Cyclist with a grudge

[hombre]

Firstly they should be insured against third party liability, they are not immune from causing accidents and injuries - especially when riding on the pavements, which I beleive is still illegal.

Secondly, they should be taxed to pay for all these cycle lanes being built for them in the least, not to mention simply to use the road like everyone else.

Thirdly, they should be licensed then they might actually start realising their responsibilities - instead of just demanding ghteir rights all the time.

Fourthly, NO ONE should be allowed on the road (or pavement in lots of cases) until such time as they have passed some sort of proficiencey test - this should be both expensive and pointless in the manner of the Driver CPC!!

[joeg]

Hombre:
Firstly they should be insured against third party liability, they are not immune from causing accidents and injuries - especially when riding on the pavements, which I beleive is still illegal.

Secondly, they should be taxed to pay for all these cycle lanes being built for them in the least, not to mention simply to use the road like everyone else.

Thirdly, they should be licensed then they might actually start realising their responsibilities - instead of just demanding ghteir rights all the time.

Fourthly, NO ONE should be allowed on the road (or pavement in lots of cases) until such time as they have passed some sort of proficiencey test - this should be both expensive and pointless in the manner of the Driver CPC!!

Firstly, i agree. I have insurance aswell with British Cycling. I also dont think cyclist should be on the pavement, its for walking not cycling.
I wont use cycle paths because they are basicly just a normal path, and i dont think walkers want someone on a bike coming flying towards them doing 20mph, if your on them you should be doing walking speed.
Secondly, i dont want there to be cycle lanes, and others dont either. Most ctycle lane or facilities are crap, built where car doors open, or they just put a sign up on a normal path and call it a cycle path
Thirdy,the licence is fine, but is someone with a driving licence going to have to do one aswell? Or are you going to let them off?
Do you not think a human being has rights anyway? Are you saying because i havent past a test on my bike, i dont have rights on the road?
Your third and fourth point is about the same.
The bit about tax, your not reading my posts. Have a read.
Do electric cars, or cars that produce below 35g(have i got that figure right?) of CO2 pay road tax?
Are cyclist with cars not already paying for the roads?
What is your road tax going to?
If you cant answer my questions, then just say you dont know, its fine.

And for anyone that will pass a cyclist close, or cut them up on purpose, do you also have the balls to tell their families when you take them off and cause them serious injury, why they fell off, or why you hit them?
I doubt many people could go up to the families of a cyclist they have knocked off in a moment of rage and tell them that they have killed the person.

[hombre]

Personally I do not give a fig how many grams, pounds ounces or tons of CO2 you ot youre mates on bike do or do not produce - you should be taxed, licensed and insured in the same way as every other road user. Why do you think you should have a free ride? (Please pardon the pun).

As for "someone with a driving licence (I assume you mean for a motorised vehicle) having to obtain a cycle licence, then yes, Why not? For many years I held an HGV class 1, but could drive neither a road roller, mototised mowing machine or two wheeled vehicle over 50cc - why should cyclists be exempt?

Incidentally, due to having taken additional tests I am now the proud owner of a licence allowing me to drive motorcycles, road rollers and motorised mowing machines, I still do not have proficiency in a push bike - if I wanted to ride one on Her Majestys Highways then should it be deemed necessary I would avail my self of the required document. More likely I would get a cab.

The fact that you dont like the cycle paths provided to you is actually irrellevant, they have been provided at no cost to the cyclist, yet you still arent happy. Need I say more?

[joeg]

Hombre:
Personally I do not give a fig how many grams, pounds ounces or tons of CO2 you ot youre mates on bike do or do not produce - you should be taxed, licensed and insured in the same way as every other road user. Why do you think you should have a free ride? (Please pardon the pun).

As for "someone with a driving licence (I assume you mean for a motorised vehicle) having to obtain a cycle licence, then yes, Why not? For many years I held an HGV class 1, but could drive neither a road roller, mototised mowing machine or two wheeled vehicle over 50cc - why should cyclists be exempt?

Incidentally, due to having taken additional tests I am now the proud owner of a licence allowing me to drive motorcycles, road rollers and motorised mowing machines, I still do not have proficiency in a push bike - if I wanted to ride one on Her Majestys Highways then should it be deemed necessary I would avail my self of the required document. More likely I would get a cab.

The fact that you dont like the cycle paths provided to you is actually irrellevant, they have been provided at no cost to the cyclist, yet you still arent happy. Need I say more?

I dont think your getting what im putting.
Not only should you be critisizing cyclist for not paying tax, but also owners of classic cars and electric cars, who also dont pay tax.
Have a read of what i put, take it in.
Cycle paths are just that, a path, many just have a blue sign on to say its a cycle path.
Another licence for a bicycle? What age are you going to bring this in then?
“thats it son/daughter, you can ride in the back garden but you cant go any further now, you dont have a licence”
Im not talking about how little co2 im producing, if you actually knew something, you would know that car manufacturers are/were trying to get cars below the 35g co2 level, so the car didnt need tax.
Well done, you have a licence with everything on.
I dont have a proficency in a bicycle, i taught myself.
Did you know theres a course you can do on a bike, where you are taught to ride on the road? Not like the proficency test.
My brother did that, he doesnt know how to safely ride a bike on the road and rides in the gutter.
He wont go down the left hand side of lorries though after me and my dad drummed it into him to not do it.
Now Hombre, go and read my posts, understand then, answer my questions or tell me you dont actually know the answer.
Or just dont bother, you will be down on the level of the people that seem to think cyclist dont pay anything towards the roads, dont have any rights, and you probably moan on about the person thats just trying to get to work or train, but cant afford a car, or doesnt want a car.

[joeg]

I dont have a free ride either, i still pay insurance for myself for incase i have an accident.
I dont pay tax, dont produce enough emissions to pay tax, like an electric car.
I dont pay for the upkeep of the roads because, if i remember right, thats done on council tax and local taxes, not VED(or as you want to call it, road tax)

[semtex]

Classic cars and electric cars still have to display a valid tax disc (albeit a £0.00 one) Perhaps cyclists shoud do the same.

To get that disc they have to prove road worthyness (by means of an MOT) and more importantly Insurance.

Now my tuppence worth on the subject.

Licence
I believe in a halfway house here, bring back cycling proficency with the ruling that if you want to cycle on the “Main” roads you must be in possession of one. (Note I said “main” roads. Little Tommy or Tracy would be allowed to ride his bike on a housing estate/cul de sac without one under supervision)

Tax
see below

Insurance.
Yes I do believe some form of 3rd party liability insurance should be required (and used to get your £0.00 tax disc)

I remember when I was about 14 or 15 and used do a lot of cycling. I was coming up the road at a reasonable rate of knots when a fellow cyclist came out of a path through a gap in a hedge. He was that close that despite braking hard, I T-boned him knocking him off his bike. It later transpired that he broke his collorbone in the accident.

Fortunatly his family and my family were good friends, both sides were heard and the lads father then gave him a bollocking for riding on the path.
But what if that wasn’t the case…and they decided to sue (which is more likely to happen in this day and age) At least insurance would cover this.

[joeg]

I agree with you there Semtex.
Although i think displaying a tax disc that isnt worth anything is abit pointless.
The insurance thing i think cyclist should have.
In the cycle club im in, you have to have some sort of insurance. Out on the road, ive had to swerve out of the way of other cyclists and have often nearly been hit by others.
One guy went from pavement to road as i was just about to pass him without looking
Road worthy-ness of bike.
Well, my bike is kept in very good condition, there are some right ■■■■■■■■ out on the road though.
Theres only a few people i let work on my bike, which hardly do any work.
Maybe the MOT thing, or somethign simular would be a good thing.
Aslong as it worked out cheap, i cant see there being a problem.
Going by many people do cycle to work for the cheapness, save on bus fare and other stuff, but with the price that is i doubt it would be hard to be cheaper.
Id love there to be less POBs on bikes, they are a danger.

[alamcculloch]

I do a bit of cycling and am glad to see that a few other members of the forums do so as well.The fact is that a rider of horse or cycle has the RIGHT to use the road. The driver of a motor vehicle uses the road by licence this makes a lot of difference .I was knocked off my bike by a dizzy motorist a few months ago am still in a bit of pain ,acourt case is pending.I am insured for riding as well as driving so in the fullness of time expect to be compensated for the wrecked bike.I dont think that testing or taxing bikes could be policed effectively., but a sum of £10 could be added to the price of a bike to go into a legal pot to offset cyclists misdemeanours on the roads. What do you all think of that.Also horsey people should not be permitted to leave great heaps of dung lying in the middle of the road ,if a motor cyclist skids and crashes could he sue thehorse rider.?

[starfighter]

I’ve always wondered where the justice is in that if your dog poos on the pavement you can get a fine but a horse can drop one the size of a small dog and kill a motorcyclist with impunity. I’m not the biggest fan of bikes because the only ones I notice are being ridden in a ■■■■■■■ manner by pricks which creates a negative perception of them in my mind. I sold my bike because I’m too fat and lazy to use it. It would be wonderful to make cyclists pay for their cycle lanes but how on earth would you licence and regulate them? I’m sure legally cyclists are pedestrians on wheels and unfortunately they do have the right to use the road so we’ll just have to deal with the fact and try not to kill too many of them with our “thundering juggernauts”.

[george3]

Cyclists are legally motorists and as such are subject to the same laws as every other motorist. Including careless, reckless and dangerous cycling. Traffic lights, pavements, front and rear lights at night, red and white respectively, etc etc.

[joeg]

But a cyclist can go over the speed limit, and the police cant do them for speeding.

Cycle lanes are crap, thes one by me thats right in the door zone, but some shops aswell so people mainly use it as a pavement.
Go out of it so you ride safe and you have car drivers just thinking your being an idiot by not riding in it, ride in it and run the risk of having a door opened on you.
Did you also know that the speed limit of cycle facilities is 20mph?

[happy_keith]

This thread is so wacky that I’m gonna join in: So when I read:

george3:
‘…Cyclists are legally motorists … subject to the same laws as every other motorist…’

and

JoeG:
‘…Cycle lanes are crap … Go out of it so you ride safe and you have car drivers just thinking your being an idiot by not riding in it, ride in it and run the risk of having a door opened on you…’

It is clear through poor misconception by us prol’s that our politicians are busier ruling Europe & the world rather than communicating and effectively managing the nation’s millions of road-users.

Yes, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ‘Highway Code’ publication (- an unpopular guide book) tells us that cyclists are road-users. (‘…motorists…’? Huh?). Meanwhile, ‘cycle lanes’ are to remind other road users that cyclists are likely to use that highway. They aren’t separate or mini highways soley to restrain cyclists at the exclusion of other road-users.

It goes on to suggest that all road users should afford other road-users accommodation regardless of which party is a half-wit or not. Poor road use by any road-user should be addressed by plod (but plod is busy with other stuff, etc, etc because they are also badly governed, shabbily prioritised, alienated and abhorred by the press/public & cheesed-off too).

So why not trust me as I suggest that this whole scenario has all been poorly communicated to us by those whom we elect to lead us as they deceive us with their ‘diversity is good’ punch-line which distracts them from their primary role of maintaining national order.

To conclude: Self-centred diversity such as we are seeing isn’t good: It alienates us into microns of discontent and - as evidenced by us not knowing stuff outside our self-centred knowledge - it is proving to divide us as they rule with their self-serving agenda (which is what?).

I’m only a messenger - don’t shoot…

[george3]

JoeG:
But a cyclist can go over the speed limit, and the police cant do them for speeding.

Cycle lanes are crap, thes one by me thats right in the door zone, but some shops aswell so people mainly use it as a pavement.
Go out of it so you ride safe and you have car drivers just thinking your being an idiot by not riding in it, ride in it and run the risk of having a door opened on you.
Did you also know that the speed limit of cycle facilities is 20mph?

I’m sure I read in the paper a while back something about a cyclist picking up a ticket from a speed gun.

[alamcculloch]

I was driving the lead car for a cycle race a few weeks back,the riders went through a couple of villages at about 35 -40 mph.Sunday morning no one around so no harm done .Riders have been charged with Fast and Furious riding in the past.May be there are different by-laws in England.

[joeg]

george3:

JoeG:
But a cyclist can go over the speed limit, and the police cant do them for speeding.

Cycle lanes are crap, thes one by me thats right in the door zone, but some shops aswell so people mainly use it as a pavement.
Go out of it so you ride safe and you have car drivers just thinking your being an idiot by not riding in it, ride in it and run the risk of having a door opened on you.
Did you also know that the speed limit of cycle facilities is 20mph?

I’m sure I read in the paper a while back something about a cyclist picking up a ticket from a speed gun.

He didnt get a ticket if i remember right, just got a warning for his speed.
You cant actually be done for speeding, just furious cycling, which takes in speeding and other offences.

There is no law to be in the cycle facility, it was going to be put in the highway code that cyclsit had to be in, if they werent in and an accident happened it would be their fault, but through petitions and showing that alot of cycle facilities arent good enough, it was tossed to one side.

[montydog]

alamcculloch:
I was driving the lead car for a cycle race a few weeks back,the riders went through a couple of villages at about 35 -40 mph.Sunday morning no one around so no harm done .Riders have been charged with Fast and Furious riding in the past.May be there are different by-laws in England.

Id love to go that fast! But I ride a single speed bike so am a bit restricted

[alamcculloch]

Sir Chris Hoy rides a single speed bike, doesnt hold him back .!!

[joeg]

montydog:

alamcculloch:
I was driving the lead car for a cycle race a few weeks back,the riders went through a couple of villages at about 35 -40 mph.Sunday morning no one around so no harm done .Riders have been charged with Fast and Furious riding in the past.May be there are different by-laws in England.

Id love to go that fast! But I ride a single speed bike so am a bit restricted

I ride fixed, a 72" fixed everywhere.
I can beat people on gears for sprints, up hills, keep up in chain gangs, and won the junior section of some open TTs on my fixed TT bike.
Just having one gear means jack.
72" fixed for training, 80 on that for TTs when its wet, 65" on a crappy old fixed i built cheap, 97" for TTs on the fixed TT bike, and 85" on track bike.
I often come in the top 5/6 in my clubs tuesday night TT, out of about 15/20. They are all on gears.
Fixed doesnt hold you back. Learn how to spin!

[alamcculloch]

Hope nobody wants to move us to another forum. Fixed means no one steals your bike and you dont waste time and effort wondering if you are in the right gear.When I rode fixed I felt that I had more involvement with the bike and the silent running was great for seeing the wildlife.

[joeg]

alamcculloch:
Hope nobody wants to move us to another forum. Fixed means no one steals your bike and you dont waste time and effort wondering if you are in the right gear.When I rode fixed I felt that I had more involvement with the bike and the silent running was great for seeing the wildlife.

I rode gears, then went over to fixed in the hope my chains would last me more then a month(did alot of miles in the month)
Liked the feeling of fixed, the symplicisty and challenge, and how it made my legs stronger.
Riding 48/48(72") around Derbyshire is just one of the challenges
The silent running, lack of maintenence and blowing people away when they have gears is just great