Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

[Artaxerxes]

A cyclist that fucks around generally finds they end up injuring themselves or paying to replace an expensive bike.

A motorist that fucks around massively hurts someone else usually.

 

[thebackrow]

something something, pavement cycling, mutter mutter, training and insurance...

 

[thebackrow]

Ha. I'm sure they all swerved to miss the dangerous cyclist -

 

[teuchter]

we indulge dangerous cycling by giving it few consequences. i've been run into on the pavement of holloway road by someone cycling on the pavement. when i remonstrated with her she said she wasn't on the road (but on a crowded pavement) because she had no brakes. nothing happened to her, no cop talked to her, no one arrested her, off she went as free as bird to carry on acting without any fear of consequences. that's one example. there are many, many more.

That's a personal anecdote, not evidence that backs up your assertion.

 

[teuchter]

Also, had a cop been present, she could have been issued with a £50 fixed penalty notice.

I'm surprised Pickman's model so seldom finds himself put at risk by motorists who do stuff they are not supposed to, but face zero consequences because no cop was present. Because it happens to me all the time as a pedestrian. It happens every single time I step outside my front door and multiple cars go past at speeds way over the 20mph limit. Every time a motorist fails to slow down or stop to let me cross the opening of a side road on my way to the shops, which is most times I walk to the shops. These are actions that are in effect free of consequence for the driver, but literally put my life at risk.

I too am sometimes annoyed with cyclists on the pavement, and sometimes they put me at some risk, but only quite rarely at serious risk, and on a typical walk it's not something that happens at all whilst some kind of bad motorist behaviour is almost guaranteed.

Maybe car drivers and cyclists are somehow completely different on the Holloway Road compared to south London.

 

[Pickman's model]

Also, had a cop been present, she could have been issued with a £50 fixed penalty notice.

I'm surprised Pickman's model so seldom finds himself put at risk by motorists who do stuff they are not supposed to, but face zero consequences because no cop was present. Because it happens to me all the time as a pedestrian. It happens every single time I step outside my front door and multiple cars go past at speeds way over the 20mph limit. Every time a motorist fails to slow down or stop to let me cross the opening of a side road on my way to the shops, which is most times I walk to the shops. These are actions that are in effect free of consequence for the driver, but literally put my life at risk.

I too am sometimes annoyed with cyclists on the pavement, and sometimes they put me at some risk, but only quite rarely at serious risk, and on a typical walk it's not something that happens at all whilst some kind of bad motorist behaviour is almost guaranteed.

Maybe car drivers and cyclists are somehow completely different on the Holloway Road compared to south London.

That's a personal anecdote, not evidence that backs up your assertion.

 

[liquidindian]

Vehicle speed compliance statistics for Great Britain: 2021

www.gov.uk

 

[Pickman's model]

View attachment 336512

Vehicle speed compliance statistics for Great Britain: 2021

www.gov.uk

It'd be interesting if that included 20mph roads rather than remaining silent on the matter

 

[platinumsage]

View attachment 336512

Vehicle speed compliance statistics for Great Britain: 2021

www.gov.uk

 

[liquidindian]

It'd be interesting if that included 20mph roads rather than remaining silent on the matter

 

[teuchter]

Cycling on the pavement – a real risk or just a nuisance? | London Road Safety Council

londonroadsafetycouncil.org.uk

When we look at the casualty data for pedestrians as a whole, over a three-year period there were 197 fatalities, 2,305 pedestrians seriously injured and a further 13,519 slightly injured. Of those, just 0.5% of the serious injuries and 0.4% slight injuries were a result of a collision with a bicycle on a pavement.

 

[liquidindian]

It's hard to say what's worse though, something that's admittedly a bit annoying or something that's killing dozens every year.

 

[Pickman's model]

It's hard to say what's worse though, something that's admittedly a bit annoying or something that's killing dozens every year.

i don't know why the confusion, no one here's taking a different attitude. i'm just always surprised that all the cyclists go 'oh no nothing to see here with cycling'. i'd have expected after so many years of discussing this one of you - just one - might have had the wit to say, do you know, you've got a point. cyclists on the pavement, cyclists going through red lights, cyclists going the wrong way up one way streets, they are dangerous and anti-social. thus disarming the critique. never happened. not once. it's all cyclists kill very few people, like that's er a killer metric. it's a bit annoying. when you're walking down the canal and under a bridge and a cyclist comes full pelt at you it's more than a bit annoying.

e2a: and with the number of delivery cycles it happens more and more frequently, near misses and indeed hits. no driver's ever going to say there aren't a ton of shit drivers on the roads. i don't know why any of you never say there are a ton of shit cyclists on the roads and pavements.

anyway, it's been almost fun

 

[teuchter]

i'd have expected after so many years of discussing this one of you - just one - might have had the wit to say, do you know, you've got a point. cyclists on the pavement, cyclists going through red lights, cyclists going the wrong way up one way streets, they are dangerous and anti-social. thus disarming the critique. never happened. not once.

And yeah, there should be rules for cyclists to obey. But they should be proportionate to the risk they represent. Cyclists should not be tearing around on pavements any more than cars should be tearing around on residential streets. All this tiresome stuff about "everyone being subject to the same scrutiny, restrictions and regulations" - no one promoting increased restrictions on motor vehicles is trying to say that other road users shouldn't be subject to any restrictions whatsoever - they should be subject to proportionate ones.

 

[teuchter]

And here

To be clear - I don't defend cyclists running red lights at pedestrian crossings. Cyclists should show the same consideration to pedestrians as they would like drivers to show to them.

 

[Pickman's model]

teuchter there were three points i made, on pavements, through red lights, wrong way up one-way streets. everyone knows 2/3 ain't bad. but one out of three? not even close. no cigar.

 

[teuchter]

As you say, 2/3 aint bad.

 

[Pickman's model]

And here

soz just read it with more attention - i see you qualify your position, red lights at pedestrian crossings. the problem isn't only at pedestrian crossings, but at junctions too. not some red lights, all red lights.
e2a for clarity by pedestrian crossings, i mean those ones where there's a button which actually changes the lights. where there's a set rotation at a junction the position should be no different. we all know no means no. but cyclists (and indeed car drivers) should know red means stop.

 

[edcraw]

teuchter there were three points i made, on pavements, through red lights, wrong way up one-way streets. everyone knows 2/3 ain't bad. but one out of three? not even close. no cigar.

No one is defending shit cyclists.

You responded to a stupid Daily Mail article that highlighted people responding to the police tackling dangerous drivers by say “but what about cyclists” by saying “but what about cyclists”. The only reason could be to defend and down play dangerous drivers. Bizarre.

 

[platinumsage]

What bad cyclist ignorers fail to realise is that millions of elderly and frail people choose to drive rather than take their life in their hands and subject their easily-broken bodies to the dangers of wanton cyclists on pavements and pedestrian crossings. Therefore a crackdown on such behaviour will result in a great reduction in the number of vehicles on the roads as Gertrude realises she can now happily stroll to Sainsbury’s without risking her life and limb, and can get rid of her Honda Jazz.

 

[liquidindian]

I just want a bit more inventiveness when it comes to distractions, really. Rather than react to shit driving with "but cyclists", maybe something else, just for a change? What about wobbly wheels on supermarket trollies? They're annoying and just as relevant.

 

[edcraw]

What bad cyclist ignorers fail to realise is that millions of elderly and frail people choose to drive rather than take their life in their hands and subject their easily-broken bodies to the dangers of wanton cyclists on pavements and pedestrian crossings. Therefore a crackdown on such behaviour will result in a great reduction in the number of vehicles on the roads as Gertrude realises she can now happily stroll to Sainsbury’s without risking her life and limb, and can get rid of her Honda Jazz.

Any evidence for this?

 

[Pickman's model]

No one is defending shit cyclists.

You responded to a stupid Daily Mail article that highlighted people responding to the police tackling dangerous drivers by say “but what about cyclists” by saying “but what about cyclists”. The only reason could be to defend and down play dangerous drivers. Bizarre

no, i didn't respond to a stupid daily mail article. that's in post 8484. i responded to your 8486. and i've said (8533) no one here's saying dangerous driving isn't worse than dangerous cycling. so where have i actually defended dangerous drivers?

anyway it's been a quiet day at work and i'm grateful to you for providing some entertainment.

 

[Pickman's model]

I just want a bit more inventiveness when it comes to distractions, really. Rather than react to shit driving with "but cyclists", maybe something else, just for a change? What about wobbly wheels on supermarket trollies? They're annoying and just as relevant.

yeh but here you have to make do with what you can find. but i like the way you're thinking.

 

[platinumsage]

I just want a bit more inventiveness when it comes to distractions, really. Rather than react to shit driving with "but cyclists", maybe something else, just for a change? What about wobbly wheels on supermarket trollies? They're annoying and just as relevant.

What about the failure of police to enforce the requirement for dogs to be on leads on roads that are designated in that respect by the local highways authority under section 27 of the Road Traffic Act 1988?

 

[liquidindian]

I know there are on average about five deaths on the road a day but have you ever had an itch on your back you can't quite reach?

 

[liquidindian]

Ha. I'm sure they all swerved to miss the dangerous cyclist -

You might see crashed cars on the pavement quite regularly but you know what you don't see these days, white dog poo that's what

 

[Artaxerxes]

Any evidence for this?

Pulling crap out of his arse is evidence?


We’ve made it much easier for elderly and vulnerable to travel by car and no other way over the last 50 years so now few can convince of doing it any other way.

 

[thebackrow]

View attachment 336513

and of course the worst offenders for speeding - motorbikes

 

[Pickman's model]

You might see crashed cars on the pavement quite regularly but you know what you don't see these days, white dog poo that's what

i've seen that two or three times recently