when riding through rush hour traffic I am sometimes held up by packs of inconsiderate motorists driving in groups of more than 5,

Damn straight, I could do my commute door to door in 27 minutes if it wasn't for all the stupid doxy bints in motor cars buggering about getting in my way, incapable of getting the smeg on with it, and all those boring traffic lights I insist on stopping at, which are only necessary becuase of all the stupid metal boxes fat lazy people insist on driving around. So it takes nearer 45 mins.

But that's life, they have all the right in the world to drive their cars, just as I have every right to ride my bike down the Queen's Highway.

fewer divs running red lights on their fixies is what is required.

Why if they don't cause accident surely that is as acceptable than riding in a pack of 30?

hungry monkey no I am not that thick; however I shall point to the line being referred as "white line", not "doted line" therefore I do stand correct.

Why if they don't cause accident surely that is as acceptable than riding in a pack of 30?

There is no law about riding in packs of 30, though plenty of TLI, CTC and BCF regulations and guidelines about doing so safely and with the minimum of disruption to motorists/oter road users.

There are laws about running red lights. They are there for a reason. Crushing dozy fixie riders under your wheels becuase it was green for you and the biker just ran the light is pretty hard on the motorist, plus traffic accidents gum the whole city up big time. So lights are (mostly) good.

However I will say that I nsee as many drivers running lights as I do cyclists, and 2-3 tonnes of metal running lights has more of a potential impact than a skinny fixie pillock.

Juan – just to take a step back here – your frustration is 100% derived from your mistaken belief that cars own the road. This is the same as a lot of drivers and the reason that cyclists get killed. You are just plain wrong in this belief and a potential danger to cyclists until you realise.

Actually, I think his frustration stems from his well-known hatred of roadies. 🙂

your mistaken belief that cars own the road.

Didn't say that
I said road are surface FOR the car and therefore (yes that is my favourite english word) the road as we know it, is for the car. Tarmac is expensive and I very much doubt the state of road are maintain so middle aged men in pink lycra riding exotica carbon bikes can enjoy themselves. Once again maybe my rather peculiar english have disturbed you, but please do not get blind by your hatred of cars (after all misquoting is a tool I can use too 😉 ).

I am glad finally someone know me that well my dear 😉

Aye, and us cyclists don't feel we own the road, that gets knocked out of you pretty quick 😉

Those of us that ride on the road a fair amount know a bit about asserting yourselves so that motorists are less likely to pull some half baked stupid impatient stunt, becuase we all know they think they own the road, so you just have to manage that expectation.

Accidents happen though, stupid legislation that increases the alienation of the motoring public further isn't going to help.

Killing the growth in road and commuter cycling traffic off stone dead with arbitary car is king rules isn't going to rescue the planet or 'leverage alternative transport solutions' to the car from a cash strapped goverment either.

I said road are surface FOR the car and therefore (yes that is my favourite english word) the road as we know it, is for the car. Tarmac is expensive and I very much doubt the state of road are maintain so middle aged men in pink lycra riding exotica carbon bikes can enjoy themselves

You're not reading what I've written juan. Did this problem come into effect when you were studing the Highway Code???:

Road surfacing, cost is not billions, I also pay for it via my council and income tax, dispite not having a car, allowing most roads to deterorate so motorised traffic can't use them would suit me fine, if trunk roputes where car free and better surfaced (or looked after at all), motorised traffic increases road surface damage wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more than bikes, feet or weather, especially road heavy haulage.

Oh and the roads were originally tarmacadammed FOR CYCLE TRAFFIC!

it's illegal to go over the white lane

not true. you can cross a solid white line when safe to so

You MUST NOT cross or straddle double white lines in normal driving. Exceptions are: if it is safe to do so and you need to enter premises adjoining the carriageway or a side road. In addition, it is permissible to cross the line as necessary and provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle. Or to overtake a horse, pedal cycle or road maintenance vehicle, only if they are not travelling at speeds greater than 16 km/h (10 mph). You can also cross double white lines when ordered to do so by a policeman in uniform.

Those of us that ride on the road a fair amount

Well I think I do qualify for that. However if you imply that to be able to use the road I must wear lycra, shoes I can't walk in, take drugs and have a carbon exotica I am then forced to abide to your universal knowledge of all my love.

You don't wear pink lingerie, orange stockings, cork clogs and a trilby when riding on the road? You sir, are a vile abomination to the good name of road cyclists everywhere.

not true.

Over here it is, unless you have no other way. For example you'll get fined and have point removed if you over take a cyclist and cross the solid white lane;
Plus, if I quote you thombthub it's Or to overtake a horse, pedal cycle or road maintenance vehicle, only if they are not travelling at speeds greater than 16 km/h (10 mph).
You shall not it cycle (and not cycles) plus it's for speed lower thatn 10mph, and everyone knows that lycra makes you go soooo fast that you are at least twice this speed.

Other terms of endearment you might try to spice up your beautifully idiomatic english:

– old bean
– sweetie-pie
– snookums
– honey badger
– cupcake
– angel-cheeks
– cutie-pie
– flange-cherub
– fag-masher
– me old dutch steamboat

Most of these are usually used to refer to women you are attempting to woo, but can also be used generally to lend you an air of Stephen Fry-esque loucheness. I hope this is helpful. 🙂

The problem is that while it makes a fair point, as a bit of motoring legislation it would be largely unenforceable, and yet another rule that many drivers would ignore (I counted 3 on their mobiles this morning)…

The most vocal campaigning on cycle safety seems to be from the “Ban ‘em’ all” wing of the Tabloid press these days…

I think what I would like to see is a bit more promotion of “good practise” both for cyclist and motorists, we’ve all seen the “watch out for motor bikes” campaign and the less frequently shown Ad telling Motor bike riders not to overtake 18 wheelers on blind rises in the wet…

But how often do we see an ad telling drivers to watch for cyclists?
And vice-versa; an ad telling cyclists to make themselves more visible, fit some lights, look over their shoulders and signal where possible?

A petition asking for a government backed campaign to better promote cycle safety awareness (for both cyclists and Drivers) would be far more use than an unenforceable law…

I’d also like to see free courses for both motorists and cyclists to promote the same set of observational skills and awareness…

The credit crunch arguably has forced more commuters back on to their bikes. Any responsible government would want to ensure that these “crumple zone free” citizens are at least aware of their vulnerability and that other road users are conscience of their prescience…

Don't turn this into a roadie vs MTber debate. To the motoring public ANYONE riding on a road no matter what they're wearing or riding is a CYCLIST. That's everyone from newspaper boy on BMX to MTBer using it to get to the next stretch of bridleway.

The issue here is CYCLIST vs motorist and the last thing the debate needs is pointless niche-ification (is that a word??). Cyclists are (or they bloody should be!) in this together to make the roads safer for everyone (inc drivers). Better education and increased law enforcement of the perfectly good existing laws for everyone.

telling cyclists to make themselves more visible, fit some lights, look over their shoulders and signal where possible?

That is not going to be possible sweet pie, think performance here 😉

The issue here is CYCLIST vs motorist

Nope I think that is the problem, playing that game and turning it into a fight…

Raised awareness and better training on both sides of the debate would help far more than excessive, punitive and unenforceable laws…

That is not going to be possible sweet pie, think performance here

I perform much better when I'm in full view, rather than street pizza.

Mmm sexy:

AARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGgg
I CAN'T SEE ANYMORE………………

Let's keep with the times – 914.4mm not 3 feet.

he he he!

Gosh. That image gives me a fizzing feeling behind my penis. 😯

It's the orange/purple combo partly…

Nope I think that is the problem, playing that game and turning it into a fight…
Raised awareness and better training on both sides of the debate would help far more than excessive, punitive and unenforceable laws…

Which is exactly what I said if you read to the end of my last post…

And what I said in the post prior to yours, what I was taking issue with was your combative attitude: "Cyclists Vs Motorists" not exactly a positive message is it? and that's the thing that get drivers backs up straight away, the assumption that drivers are always in the wrong…