't cycle, and millions cycle in manner to avoid those in vehicles stopping those from cycling.

No problem with cyclists REAL irresponsiblity being dealt with.

Will admit to a bit of community action myself when a van driver hurled rubbish at pedestrians heads.

Another who needed profiling.

 

You don't need to be on one side or the other, in fact those with the extreme militant point of view like this are a big part of the problem IMO. Like lots of people, at various different times I'm a pedestrian, a cyclist and a motorist. And like the majority, I'm calm and courteous whichever mode I'm using at the time.

I do think though that cyclists in general need to get with the common etiquette of road use. If I'm approaching a left hand junction on my bike, and a car travelling in the same direction just ahead of me has stopped to allow an oncoming car to turn right, I too will stop to allow the car to turn right. Why wouldn't I? Avoids risk for me, and just good manners. Yet I seem to be about the only cyclist in Bristol who is even aware this is going on, and it happens multiple time on every journey.

If I'm riding along a narrow road with cars parked on both sides, and a car is driving behind me waiting to get past, I'll pull over and let them pass. I would feel incredibly selfish making them wait and much more comfortable once the car has gone on its way. Very few cyclists do this though. I also stop at red traffic lights while others sprint past into the unknown perils of the junction.

So yes, for me, compulsory training and regulation for cyclists would be a good idea.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WTFiGO!?!    1,686
1 hour ago, BigTone said:

No problem, I'm chilled, but still I refer to my original post and the question I posed

It's an emphatic no from me, Tone.  

Why not also tax those pesky pedestrians for their continually clogging up of the pavements and their making the traffic stop so that they can cross the road?  

I'm with you on the pain in the arse cyclists who try to compete on busy roads with combustion engines but by doing what you and Whistle Happy are proposing would penalise the majority, for whom are not a pain in the arse.

Spot on City Rocker: I'll always take the quiet route where possible, pull in for cars etc.  Why oh why some cyclists even try to compete on an even-footing with cars re speed is beyond me.  

 

Edited by WTFiGO!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
!james    766

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41036581

Its ******* idiots like this that wind me up. 

Quote

"I didn't actually know it was against the law until this case," he says.

He does admit you "can probably slow down quicker with a front brake".

But Michael does not believe he is taking a risk: "I wouldn't ride it if I felt there was a risk to others."

He does concede that it makes riding "exciting" and "fun"

Following the case, Michael is planning to get a brake fitted. But this isn't for the reason you might think.

"I'm worried going out on my bike, that the police are going to take my bike off me and then I won't be able to work," he says.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My issue is that is you make cycling any harder then less people will keep at it. Bristol is one of the most congested cities in the UK and less cyclists means more cars, which in turn makes more traffic.  

As someone who cycles and drives both a car and motorbike, the group I have the biggest issue with in terms of most near misses is car drivers. Car drivers seem to have a very linear view of driving, one behind the other. Bikes of all kinds however can flow through the traffic which car drivers don't often expect. This lack of expectancy however is almost always the car drivers fault (exceptions may include a bike undertaking a car indicating left). If there is a gap, there may be a bike. 

I'd make it compulsory for School children to take a cycling proficiency test and also extend the driving test to include how to treat cyclists. There is fault on both sides, the difference is that while cyclists tend to be inconsiderate (the news story is a very isolated case of death caused by cycling), car divers' ignorance and stupidity make up the majority of the 1750 deaths every year on UK roads. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SARJ    625
On 8/27/2017 at 18:06, BigTone said:

Lady leaves shop and looks to walk across one way street. Cyclist coming in the wrong direction creams her and puts her in hospital. He can't see what he has done wrong and wants to leave the scene. Myself and several others prevent this until the police arrive. Lady in question suffers several fractures.

Don't use the old emissions excuse because it is bull shite and you know it.

Pavements are for pedestrians.  Red lights are to be obeyed. If you don't know or understand the rules of the road then don't use it. You NAVIGATE what exactly ?

You Sir are a classic example of why cyclists should be licensed and you quite happily admit to being above the law ........... unbelievable attitude.

Are you like the Alliston idiot who would then shout abuse at his dying victim in the road ?  Something tells me you probably would and would talk yourself into believing you are in the right.

Well said Tone.

Last year I sadly almost killed a cyclist on the A369 from Portishead to Bristol, near Beggar Bush Lane where there is the traffic lighted 3 way junction. 

I was driving my car within the speed limit and went through a green traffic light. A cyclist coming up Beggar Bush Lane went through a red light. I had to swerve to narrowly miss him, cyclist fell off his bike, his lycra suit all torn and his body suffered terrible scratches as he skid and fell off the road onto the pavement.

I stopped, got out the car and went to assist only to be given a mouthful of abuse about driving "like an idiot". When I tried to explain it was green light and the cyclist had gone through a red light he wasn't having any of it. Other cars who'd also stopped kindly backed up my version of events only to be told to "**** off" by the wannabe Bradley Wiggins who spent most of the rant asking if I knew how much his lycra cycling suit and shoes cost and how he'd have to fork out for new gear.

From that day on I've had no sympathy. Cyclists who choose to use the road rather than cycle paths should be insured and taxed. I also think hi-vis jackets should be compulsory for the safety of all.

 

P.S. I'd like to add, in the above story, there is a cycle path running the entire way along the A369, installed at the cost of millions to North Somerset Council. But no cyclist ever uses it.

Edited by SARJ
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PHILINFRANCE    934
4 hours ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

I'd make it compulsory for School children to take a cycling proficiency test and also extend the driving test to include how to treat cyclists. 

An excellent idea.

I took (and passed :yes::clapping:) mine almost 50 years ago, and I can well remember how the test was taken extremely seriously, both by the junior school teachers who taught us how to cycle carefully and by the numerous pupils taking part - I seem to recall I was about 10 years old at the time - and how those of us who passed shared not only a certain pride, but also the confidence to cycle to school alone.

Perhaps going off at a slight tangent, I also remember the local 'Bobby' who attended during our last lessons, offering kindly advice and gaining respect from the pupils and, in my case at least, a respect that remains some 50 years later.

Do local 'Bobbies' still exist?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigTone    4,318
18 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

An excellent idea.

I took (and passed :yes::clapping:) mine almost 50 years ago, and I can well remember how the test was taken extremely seriously, both by the junior school teachers who taught us how to cycle carefully and by the numerous pupils taking part - I seem to recall I was about 10 years old at the time - and how those of us who passed shared not only a certain pride, but also the confidence to cycle to school alone.

Perhaps going off at a slight tangent, I also remember the local 'Bobby' who attended during our last lessons, offering kindly advice and gaining respect from the pupils and, in my case at least, a respect that remains some 50 years later.

Do local 'Bobbies' still exist?

 

It was PC Genge in Nailsea and you couldn't fart without him knowing either.

Edited by BigTone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×