anyone can get on a bike and ride it but not anyone can get in a truck and drive it
so maybe they should get in the cab before we get on bikes
I always thought the “main reason people use bikes” is because they really have no idea of how much riding one shortens their odds of being dead by next Friday night… 
People also drive 4x4s because they think they are fuel-efficient, drive them at exactly 55mph because they think that’s the most fuel-efficient way to drive them, and bust a nut earning enough overtime to make the payments to the car finance company.
Then there’s people who think “paying cash” saves them a mint, “smoking duty frees” saves them a mint, and “having a cushy pension that pays out at 75” is ever going to be collected by the kind of person who’ll pay into it…
Handy Hint:
"Going Without" saves the most of all. 
themattster79:
TROTSKY3:
Cyclists should be trained before being allowed on the road , and also pay their way, they should have to take lessons, sit hazard and theory ,pass a test , be insured, and have a roadworthy vehicle, and be prosecuted for their faults . they do not have to read the highway code so don’t even know the rules of the road, but have the right to use it, maybe letting them ride on the pavement and hitting a pedestrian is safer than letting them on the road.Worst idea ive ever heard. The reason most people use push bikes is because there a cheap way to get around. So if you brought these regulations in no one would bother riding them. And so there would be more vehicle’s on the road. Also they can get prosecuted for their faults
Sounds like a plan for me. Keep the useless things off the bloody road.
themattster79:
TROTSKY3:
Cyclists should be trained before being allowed on the road , and also pay their way, they should have to take lessons, sit hazard and theory ,pass a test , be insured, and have a roadworthy vehicle, and be prosecuted for their faults . they do not have to read the highway code so don’t even know the rules of the road, but have the right to use it, maybe letting them ride on the pavement and hitting a pedestrian is safer than letting them on the road.Worst idea ive ever heard. The reason most people use push bikes is because there a cheap way to get around. So if you brought these regulations in no one would bother riding them (RESULT). And so there would be more vehicle’s on the road. Also they can get prosecuted for their faults
the worst idea I ever heard was a suggestion that people including children can use their cycles on the road amongst the traffic without training or any knowledge of the rules or safety issues, with a cycle in any condition they choose to ride, because its cheap. (sometimes its not so cheap)
you think cheaper is better than safer ? MOST are no prob at all, they are probably also drivers, some are not so good , a bit of training might help that.
TROTSKY3:
BillyHunt:
TROTSKY3:
BillyHunt:
The thing is that the vast majority of cyclists do “pay their way” as they have cars as well as bikes. Cyclists don’t have to pay a tax because if they did you would have to get pedestrians to pay, they use the roads also. And let’s face it, yes you might have the odd cyclist that gets in your busy way for a few seconds, but are they worse than the driver pulling in front of you before braking? The middle lane hogger? The tool that stops in the narrowest part of the road before flashing you through? The lorry driver that pulls out to overtake you on a DC doing 0.1kph faster than you? My advice would be to get used to them, there are going to be plenty more on the road over the next few years, and I’ve yet to see or hear of a cyclist winning the truck v bike match.they don’t pay their way , not one penny , millions of uninsured drivers on our roads, pedestrians cross the road not use it. sometimes there is no footpath.
Now you’re just showing your ignorance, the roads are paid for out of general taxation, so roads are paid for by some people that don’t drive or cycle, pedestrians for instance. If you earn money & pay tax then you pay, simple as. Your vehicle tax is but a small part of what goes into the pot.
If a pedestrian is crossing a road then they are using it, wether there is a footpath or not is neither here nor there, the fact is they’re crossing the road, clue is in the phrase.make your mind up Billy Hunt (rhymes with), you insure your vehicle, a pedestrian does not have a vehicle. I think cyclists should have insurance , if a cyclist goes into the back of you on his vehicle and damages your vehicle or worse, I believe cyclists should be insured to use the roads the same as all the other insured road users ,so im IGNORANT.
Ive never mentioned taxing a cyclist.
Make my mind up! Your saying cyclists don’t pay a penny when they obviously do. They pay taxes so pay for roads, they pay for their bikes, often costing more than some cars, some pay for insurance, not all but then you could say that about motorists. If a cyclist damages your vehicle they are just as liable as anyone else to have to pay for the damage. So how do you think they should pay?
MONTHLY 
quote BILLY HUNT
" a pedestrian is crossing a road then they are using it, wether there is a footpath or not is neither here nor there, the fact is they’re crossing the road, clue is in the phrase" NT
When I cross a level crossing ,do I also need a RAIL TICKET ?
Trying to change cyclists or truck drivers is a lost cause. Better to spend effort on improving the roads. Having driven trucks and cycled in NL I think we could learn a lot from them where there is often very decent separation between cyclists and everyone else, and a presumption of guilt on any driver who hits a cyclist. Certainly focusses the mind!
Unfortunately the politicians don’t agree:
Ministers Mike Penning and Norman Baker declared that Britain has nothing to learn about cycling safety from the Netherlands because our rate of cycling fatalities per head of population is lower.
They probably think they are very clever for finding out that on average 200 cyclists die a year in NL and only 109 do in UK. But a tiny bit of maths reveal that actually 1716 would die in the UK if we reached the same levels of journey by bike (33% of all journeys in NL, 2% of all journeys in UK). That is actually twice the fatality rate per head of population. But it never did suit a politician to let the facts get in the way of a good story.
TROTSKY3:
quote BILLY HUNT
" a pedestrian is crossing a road then they are using it, wether there is a footpath or not is neither here nor there, the fact is they’re crossing the road, clue is in the phrase" NT
When I cross a level crossing ,do I also need a RAIL TICKET ?
No why would you?, but you are still crossing the railway. Earlier you were trying to say pedestrians don’t use the road as all they do is cross it! If I were you I’d stop trying to be clever, it doesn’t suit you. If you find avoiding cyclists difficult maybe you’re in the wrong job & should try something less challenging.
I cycle a lot on the roads around north Bristol. I don’t commute into the centre as its hellish at the best of times
In the five years of cycling only one near miss with a lorry due to trailer swing in. Generally I find im given the room needed at treated with respect
But I never go down the inside, sit behind traffic at lights and junctions and pull over on single track lanes if I can.
I have insurance for my own peace of mind,
Treat others as you would want to be treated, but also there is something to be learned from all road users if they could spend a day in other peoples shoes
BillyHunt:
peterm:
Can’t agree with Billy Hunt. If you have a car, you tax and insure it, not talking about low or zero emissions. If you have a second car that you use for recreation or other reasons, you have to tax and insure it too, so the same goes for a bike, surely. A bike rider has a responsibility to use the road safely and to show a bit of care, consideration and common sense to other road users, so why not make them identifiable by a number plate.I’ve said before that there are drivers of all types of vehicles out there that shouldn’t be on the road, but when I’m on a bike (not often nowadays) I don’t get in everyone’s way, I don’t go up the inside of anything that might be turning left, I don’t go round parked cars without checking to see if it’s clear to move out, I don’t run lights or ride across pedestrian crossings. There are plenty more do’s and don’ts but basically it’s common sense and self preservation, not ignoring road rules knowing that I’ll get away with it because there’s no means of identifying me.
I really think that for the most part, it’s cyclists that need educating.
Many countries & cities have tried the number plate on bikes, not one has managed to keep it, it’s just too expensive to administer. And again, motor vehicles have them & that stops nobody driving like a tool. The fact is that, once you put an engine in something it becomes a lethal weapon, the onus is on the driver to drive safely. I, and many many other drivers, have had no problems with cyclists in over 30 years on the road, and yes I do drive through city centres. You see them, you wait for a place to get past them, you go past safely, what’s hard about that? You as a driver have to take responsibility, you might not like it but that’s part of the job.
I don’t have too many problems with cyclists because I treat every one of them like idiots, as I do other drivers, BUT I take issue with the statement highlighted. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve gone past a bike, only to have him or her come up between traffic and sit in front of me so that I have to get past it again, I’d be worth a fortune. It’s no good saying stay behind, because it doesn’t work in the real world. After forty odd years of driving lorries and buses, I’ve tried that and it definitely doesn’t work.
peterm:
BillyHunt:
peterm:
Can’t agree with Billy Hunt. If you have a car, you tax and insure it, not talking about low or zero emissions. If you have a second car that you use for recreation or other reasons, you have to tax and insure it too, so the same goes for a bike, surely. A bike rider has a responsibility to use the road safely and to show a bit of care, consideration and common sense to other road users, so why not make them identifiable by a number plate.I’ve said before that there are drivers of all types of vehicles out there that shouldn’t be on the road, but when I’m on a bike (not often nowadays) I don’t get in everyone’s way, I don’t go up the inside of anything that might be turning left, I don’t go round parked cars without checking to see if it’s clear to move out, I don’t run lights or ride across pedestrian crossings. There are plenty more do’s and don’ts but basically it’s common sense and self preservation, not ignoring road rules knowing that I’ll get away with it because there’s no means of identifying me.
I really think that for the most part, it’s cyclists that need educating.
Many countries & cities have tried the number plate on bikes, not one has managed to keep it, it’s just too expensive to administer. And again, motor vehicles have them & that stops nobody driving like a tool. The fact is that, once you put an engine in something it becomes a lethal weapon, the onus is on the driver to drive safely. I, and many many other drivers, have had no problems with cyclists in over 30 years on the road, and yes I do drive through city centres. You see them, you wait for a place to get past them, you go past safely, what’s hard about that? You as a driver have to take responsibility, you might not like it but that’s part of the job.
I don’t have too many problems with cyclists because I treat every one of them like idiots, as I do other drivers, BUT I take issue with the statement highlighted. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve gone past a bike, only to have him or her come up between traffic and sit in front of me so that I have to get past it again, I’d be worth a fortune. It’s no good saying stay behind, because it doesn’t work in the real world. After forty odd years of driving lorries and buses, I’ve tried that and it definitely doesn’t work.
Yes it happens all the time, but I’m guessing that in your 40 years you’ve not killed or maimed any. It’s all part of driving a large slow vehicle in a built up area. While we would all like bigger, wider, better roads with no other traffic, we all know it’s not going to happen. With more & more cyclists getting onto the roads, of varying degrees of experience, the onus is on us, the ones driving as a profession, to be extra vigilant when sharing the roads with other, more vulnerable users.
…Perhaps there’s a connection with "driving LGVs on roads too small for them, in areas that don’t want you in the first place" and “Doing Multidrop/Food deliveries”.? 
In that case, I think you’ll find that most of the driving community "don’t want to kill a cyclist - ever" and they’ll best achieve that aim by "not being on the roads where such accidents occur"… 
I think you’ve missed the point BH. I can be as professional, vigilant and caring as I bloody well like, but that doesn’t stop an idiot on a push bike from coming up the inside of me in a queue of traffic and then wobbling about in front of me when the lights change. If these people had some common sense and a bit of consideration, they’d know they were a pain in the aris and keep back behind the trucks, but they don’t give a monkeys and never will until they’re brought to book or squished, but it’s always the horrible lorry driver that’s got it all wrong. Most of us have at some time or other, ridden a bike, but how many of them have driven anything bigger than a car.
As for “in your 40 years you’ve not killed or maimed any.” I was seventeen when I was driving my fathers Morris Minor 5cwt van and a bloke ran into the side of it and died as a result. I was exonerated from all blame, but he was still dead. When I was 22, I was driving an artic behind another artic. We were both turning left with indicators going. After the bloke in front started making the turn a cyclist came belting up the inside and was squashed under the tandem trailer wheels. Neither incident bothered me and don’t now, but both were an eye opener as to what can happen to idiots. The driver in front of me was found blameless too.
peterm:
I think you’ve missed the point BH. I can be as professional, vigilant and caring as I bloody well like, but that doesn’t stop an idiot on a push bike from coming up the inside of me in a queue of traffic and then wobbling about in front of me when the lights change. If these people had some common sense and a bit of consideration, they’d know they were a pain in the aris and keep back behind the trucks, but they don’t give a monkeys and never will until they’re brought to book or squished, but it’s always the horrible lorry driver that’s got it all wrong. Most of us have at some time or other, ridden a bike, but how many of them have driven anything bigger than a car.As for “in your 40 years you’ve not killed or maimed any.” I was seventeen when I was driving my fathers Morris Minor 5cwt van and a bloke ran into the side of it and died as a result. I was exonerated from all blame, but he was still dead. When I was 22, I was driving an artic behind another artic. We were both turning left with indicators going. After the bloke in front started making the turn a cyclist came belting up the inside and was squashed under the tandem trailer wheels. Neither incident bothered me and don’t now, but both were an eye opener as to what can happen to idiots. The driver in front of me was found blameless too.
No, I haven’t missed your point, I know that cyclists can & do, occasionally ride up the inside of vehicles, not as much nowadays I’ve noticed though. But, as expected on a truckers forum, it’s never the lorry pulling up right next to a cyclist already at the lights who, when they turn to green then indicates left & tries to turn before letting the cyclist away. I know it happens because it’s happened to me.
We did this course last Saturday, the principles of the course are ok (to raise awareness towards bicycles).
It was in 2 parts- 3.5 hours, classroom with videos, statistics & discussion & 3.5 hours practical on push bikes.
The classroom part was ok, would have been mind-numbingly boring if it was for the whole day, but you could endure 3.5 hours watching the causes of some ‘Accidents’ & the consequences.
The cycling part made me feel like an 8 year old child on a cycling proficiency course. I’ve been cycling since I was a small child & motorcycling + cycling since I was 16, so I’m very aware of the dangers between wagons & vulnerable road users.
There were 2 ‘Instructors’ (nice people, to be honest) but the training couldn’t be more Demeaning, we were made to wear helmets & hi viz (or there was a lot of paperwork) we rode around the car park, in & out of cones, had a slow race (I won both times) had a fast race in & out of the cones (my team won, both times), this was to make sure that everyone was happy with the bikes (fair enough, a few of us hadn’t been on bikes for a lot of years) but then it got silly.
I thought that they would get one of us in a wagon & drive around the group, up & down, around junctions, get the group to ride up the inside next to a kerb & even demonstrate what happens to a bike when a wagon rides over one (you only need a knackered old bike to prove the point), but no, we all rode out like a family of Ducklings following our Mum, with our Dad behind us & proceeded to ride around our deserted industrial estate for a couple of hours, no lorries to contend with, only a few cars & a lot of people laughing at us (thinking-Wot a load of Wallys) the instructors were even praising us when we managed to turn into or out of a deserted junction.
I got upset when they wouldn’t stop to let us all have a go on the swings & slide.
What a complete waste of our time, we should have been doing the practical on a busy road with junctions, traffic lights, roundabouts & even bendy country lanes & as I said before, with lorries & fast moving traffic, just to show the inexperienced amongst us how vulnerable you are, when you’re not encased in a steel overcoat.
It’s courses like this that would be a very useful for a lot of us, if they put it across in the right way, not Namby Pambying about. There were 18 of us for the day, split into 2 groups, apparently the authorities paid for it (that’s why our Boss made us do it !!!)
Three people teaching the course (obviously being paid) & now we are all ‘Trained Up’ to be able to drive into London ! ‘WHOOPY F’ING DOO’
Will it save a few ‘Kamikaze’ Cyclist’s lives ?
Probably, but it could save a few more if they go about the training in a more robust way.
martinviking:
Will it save a few ‘Kamikaze’ Cyclist’s lives ?
Probably, but it could save a few more if they go about the training in a more robust way.
As poor as the course sounds that looks like job done to me.
This is a good idea and will improve driving from all angles because you will have greater awareness from a cyclists point of view, so when planning a move where cyclists are around you will have greater knowledge. I ride a racing cycle for fitness and have not been on it in ages but want to get back on it. You see the world at a much slower pace and learn a lot about how other drivers treat you. Driver’s with a capital D know how to handle any if not most situations and always try and keep a steady positive mental attitude. This world is hectic and the pace of life is fast, there are too many vehicles on today’s roads and the average motorist is in a rush to get from A to B seeing cyclists as a hindrance and a pain, just like us truckers are to car driver’s. The cyclist does not have to pay for using the road… hey it’s non polluting for God’s sake and kind to the environment, runs on the human engine. Common sense is all the tuition required to be safe on the roads, lights and visible clothing when dark are a must.
The trouble is some are just too lazy to even think of getting on cycle. If so fair enough but allow others to cycle in safety at least!!