So cyclists think the rules of the road don't apply to them because car drivers are bastards.
As such, cyclists jump red lights because it's, er ... safer for them and screw everyone else.

So imagine my joy this morning to see, at the end of the road I was walking down in central Mordor, a cyclist being berated by a very large man shouting at them and prodding them in the chest. They'd obviously jumped the lights in front of the wrong man, and he was proper tearing them off a stripe.

The berator stormed off, and the cyclist was left shaking, made it over to some steps and sat down with their head in their hands and, clearly very shaken up by the whole affair, started crying uncontrollably.

I felt my heart warm with righteousness - for once justice had been done - they wouldn't be doing that again! I was inspired, elated - I too will join these ranks of people who actually do something about these bloody cyclists, instead of maybe shouting at them from the pavement as they whizz past me at lights! I too would make cyclists weep - the scourge of the law-breakers! The protector of children and little old ladies scared by the baddies! Hoorah for me!

Imagine my surprise, then, as I got closer, to find the cyclist was a petite young girl in her 20s.

My egomania is now in tatters.

"Ouch"?! It's all I had left of my self-esteem.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:08, 83 replies)

My friend who was boasting about red light jumping on facebook
Recently posted that the morning after his birthday he had to go to a cycling re-education course at 7am because he'd been caught...red light jumping.

Made me laugh, anyway.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:12, closed)

Pffft.
Thing is, judging by previous responses to my views on cycling, and, indeed - there's a guy at my work who holds similar I've just given short shrift and had to correct - they genuinely think they should be above the law because car drivers are bastards.

However, the moment you plow through a herd of school children on the tube platform just because a fat man behind you is walking erraticly, people get uppity.

One law for them, one for us.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:25, closed)

The majority of city cyclists are twats, who treat the Highway Code as something for other people.
I speak as a cyclist AND motorist.
(Bear Pookie The Frankly Challenged. Halloween is coming to town., Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:29, closed)

This I have to agree with
I commute regularly by bike in Central London (on a six inch travel freeride bike, natch!) and it pisses me off no end when a flipflop wearing moron on a fixie barge past me at traffic lights because they think the highway code doesn't apply to them.

Sure enough, once the lights have changed you catch them up in no time because they've run out of gear and you have to find a way past before repeating the same thing at the next set of lights.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:39, closed)

Verrrry much this.
There's a guy I see most mornings who wears LINEN. LINEN. and he does exactly what you describe. Well, excuse me for not wanting to get crushed under a bus at the big crossroads at Mile End.
( Devil_In_Tights the *real* DiT!, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:16, closed)

I think Douglas Adams said it best in the Long Dark Teatime of the Soul
He stepped out on to the street, where a passing eagle swooped out of the sky at him, nearly forcing him into the path of a cyclist, who cursed and swore at him from a moral high ground that cyclists alone seem able to inhabit.

I have no problem with car drivers - they tend to stop at traffic lights and zebra crossings. Cyclists, on the other hand, seem to think that because they're "doing their bit for the environment" that absolves them from paying any consideration to pedestrians (or "lemmings" as they call us) whatsoever. I dread the short-term effect that the "Boris bikes" are going to have on the capital but I am vaguely hopeful that eventually cycling will become normalised (and therefore regulated) like it is in Amsterdam with proper cycle lanes and cycle traffic lights that they *have* to obey. Actually, the one good thing about the new bikes is that they're all numbered, so if you spot someone jumping a red light or knocking you over on one, you can report the fucker.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:45, closed)

You should look before you step into the road anyway, even if you can't hear a car. It is good practice.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:49, closed)

Actually, on a green man one SHOULD step into the road, as that is exactly what the green man is there for.
Of course, if there's a cyclist hopping the lights, then it's the cyclist's fault as they shouldn't have hopped.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:51, closed)

Er, yeah I know
Last time I got knocked down by a cyclist I was on a fucking pedestrian crossing on a green man and they couldn't be arsed to stop at the red light.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:54, closed)

Cyclists with dogs are particularly annoying.
Combo of twat, bike, lead and mobile shit machine is fucking dangerous.
(Bear Pookie The Frankly Challenged. Halloween is coming to town., Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:08, closed)

"Cyclists with dogs are particularly annoying. Combo of twat, bike, lead and mobile shit machine is fucking dangerous."
That's from Shakespeare, isn't it?
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:09, closed)

Yeah, some cunt sucker like that.
"Voltaire."
(Bear Pookie The Frankly Challenged. Halloween is coming to town., Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:18, closed)

From his very famous piece called
"Cycling through Lewisham at five-thirty on a week day".
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:29, closed)

...whilst dodging tramps and dog shit.

(Bear Pookie The Frankly Challenged. Halloween is coming to town., Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:44, closed)

Actually, some crossings are fucking ridiculous
and so big, that as a cyclist, if you go through a green, it can turn red and give the people waiting to cross a green man before you're through.
Once happened to me - i go through a crossing on green, and this woman and child steps out right in front of me and i nearly hit them. She shouted at me, and i had to point out to her that it was green for me when i went through, and she should be teaching her son the correct way to cross a road - to always look left and right.
(badgers43, Thu 5 Aug 2010, 13:43, closed)

Cyclist haters
Some car drivers seem to have a blind spot about the fact that if there are more cyclists on the road then there are less cars and therefore less traffic. Using pedestrian crossings and turning left at junctions are some of the perks of being a cyclist that get the less die hard clarkson fans out of their cars. No one goes out on their bike to get killed, and the only way a bike can kill a car driver is if you take them out the car and beat them with it (something I've been tempted to do after having someone open their door into the bike lane, leaving me with a beautiful back edge of door shaped scar snaking up my chest). If you have to run all these risks and still sit in traffic for the same amount of time (only while being colder and wetter) then people will never get out of their cars. I know people think cyclists are smug and recklessly endanger the lives of other road users, and to be fair there are some who do take daft risks. But just remember that it is their choice if they want to take those risks and you can't be hurt by them. Just don't swerve if you know the highway code has you in the right. And check your fucking blind spots.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:42, closed)

And what about the threat cyclists pose to pedestrians?
A 10-stone man travelling at 20mph is going to do serious damage anyone foolish enough to cross a pedestrian crossing when he decides not to stop because there was a car back there who didn't give him enough room.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:50, closed)

I would run a red light at a crossroads when there are no pedestrians crossing on the green man and a green man on the road crossing the one I'm on means there is no traffic. Or I'd turn left under those circumstances, again if there are no pedestrians. I think London is probably different because there is a bit of a "cycle couriers are cool" culture where people do take risks, but in Newcastle I know a number of people who've hit pedestrians due to them stepping into the cycle lane without looking due to being on the phone etc, and in every circumstance the pedestrian has admitted responsibility. I would LOVE the Dutch system (seperate cycle lanes) to be introduced over here, but it's not happening any time soon.

I suggest you try cycling to work one day to get a view from the other side (you might also find you enjoy it).
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:00, closed)

came off as a smug cyclist there, sorry.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:03, closed)

I cycled to work in London for 4 years (12 miles each way for 18 months, 8 miles each way for 30)
I obeyed the law throughout, and if I felt threatened by traffic, I would get off and walk for a bit.

There is no problem other than self-importance and arrogance in the cycling community.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:04, closed)

^ this
I used to cycle through Archway junction at rush hour every day. Yet I always stopped at red lights and pedestrian crossings because, well, IT'S THE FUCKING LAW. It's not that difficult to understand.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:11, closed)

^^ this
Can't agree more.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:15, closed)

When the system is set up so that cycling is as safe as driving a car (ie Holland) I think you'll see cyclists behaving better. I should stress again that I personally only jump red lights if there's no one crossing. And on the subject of it being the fucking law... actually lets not get started about car drivers whingeing about speed cameras.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:33, closed)

I concur about speed cameras.
You are still wrong to jump red lights at any point, though - people crossing or no - just as it's not right to kill people with no dependents, steal stuff from the rich, or abuse people because they're poor.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:36, closed)

sure thing jesus

(augsav forgot about B3ta, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:48, closed)

Oh you naughty, rebellious scamp, you!

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:58, closed)

*runs away giggling*
(augsav forgot about B3ta, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:00, closed)

ANYONE jumping red lights
is committing an offence. Big deal, not a problem you might think. We all stretch the yellows and we all do 32 on that long straight bit near work.

BUT red lights are there to establish a safe traffic flow. If you follow the system, you CANNOT crash or hurt anyone (or if you do, it's the fault of the council who set up the timing). Not just "it lowers the risk" like speed cameras are supposed to do. You cannot crash. Which means that blind people can cross the road at the beeps with no risk. Drivers can set off on a green light and know that no-one's going to smack into the side of them coming out of the arm of the junction.

Jumping red lights is so, so much more dangerous than speeding that it's horrifying that you two-wheeled types are so keen on it.

Saying that, watching two red-light jumping cyclists run into one another was the funniest thing I've ever seen.
( uberdeity Wondered why Owen Lars knew of the term "hell" on, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:09, closed)

^ I like your views and wish to subscribe to your newsletter

( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 5 Aug 2010, 9:24, closed)

I was hit by a cyclist in this manner.
I foolishly stepped out on to a one-way street after only checking the direction the traffic should have been coming from, only to feel a sharp pain in the back of the head and stagger forward a bit. I looked around to see what it was and saw a cyclist landing about twenty yards farther down the road. He was bigger than me (I'm just over ten stones) and moving faster, so I have little notion as to why he suffered more from the collision than I did. Perhaps I'm just a very grounded person.
(ThomsonsPier consumes, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:26, closed)

SPANG

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:51, closed)

I'm a pedestrian, mostly
I drive a car less than I ride a bike (and I do ride a bike, though not often on the roads). And as a pedestrian, I'd rather share the roads with car drivers than cyclists, who are a largely unrepentant menace. I'm not looking to "get people out of their cars" or save the bloody environment, I just want to be able to get to work without being knocked over by some holier-than-thou tosser who thinks red lights don't apply to them.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 9:51, closed)

Agreed.
I am all for environmentally friendly forms of transport, but cyclists seem a law unto themselves.
I got knocked into a hedge by a bike monkey last week, who had hopped up onto the path and was coming around a corner full tilt as I was walking the other way. He was unsighted as there is a garden with a tall hedge next to the path, and I was unsighted because I am virtually blind and get about using a long cane (white stick). I now have a bruise on my stomach and a ripped handbag (which luckily took the force of his handlebars).
The people walking behind me picked me up and berated the twat in no uncertain terms (I was too winded), who, when they wouldn't let him continue merrily on his way on the pavement by blocking his path (there were four of them and the path has a railing on the other side as it is next to a main road), rammed them with his bike and sailed off without so much as an apology to me.
It's not the first time something like this has happened to me. Fucking menaces.
(womanwhocanonlylivewithdogs, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:35, closed)

Womanwhocanonlylivewithdogs
makes a good point. It's alright saying you should look before crossing on a green man, but what about the blind and partially sighted? They have to rely on the fact that when the crossing beeps it *should* be safe to cross. Modern bikes are almost silent nowadays, good luck hearing one before it's almost on top of you.
(Petite chien is going to do science to it, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:07, closed)

I'm talking about pedestrians who step into the road without looking. No argument from me that crossing pedestrian crossings with people even in the vicinity and riding on the pavement is out of order. Pavement is for pedestrians, roads are for cars and ideally proper seperate cycle paths are for cyclists.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:25, closed)

Stepping into the road without looking is not a crime
Jumping a red light on a bicycle is.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:40, closed)

Stepping into the road on a green man, pedestrians should not HAVE to look.
Likewise - whatabout the blind?
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:45, closed)

I think...
...what Pete_G is trying to say is that pedestrians who step out into an ordinary stretch of road without looking are a danger to themselves and other road users. Pedestrians stepping out into the road at a designated crossing should absolutely not have to look.

I cycle 7 miles each way to work and back every day and I obey the red lights and so on, up until the point that my light is just about to turn green and I get a bit of a jump on the traffic behind me.

What seems incredibly ridiculous is that other cyclists will abuse me for obeying the law...

Edit: I've just read a reply at the bottom of the page about stopatred.org and pledged to not ride through red lights... Look at me! I'm a virtuous cyclist!
(Sir Itchalot has a very self-referential signature, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:09, closed)

Good on you
we need more like you
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:22, closed)

shrill histrionics aside
the numbers would tend to suggest that the actual danger posed by cyclists is hugely at odds with the perceived danger. Cars users kill and maim far more, doing equally stupid things, yet people who drive never seem to generalise this to 'all drivers are cunts'.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:53, closed)

I understand flying is still the safest form of transport, but it doesn't stop a lot of people being afraid of it.
Likewise, two rings don't make runt and all that.

You don't, however, get many car drivers who will try to claim that they drive a car for the benefit of anyone other than themselves, or try to justify breaking the law, with the possible exception of the wife's waters breaking/speeding story.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:56, closed)

Actually
Flying is only the safest form of travel if you calculate by distance travelled.
If you calculate by the number of journeys vs the amount of accidents, then train travel is the safest.





As you were
(EvilMeister, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:04, closed)

from personal experience
I've never been knocked down by a car, but I've been knocked down by unrepentant cyclists twice, despite being on crossings at the time. Living in a city I don't have much to fear from motorists because they really don't have the space to get up any speed but cyclists remain a daily hazard.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:07, closed)

Selfish dicks will remain thus in any mode of transport. If a cyclist knocks you down at a crossing, I suspect they'd have committed an arrrestable offence - in which case, you'd be perfectly within your rights to detain them. A 700 quid fine and whatever they have to give you in personal injury compo might go some way towards improving their manners.

Certainly wouldn't hurt to have mandatory bike number plates, provided they don't actually cost any more than the materials warrant. Might even reduce bike theft, if it matched a number stamped on the frame, so a win all round...
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:21, closed)

^What she said^

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:27, closed)

I'm all for number plates, registration etc.
Or even just some proper organisation - as I said above, I have no problems with Amsterdam which has proper cycle lanes, because I know that cyclists there will stop at crossings and obey the rules laid out for them. It's just my experience of cyclists in London that have dimmed my view of them because as Vagabond says above, they really do seem to think they should be above the law.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:28, closed)

From a totally biased bike commuter
I agree with Pete G's brave stance against the judgemental bike haters. Yes, there are some twats on bikes. Yes, they should be punished if they do something overtly dangerous. But it all comes down to common sense really and surely you'd have to admit that a cyclist turning left at a red light when there are no pedestrians crossing isn't exactly a hanging offence is it, given that no one is inconvenienced? There is of course the "but where do you draw the line?" argument, rules is rules etc. but this new found inflexibility and nanny like attitude is for me one of the most irritating and saddening developments in the UK at the moment. Police or cyclist police should be given the power to use their judgement as to whether a cyclist has been acting recklessly or not and act accordingly. and if bikes scare you that much, you'd probably be safer inside with a tinfoil hat on and a cup of soothing tea. Just an idea.
(impossibly witty twat No, YOUR Mum etc etc, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:06, closed)

As both a cycle and pedestrian commuter in the city
I've seen arrogance from all sides - pedestrians with a herd mentality who blindly step out in front of a cycle going through a green light through to cyclists passing through a red light at speed and barely avoiding contact with pedestrians.

Frankly, it would be a whole lot safer if more cyclists respected the traffic signals.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:24, closed)

"Judgemental bike haters"
Both Vagabond and myself have admitted to being cycle commuters at some point in our lives; I've just bought a new bike in fact.

What we're complaining about is the automatic assumption that cyclists should be able to break the law with impunity just because that law inconveniences them a little bit. I'd like to ignore laws that inconvenience me as well, but I don't have the self-assured moral high ground of a cyclist to do that from.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:57, closed)

i always jump red lights
and ill continue to jump red lights.
i love every little bit of it jumping red lights.
i like riding on footpaths too. so smooth. oh yeeah.
(augsav forgot about B3ta, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:27, closed)

Hahahaha
Well done!

*pats on head*
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:37, closed)

lol cycletroll is trolling

( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:39, closed)

*gives biscuit*

(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 10:41, closed)

I like cyclists
Especially when they're being scraped off the underside of a lorry with a stiff brush.


Oh, provocative.
(TheManWithThePlan cussed your mum on, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:11, closed)

No...
...Cyclists think that the rules of the road -- as specified for cars -- do not apply to them, since they are a different legal class of vehicle and the statutory law governing them is very different.

By the road traffic act, car drivers are legally bound to drive with "reasonable consideration to other road users"; cyclists are not. In a very strict sense, cyclists are right: the rules of the road do not apply to them. There is an offence of dangerous cycling, but the the requirements for it are similar to those for dangerous driving and in many circumstances, simply going through a red light wouldn't qualify. Of course blowing through a red light crossing a dual carriageway at 70mph and causing traffic to swerve around you probably would, but most cyclists (at least those who are still alive) do not go that far.

Still, the fact that there is no law against being an arsehole doesn't necessarily mean that you should go out and act like the biggest cockwad you can be.

As a cyclist, I treat red lights like a stop sign: i.e., stop, give way to other traffic, then go if I'm sure there's nothing coming. Works pretty well for me and the only people who get pissed off are people who are chippy about bikes being on the road anyway.
(Mr T, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:22, closed)

Eeeee-xactly.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:27, closed)

Interesting point, and well-presented.
In response, I suggest that cyclists should be bound to all laws of the road, VERY similar to cars, and as such should pay road tax, insurance, and be registered and covered by the DVLA, etc.

Likewise, they should be punished as car drivers are for breaking said laws.

Where's my hat? Oh - here it is.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:31, closed)

I can see the point of registering bikes... but road tax and insurance? seriously? If you cycled that long then you must like bikes a bit. One of the best things about them is that you don't have to go through the bollocks that makes car ownership such a nightmare. They should be trying to turn people towards cycling not repel them.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:29, closed)

Road tax - yes - cycle lanes don't build themselves (well, they do at the mo, but they should be funded at least in part by cyclists)
Insurance - hell yes. In case of hitting pedestrians, other cyclists, damaging cars, etc. Registration likewise for the same reasons - if someone jumps a red light, you can get their number and report them.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:33, closed)

Copy Holland should be the mantra! Fund the cycle lanes out of the money the NHS saves from not having to treat as much heart disease. I wouldn't pay for the cycle lanes unless they were actually separate from the road everywhere anyway, as until that is the case you're no safer on them than you are on the road. I pay car tax to upkeep the roads, as do most people who ride bikes.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:42, closed)

So basically
"I'm not going to help unless they start it and do it my way".

Seems about right.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:46, closed)

like I say I already pay car tax. That should cover a bit of paint on the roads that gets ignored anyway.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:59, closed)

I already pay council tax.
Shouldn't I have to pay car tax if I get a car?
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:04, closed)

This would be well and good
if more than a tiny fraction of existing Vehicle Excise Duty (no such thing as 'road tax') went towards building and maintaining roads, which it conspicuously doesn't. It goes into a central pot, and roads are maintained from a council's budget. Charging cyclists for a cycle lane makes about as much sense as charging pedestrians for the pavement.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:03, closed)

Pedestrians do pay for the pavement. Council tax.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:09, closed)

Some of that Council Tax is also spent on road maintenence....
...well, not round our way so much.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:11, closed)

See below discussion on Vehicle Excise Duty.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:16, closed)

And likewise, cyclists already pay for cycle lanes - the point being, neither should have to pay extra. It's probably in everyone's best interest - not just the cyclists' - for cyclists to be moved from the roads onto designated paths.

VED is a bit of a spurious argument, as it's chargeable only to a specific type of vehicle, and has pretty much nothing to do with building/maintaining the highways.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:19, closed)

Pedestrians pay for cycle lanes, but don't use them.
Cyclists choose to use them, so they should pay more, in order to upkeep them.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:23, closed)

Ergo cyclists also pay for cycle lanes...
...because some of us cyclists pay Council Tax too.

My Council Taxes also help pay for road maintenence, but I would stop short at walking down the middle of the road simply because my Council Tax receipts help maintain it.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:26, closed)

No no - its about choice - choose to do something, pay more:
Motorists pay extra beyond their council tax (VED or whatever) because they want to motor (fair enough) and thus use the roads more heavily.

Cyclists should pay extra beyond their council tax (VED/CED whatever you want to call it) because they want to cycle and thus use the roads more heavily.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:30, closed)

But by the same logic, so should an individual walking through a pedestrianised zone.
A moot point, but the bulk of my cycling is offroad on towpaths and bridleways, which are maintained by councils and private landowners.

Given that I share these byways with ramblers and horseriders, does that mean that ramblers and horseriders should pay a levy too?
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:35, closed)

See below - ticket or tax.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:41, closed)

You're entitled to your opinion
but it seems to be borne more out of spite than logic.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:44, closed)

Not spiteful, though I will own cyclists - as evinced in this thread - do tend to think they're above the law, which is fucking annoying.
I just don't think this pedestrian/road-goer hybrid should exist any longer. I think the delineation should be much, much clearer - as it is for cars - and the rules enforced likewise.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:50, closed)

Are you suggesting that public money should only be spent on amenities which have 100% uptake within the community? Or that you should recieve a reduced tax burden if you choose not to use a publically-funded service?

Whether pavement/road users take direct advantage of the cycle lane or not (I use all three, albeit not simultaneously) - they still reap a discernable benefit from having them built.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:39, closed)

Yes. Yes I think I am.
Whenever using any other form of transport, one is expected to subsidise the infrastructure of that transport - by paying the ticket or the tax.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:41, closed)

Unless you're on foot in a pedestrainised zone...

(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:46, closed)

No - I've said already
That's paid for.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:49, closed)

But so is a coat of green paint denoting a cycle path, not to mention a bridleway
I may be being particularly stupid, but I fail to see what taxing a cycle every year would achieve that simply cranking up the level of on the spot fines for red light jumping cyclists wouldn't.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:18, closed)

It would make people think twice about just getting on a bike and buggering about in town, just as one does a car.
It wouldn't disuade people to any significant degree - people who want to ride will ride, just as they do with cars.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:21, closed)

Erm..... How?
Surely the risk of a high fine would disuade more cyclists from jumping red lights than they would if they paid for an annual license?

Anyway, the idea is to get more people to jump on bikes and travel short distances, no?
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:25, closed)

I think if you had to go through the rigmarole of paperwork and pay insurance
you'd have a hell of a lot more respect for bike-riding.

But as for encouraging people to ride bikes - not from me - I don't care how you get to work - I'm certainly not one of those "environment" poseurs, I just think that however you do get to work, you should obey the rules of the road.

I don't charge the barriers on the tube because I'm going a shorter distance than others. I don't expect cyclists to expect to be able to break the laws because they don't like some of them.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:28, closed)

Hmm
Does paying Vehicle Excise Duty stop boy racers from driving their souped up Corsas in an antisocial fashion?

I'm not an environment poseur either - I pay over the odds for a bike frame manufactured in Taiwan and shipped halfway round the world, that I've maintained and built up in my own time and at considerable expense. Plus I love cycling too.

You won't see me jumping red lights or cycling on the pavement.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:32, closed)

No obviously it won't completely stop twats being twats.
But I'm sure a bit of regulation, legal enforcement, and personal and financial accountability would stop couriers being so, and likewise the vast majority of cyclists.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:35, closed)

Then perhaps better enforcement of on the spot fines at traffic lights would achieve the same ends, no?

(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:35, closed)

And taxes. I think the taxes would make bike ownership, distribution and acceptance
far more respected - like that of a car. Owning a stolen car anywhere beyond Chavland is not cool or acceptable, and those who own and use cars are expected and respected for using and respecting the rules of the road.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:42, closed)

I assume you're a driver?
Has Vehicle Excise Duty disuaded you from speeding?

As a cyclist I can give plenty of examples of bad driving where drivers have failed to uphold the rules of the road, despite obviously paying a levy to use it.

[edit]

Taxes are already levied on the distribution and sale of bicycles, in the forms of import duty and VAT.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:50, closed)

I'm not a driver, no.
But I won't object to paying my dues and respecting the rules of the road if/when I become one if/when I move out of Mordor.

Taxes are already levied on imported cars.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:54, closed)

Back to my first point. Car drivers getting out of cars and onto bikes benefits the remaining car drivers, so they should pay for it.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:52, closed)

People dying means more resources for the rest, so funerals should be paid for by everyone else.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:25, closed)

Er, they are. People pay for the extra, above-bog-standard bells-and-whistles, like a decent coffin, a moving service, triangular sandwiches for the reception, and so forth. But the basics are free, if you choose (/are left with no option but) to avail yourself of the service.

If one concludes that the niceties you pay for pay for to make your loved one's funeral specifically tailored to him/her are analogous to the tarmac and road furniture used to make the public highway more specifically tailored for cars, we're essentially in agreement that the basics are free, and you pay for the extras.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:39, closed)

Hmm.
Alright - we'll call it a draw.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:41, closed)

Horse tax, anyone?

Anyway. The public highways are exactly that - highways, for the use of the public, which - other than the odd turnpike here and there - have historically not incurred a direct cost for users. On my mountain bike, I do not require the modifications to the public highways which are demanded by cars - I can live without all your newfangled fancy tarmacadamised surfacing and whatnot. Car users are paying extra due to the significant cost of rendering public highways - free for other forms of transport, which have every right to use them - suitable for their transit. And because it's a fantastic source of revenue for central government.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:53, closed)

Pedant Content
There's no such thing as Road Tax

There's Vehicle Excise Duty and Fuel Duty. Receipts from both of these levies far exceed the total expenditure on transport though.

I'm against the idea of taxing cyclists, but I do think compulsory proficiency testing at school age is a good idea.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:06, closed)

I think a license should be earned just like with a car.
And I don't see why they shouldn't pay VED - they already pay fuel tax so yes - that's fine.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 13:10, closed)

I had to do the proficiency test at school
are you telling me kids these days don't have to?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:51, closed)

According to Stop At Red - run by cyclists for cyclists - you're wrong
"A bicycle is classed as a vehicle like any other. Everyone knows that this leads to absurdities and anomalies in the way that the law is applied to cyclists in practice. Cycle campaigners are lobbying hard to remedy this; but politicians are unlikely to sign up to enhancing the legal status of an unpopular group of lawbreaking social outcasts."
www.stopatred.org/why.php

[edit]Actually just read this: www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/Cyclists/index.htm
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 11:35, closed)

Excellent campaign
I've just signed up to the Stop At Red pledge, very good idea; I shall now stop going through red lights and jumping the green at all.
(Sir Itchalot has a very self-referential signature, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:14, closed)

Exactly the problem.
What needs to happen is Cycle police just like traffic police, and to come down hard on cyclists who jump the lights.

Cyclists should have to hold a license, and be subject to the same penalties as all other road traffic.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:16, closed)

In London Village it's on the increase:
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/16/police-cyclists-red-lights

Mainly because people are starting to get so fed up with it; city police have to respond to "community concerns" and RLJ tends to wind up just about everybody.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:19, closed)

The wording of the law is "mechanically propelled vehicle"
However, in the eyes of the law, muscle power is not mechanical. Bicycles are legally defined as:
"bicycle" means a two-wheeled vehicle that is propelled solely by the muscular energy of the person on that vehicle by means of pedals and has not been constructed or adapted for propulsion by mechanical power;

As an engineer, this makes me cringe. It's saying:
A bicycle is a biomechanically-propelled vehicle that is not mechanically propelled. Although the statute is merely a clarification of case law which had previously determined that a pedal cycle is not an MPV.

Find the statute here:
www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20031101.htm
(Mr T, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:46, closed)

I'd like to see a fine contested on such, though.
Just for the sheer joy of watching the cyclist get crushed.

FFS. "I didn't strangle them, my hands did!"
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 12:49, closed)

See, all I'm hearing is "Waaaaah, I want to break the law and I think I should be allowed to"
www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/Cyclists/index.htm

Please direct me to the section of the highway code that allows cyclists to jump red lights.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:45, closed)

wouldn't it be simpler, all in all, if anyone suspected of wishing to ride a bike outside the confines their own imagination simply had their legs hacked off with a large, sharpened rusty spoon? Let's not fuck about.
(impossibly witty twat No, YOUR Mum etc etc, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:41, closed)

Well there is that too.
But rest assured - once I'm voted in as Grand High Dictator Of Earth And All Things Are Glorious Under He That Rules Over All, things will be changing around here, I can tell you.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 14:48, closed)

Wow!
This thread got so big so quick I could only read half of it but I wanted to share my thoughts...

I love my motors but I also love my cycling. I love cycling on roads but I hate those who don't give you any space. When I over take in a car, I make sure the cyclist has plenty of room and I drive on the other side of the road. I hate it when I look in my rear view and see other drivers over taking within inches and not giving them any room even though the road is clear.

From recently buying a proper road bike and cycling 10 miles into work everyday, I can say that on the roads near me, the worst menaces are busses. Cars and large lorries / vans give you plenty of space but the number of times I've been forced off road by busses I cannot now count on both hands - within 2 weeks of cycling. Artics are bigger but they can give you plenty of road space when they over take! When a road bike goes off road it equals instant stoppage and when your feet are clipped in place, it also means you will fall off and get hurt...

Saying that though , cyclists do have a responsibility themselves to be safe and be seen. Last week I hit the back of a stationary bus at 25mph as I was concentrating on making sure I had enough space between me and a kerb, and a scooter who was next to me had enough space too... Ouchy! The bus driver never noticed and drove on but it was my fault for not looking so I can't hold a grudge. I did like the fact that 5 cars stopped to help though the only thing that was damaged was my pride (and a very sore neck and headache for three days).

Cyclists do have to abide by the rules. A red light means stop. In my youth I would jump them, nowadays I obey them as you never know who may step out at the last minute. If I'm in a hurry, I'll get off my bike, cross the road, get back on and carry on my way. You can also get penalised on your drivers license by not following the rules of the road.

I have some serious biker friends who have obtained points on their drivers license for speeding on a bike (you can go fast on bikes, I have so far hit 47mph on a mountain bike (in a 60mph zone) but roadies are so much faster and my friends have set off speed cameras at over 60+mph!) If you're caught, you will get points and a fine if you own a car. I find that very unfair as non drivers get nothing if they're caught doing wrong on a bike!

The other gripe I have is cycling helmets. I did the London to Brighton this year and wore a helmet because of the length of the ride. I never used to wear one but all the accidents I cycled past, all had to be ambulanced or air lifted away and not a single one had a helmet on and had severe head trauma! I'll always wear one now, every-trip. When I hit my bus, the one thing that stopped me having concussion was the fact I had a helmet on as I hit the back at 25mph head first!

Another thing on helmets, I work for the government and promote cycling to better the air quality in my district. We get a lot of external funding for this which is great and this year, cycling schemes and rides have really taking on and we are getting thousands of participants in cycle schemes, rides and events. Due to the fact we are promoting safe cycling, all our literature shows people having fun on bikes wearing full protective gear (helmets, lights, reflectors etc). the law does not state protective clothing must be warn but I feel ashamed that some of the biggest promoters for cycling events show people doing dangerous stunts, families mountain biking down hills etc with no safety gear... i think that's unacceptable. By all means let people know its an option but do not advertise unsafe riding. I raised this with some companies with whom I refused to distribute their adverts for this point and their statement in reply was that it was not the law and up to the individual to make their own choice. From what I have seen, by all means we can make our own choice but the bigger public profile we can raise for safe riding, the 'cooler' hi vis jackets and helmets will become...

*breathes*

goodness, I didn't mean to rant but I'm very into my cycling and want to promote just how good and fun it can be but for very very little expenditure, you can be made safe without damaging your 'street cred'.

length... I can't think of a pun but my helmet is blue and want a red one (to match my bike)...
(Something funny, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 21:32, closed)

on the helmet point, I never used to bother. On the third day I started wearing it, a car driver turned left across a bike lane without checking their blind spot and I went straight into the side of them (albeit at a very slow speed). I took it as a sign and now I wear it all the time.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 22:28, closed)

See, I agree with pretty much everything you wrote there
I don't tend to wear a helmet for recreational cycling (I live near a really long, flat disused railway track which doesn't present a whole lot of dangers) but I'd never hit the road without one, that's just playing Russian roulette. I've also impressed the need for one onto my girlfriend as well - the same girlfriend who got her collar felt recently for...jumping red lights. Oh, how I laughed.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 5 Aug 2010, 9:32, closed)

God, I wish people like you would shut up
You'll notice that every cyclist has responded by saying that they respect red lights, or if they do go through them, they do it cautiously.

Cyclists may carry an air of smug superiority, and they have every fucking right to. They have the best view of the road: they're not as low down as car drivers, they're higher than pedestrians, and their views aren't restricted by massive helmets like motorcyclists.

They also have the best reactions. The shots of adrenaline and endorphins being released into their brains mean that they're always alert, and the sense of vulnerability means that they're generally pretty cautious. They're also usually going slowly enough (less than 20 mph) to be able to swerve and brake out of any tough spot.

They're also smug because they'll probably live longer than you, someone who's sitting behind the wheel of a machine that kills more people every minute than bikes do in a year; someone's who's getting all frustrated about people who are getting decent, healthy exercise and arriving to their destination far more quickly than you ever will.

In summary: fuck you.
(hnnrs, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 21:53, closed)

I kinda agree but...
Having just got a new road bike, the one thing that stopped me from not hitting the bus was that the brakes are most responsive when you're in the racing position (i.e. downhill racing with your hands below the stems putting full pressure on the brakes). From what I can gather (unless I'm doing it wrong) is that you only touch the top part of the brake (normal riding position) so there is less pressure hence a larger stopping distance hence my shortfall!). Saying that, on my other bike I can ride inches from a car and stop sooner than they do as you get more pressure on the brakes.

I guess the main reason there are more car fatalities is that bike accidents are less severe due to the lack of metal surrounds and lower speeds... But I'm an exception to the rule as any kind of fitness regime I manage to find some kind dangerous way to maim myself, no matter how safe the sport!
(Something funny, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 22:15, closed)

I'd like to see a per mile travelled analysis of fatalities/ injuries. It would be a lot more informative as there are much fewer cyclists on the road than car drivers.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 22:30, closed)

haha, this is exactly what I feel like but don't want to say because I'll get cyclists a bad name. Try falling asleep at the handlebars as well, it's not easy.
(Pete_G, Wed 4 Aug 2010, 22:25, closed)

"they'll probably live longer than you, someone who's sitting behind the wheel of a machine that kills more people every minute than bikes do in a year"
You'll notice that myself and Vagabond have already posted that we both have cycled our commutes at one point or another. I walk most places, get the tube to work, I don't even own a car and I still cycle at weekends for fun. I've just bought a new bike, in fact.

But yeah, you're right, I'm just a jealous, evil driver who doesn't respect your god-given right to break the law whenever it suits you.

In summary: you're a dickhead.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 5 Aug 2010, 9:17, closed)

"In summary: fuck you."
Good point, well presented - I stand down, my argument in tatters.

Except for the whole bit about cyclists not being above the law and acting like dickheads.

That would be you, then.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Thu 5 Aug 2010, 9:47, closed)