The Driver vs. Bicyclist Fight is Way More Violent in England

reply to post by 4hero


Right of way, doesn't mean you can just swerve in to traffic whenever. IF you don't believe me, try it, see what happens.

The bus driver should have been tried for attempted murder. I don't care if the biker was next to the bus for miles yelling and flicking the bus driver off. You can't just go hitting people with your vehicle because your mad. The biker was lucky he didn't get killed.

As a CDL driver on roads here that are mostly 2 laned roads once each way you know what i do when i see a person riding their bike? Its a really hard thought to grasp but i move over and if it is not safe to pass them i slow down and wait to go around them.

Why? Cause that is a human being on that bike and I am a human being in a car / truck.

I find all the anti-cyclist comments in this thread intriguing. Mind you, as a bike messenger myself in New York city, I find many of these arguments down right ignorant.

Especially in the outer boroughs and my home borough Brooklyn, I have to put up with drivers blaring their horn at me when I'm trying to pass a double parked car and worry about some speeding jackass trying to sheer off my whole left side. You all have no idea how complicated it can be on numerous days riding a bike in the city when people argue you shouldn't be riding in the street and then argue about riding on the sidewalk. I don't want to knock a pedestrian down on my bike, I run the risk of falling off my bike when I do so as well.

I can understand the frustration towards cyclists as I have witness reckless behavior: I personally get pissed off myself when they make a move with no sort of warning whatsoever, but given my past injury:



Where do you truly expect us to ride? We can't go on the sidewalk, we can't go in the street, there is almost nowhere acceptable for any cyclist who careful enough to not cause chaos in any form according to how you people view things. It's digusting with the dangers we face but no consideration for us.

That seemed pretty intentional. I watched it a few times before I decided to give an opinion. It LOOKS like the bus driver didn't realize the cyclist was there so it startled him, then he got pissed and decided to be an ass about it.

I do not know about in the city, but I can give you my opinion on what I see, living out in the country in the US. We have winding FM roads out here, which apparently is popular with cyclists. Well, there is no shoulder on these roads, and the speed limit is 60 mph.

I constantly come around a corner and have to break extremely hard because there are one or more cyclists in the middle of the road. There are no passing zones for the most part on these roads, so I have to slow down, and sit there behind them driving under 10 mph for 10 minutes. It gets very annoying.

My brother was cycling on one of these roads, and was hit by some company's truck. The guy went to pass him, but instead of getting in the other lane, he only moved over halfway. Well, he hit my brother and threw him off his bike, and he broke just about every bone in his body, including his femur, pelvis, arm, etc...Big bones. He was in the hospital for a very long time.

Despite the fact that the law, which our lawyer told us, given that this particular road doesn't have a shoulder and doesn't meet certain width requirements, states that the cyclist has the entire lane, the lawsuit ended without justice...which isn't what this thread is about, but it plays into my opinion on the matter.

He was on a road that was straight as well, so imagine how dangerous a curvy road can be. I do not think bikes should be given the same privileges as an automobile. They aren't fast enough for one, which can causes many problems. Sometimes they are also hard to see, which is something I have noticed frequently, with the majority of bikes that are on the road in my area.

So I vote that bikes should not be allowed on roads under any conditions, as they offer no protection for the rider, and cause too many problems for the majority, which are cars, on the road. Motorcycles are more dangerous than cars, since they do not offer any impact absorption, but at least they don't go 5 miles per hour.

reply to post by Ixtab


wtf?

i pay my car tax just like you do, cos i own a car AND cycle.

what a stupid tool

not every one can afford a car, and have to cycle.

FFS.

personally, i think this bus driver should be put up for attempted murder for that move.

I am always getting abuse when I cycle on the road. ie, beeping, shouting and swearing. But if I cycle at a safe speed on the pavement I get stopped by the police and told its illegal and have to cycle on the road or get fined. Us cyclist should petition for our own roads where we can cycle to our hearts content and not be abused. and before anyone says it, cycling paths are not our own roads because they are still part of the road and therefore most drivers still class you as been in there territory and stealing there road, lol.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
So I vote that bikes should not be allowed on roads under any conditions, as they offer no protection for the rider, and cause too many problems for the majority, which are cars, on the road. Motorcycles are more dangerous than cars, since they do not offer any impact absorption, but at least they don't go 5 miles per hour.

So your whole reasoning is your car is faster, and no one should get in your way?

You don't care about the rider being unprotected, you are bothered that you have to slow down.

Just because you drive a car capable of moving faster than other road traffic, it doesn't give you the right to expect slower traffic to get out of your way.

If you're on a road that cyclists use, especially if you know, you should adjust your driving style, and speed regardless of the speed limit, so that you will not be surprised when come around a corner and see cyclists.

I'm tired of this entitlement people think driving a car gives them. Stop thinking the road belongs to you, and learn to respect other users, and share the damn road.

Originally posted by RagnarokZ
I am always getting abuse when I cycle on the road. ie, beeping, shouting and swearing. But if I cycle at a safe speed on the pavement I get stopped by the police and told its illegal and have to cycle on the road or get fined. Us cyclist should petition for our own roads where we can cycle to our hearts content and not be abused. and before anyone says it, cycling paths are not our own roads because they are still part of the road and therefore most drivers still class you as been in there territory and stealing there road, lol.

Hey I get it. Im a driver, but hey I've ridden my bike to work many a times. The city is a different deal, and you have to realize that most people driving out there are idiots. But this isn't a one-sided problem, it seldom is. When I'm riding the bike, I'm aware of cars behind me, and what I'm doing, because ultimately I'm the one at risk. Its common sense to slow for a bike approaching a double parked car, or any obstacle for that matter, and drivers need to be taught how to actually obey the bike paths on roads. Every time I see a car going to make a right turn, they always go wide, so you think they might be going left to change lanes or something, but then they turn right, not even aware of any bikers coming down the path, so I am constantly aware of this while I'm riding. Its also common sense that if you find your self on a two lane curvy road, you ride single file, ALL THE TIME, not just when cars are behind you, one of these days, there going to be coming around that corner too fast, they won't see you in time, and you'll ultimately pay the price, the farther you can get to the outside of the lane the better.

The argument that all car drivers are just impatient, and they should just drive behind the bikes at all times, giving them full use of the lane at all times is ridiculous. I can use the same argument for the sidewalk, you guys say its dangerous because you go too fast, well if you slow your biking down to walking speed, wouldn't be so dangerous would it?

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
So I vote that bikes should not be allowed on roads under any conditions, as they offer no protection for the rider, and cause too many problems for the majority, which are cars, on the road. Motorcycles are more dangerous than cars, since they do not offer any impact absorption, but at least they don't go 5 miles per hour.

So your whole reasoning is your car is faster, and no one should get in your way?

You don't care about the rider being unprotected, you are bothered that you have to slow down.

Just because you drive a car capable of moving faster than other road traffic, it doesn't give you the right to expect slower traffic to get out of your way.

If you're on a road that cyclists use, especially if you know, you should adjust your driving style, and speed regardless of the speed limit, so that you will not be surprised when come around a corner and see cyclists.

I'm tired of this entitlement people think driving a car gives them. Stop thinking the road belongs to you, and learn to respect other users, and share the damn road.

Didn't you say that bikes are too fast for sidewalks? Why don't you just slow down on the bike to walking speed, everybody wins

Originally posted by andersensrm
I can use the same argument for the sidewalk, you guys say its dangerous because you go too fast, well if you slow your biking down to walking speed, wouldn't be so dangerous would it?

The only problem been that if you live in England, riding on the pavement is illegal no matter what speed you travel.
Do agree about cycling in single file though. I always cycle alone so dont do this but do get annoyed when theres about 50 cyclists taking up half the road.

Originally posted by RagnarokZ

Originally posted by andersensrm
I can use the same argument for the sidewalk, you guys say its dangerous because you go too fast, well if you slow your biking down to walking speed, wouldn't be so dangerous would it?

The only problem been that if you live in England, riding on the pavement is illegal no matter what speed you travel.
Do agree about cycling in single file though. I always cycle alone so dont do this but do get annoyed when theres about 50 cyclists taking up half the road.

Well then its just a matter of changing the law, the point is that it's a hypocritical argument.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by Ixtab
If cyclists paid road tax and had insurance I could accept there presence on the road, but they have neither so should not in anyway be allowed on the road.

Sorry if that offends any campaigners for cyclists rights.

BS, you pay those fees for the privilege to drive a car, not use the road. Just because it costs you more money than someone else it doesn't mean you should have more rights. It's your choice, you are not forced to drive a car.

Cyclists have as much right as you do to travel.

Where are they supposed to ride?

The side walk.

You would have to be a complete moron to ride a bicycle in such a busy road. Go ride on an empty country road not in the middle of a busy city road for crying out loud. You wouldn't let your kids ride there so why would you set a bad example?

Why put yourself in unnecessary danger? Isn't there some back roads, some neighborhood roads that you could ride on?

Alternatively you could move to a city that was built to accommodate cyclists in a manner that puts them very low risk of the 3,000 pound hunks of metal flying around

-Alien

Where I live, the drivers generally don't take out cyclists out of malice, but rather incompetence. Driving while texting is incompetent driving, which I'm sure plays a large role as well.

I am an experienced cyclist. I ride hundreds of miles both off and on road. One rule of riding in traffic is stay out of the way. Another is never go down the middle of a lane when traffic is there. This guy was literally daring that bus to pass etc. In effect he was literally attempting to slow traffic. If not deliberately then through stupidity.
I actually cannot fault the anger of the Bus driver in this case though attempting to kill for such a thing is way out of the acceptable.
If you are going to ride in traffic. Wear the gear, and steer clear.
Both of these guys were in the wrong. I cannot side with either one.
dh

Originally posted by InsideYourMind

Originally posted by Silvertrowel


I watched the vid. What cycle lane? I didnt see any cycle lane.

=
ukcyclerules.com...

Both lanes on the road are cycle path's.

The bus drivers actions are the effects of road rage. there's no conspiracy here

edit on 20/2/2012 by InsideYourMind because: quoteboxes

OMG.......... Your kidding me right?
You think thats a cycle lane?????

And you think its got something to do with the event in question???
ROFL

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
The side walk.

No!

www.sfbike.org...

We've already had this discussion. It is illegal and creates a problem for pedestrians. We are trying to solve a problem by NOT creating another one.

You would have to be a complete moron to ride a bicycle in such a busy road. Go ride on an empty country road not in the middle of a busy city road for crying out loud. You wouldn't let your kids ride there so why would you set a bad example?

What if you live in the city? What if your work involves riding a bicycle in the city? My perspective comes from being a bike messenger, but it should apply to all cyclists.

You have no more right to use the road than anyone, that IS the law, not just my opinion. You probably complain that cyclists don't abide by the traffic laws? Do you see the contradiction?

Why put yourself in unnecessary danger? Isn't there some back roads, some neighborhood roads that you could ride on?

Oh so no one should do anything then?

Alternatively you could move to a city that was built to accommodate cyclists in a manner that puts them very low risk of the 3,000 pound hunks of metal flying around

Oh yes, we are all in a position to just up and move where we want to?

The idea is we need to stop the 3,000 lbs chunks of metal flying around our city streets. Why should the motorized vehicle always be accommodated for? They are the problem, not cyclists, or pedestrians. We're tired of this! We will rise up and take over our streets, your days of entitlement are numbered, the revolution is close.

Yeah back at ya

I'm not a big fan of bicycles riding in the middle of the road... but whacking someone with a bus is a tad extreme, even to this Texan.

The argument about bicyclists paying for road use is silly. Cars / Trucks (Lorry? Why are they called that?) all outweigh a bicycle by orders of magnitude. I don't know how they do it in Europe (wonderful place even if y'all are a bunch of libs ) but here we are taxed by vehicle weight. Why? Because an 80,000 pound truck does more damage to the road than my little 6,000 pound pickup...

As a motorcycle rider I tend to side with the cyclists. If you're riding on 2 wheels you have the cloak of invisibility. It's on your shoulders to be seen... However, some cyclists need to go back to grade school and learn what the M means in F=MV. Some... not all.

reply to post by ANOK


The only reasons you said riding on the sidewalk was dangerous is because bicycle riders ride too fast, and can run into people and such. Then you say cars drive too fast and can run into bikers and such. You say cars should slow down, but bikers shouldn't? If you ride at walking speed how can you hit anyone? If you can't drive a car, there's always public transportation, so its not like your forced to ride a bike if you can't afford a car.