- This topic has 149 replies, 53 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by jeb.
-
57% of ALL cyclists run red lights, according to IAM?!?
-
crazy-legsFull MemberPosted 11 years ago
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18072259
Seems the BBC have also been highlighting what TJ siad. I remember the videos of the Portishead, Bristol road that they talk about in the article. Incredible difference – it can work.
Not far from me they’ve replaced what used to be a traffic light controlled junction with a big brick-paved open area, lowered all the kerbs, removed obstructing signs and just put some slightly raised cobbles down the middle of the road to differentiate the lanes – no other road markings.
It’s slowed traffic down markedly but also improved the flow.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoOh Jeebus. I stupidly read through the highest rated comments on the Daily Mail article.
How thoroughly depressing.
Those are the kind of people I would worry about sharing a sign-and-light-free road with!
TandemJeremyFree MemberPosted 11 years agoTheir attitude to bike in particular represents an entirely different attitude to a whole host of issues. One of them being their attitude towards oil. Which I believe is at the heart of our problem and Hollands enlightenment. Even more so than safety of children/citizens which is often cited as the reason for the push bike-centric culture.
Really not you know. they are a very similar peoples to us being descended from the same tribes with very similar attitudes and so on.
The shared spaces concept has also been a success in many other countries
alex222Free MemberPosted 11 years agoThere attitude to energy since the oil crisis in the 70’s? (I’m not exactly sure due to my age ;)) became a lot more forward thinking. As opposed to the UK’s attitude towards energy which has never changed (Though the caveat is that my facts/opinions on this may be slightly or very wrong).
richmtbFull MemberPosted 11 years agoOh Jeebus. I stupidly read through the highest rated comments on the Daily Mail article.
How thoroughly depressing.
Those are the kind of people I would worry about sharing a sign-and-light-free road with!
I get what your saying but if you take away signals you take away priorities and the sense of entitlement that goes with it.
The indignation from the Daily Wail mob is becuase of their punctured sense of entitlement when they see cyclists RLJing – deep down they are probably just annoyed they can’t do the same thing.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoSome choice Daily Mail comments, does anyone think we can ever share the road nicely with these people:
message to all cyclist if you want to stay safe ……. STAY OFF THE FR…IN ROADS and leave it for people who actually PAY to use it .. i mean you wouldn’t pay for a bottle of wine & then let ME drink it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! so get off and stay off .or get a licence and pay to ride in the gutter were you be long ….
I hate cyclists. I’m surprised only 73% admit to riding on the pavements. Around here nearly 90% of them do and some of them have the cheek to ring their bells expecting pedestrians to move out of the way for them. I ignore it. Let them go around. I’m where I should be.
(any bets that “where I should be” is actually in the middle of a shared use path?)
I totally disagree that cyclists should be made to pay road tax etc – they should be taken OFF the roads entirely. It’s the 21st century, and this slow and selfish mode of transport should be confined to specially designated parks.
Cyclists are a danger to themselves and other road users, and should be banned from using all A & B Class Roads. In addition they should be required to have full and adequate insurance and pay an element of Road Taxation. Banning the so called Green cyclists would also save the NHS and the motor insurance companies a fortune! NB: I used to cycle regularly, but realised that in today’s ever increasing traffic the above is 100% true.
The fact that New Labour cynically renamed Road Tax as a ploy to raise more tax due to their (now totally disproved) climate change scam makes no difference. It is still essentially Road Tax and it’s still essentially theft. Taxing vehicles on the basis of irrelevant omissions is theft.
Cyclists in the UK are smug self satisfied law breaking pedestrian endangering Green Nazi thugs in the main
Personally, I despise cyclists and think most of them are the scum of the earth.
I am amazed that the government has not brought in registration, testing and licencing for cyclists. Cyclists could pay road tax at the rate of 25% car tax. A great potential revenue earner that they have missed. No wait …. that would be common sense.
Erm.. we already pay 100% of Band A Car Tax 🙂
Last week I was coming up to a roundabout and planning to go straight on, therefore I didn’t need to indicate as I was going neither right nor left. The traffic to my left, stopped to let me go through the roundabout – that is, all EXCEPT a cyclist, who looked straight at me and then proceeded to cycle right ACROSS my path! And when I blasted the horn at him, HE gave ME the two fingers! He’s going to cause a serious accident one of these days and it’ll be HIM in the wrong.
Erm… so you came off a roundabout, with a lane of traffic to your left that had to stop to let you off, and nearly hit a cyclist in the process. And he is in the wrong??
I was just pushing my son’s buggy on to a crossing when one of these arrogant eco-do-gooders just about smashed straight into us. Hang them. Hang them high.
🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄
richmtbFull MemberPosted 11 years agoLets hope we aren’t judged as a species by comments on the Daily Mail website!
Could be worse though it could be youtube comments!
jackthedogFree MemberPosted 11 years agoSome choice Daily Mail comments, does anyone think we can ever share the road nicely with these people:
If you take such comments as an example of how we actually behave in real life, then you’re also suggesting that posts such as this (posted 20 hours ago on the first Justin Bieber video I clicked on):
F*** YOU *SSH*LE! DIE IN A HOLE AND F***? YOUR PARENTS!
mean that, when conducted face to face in the real world, the same discussion about the merits of a pop star would result in one hole, a reanimated corpse and some very unhappy parents. Of course it wouldn’t.
I try to remain a measured and reasonable contributor to the internet, but only the other day on Twitter I publicly stated that the mere sound of John Cooper Clarke makes me want to gouge out my eyes to use as ear plugs. I don’t really, it’s just fun to vent.
Even if it were fair to draw some kind of correlation between anonymously posted vitriolic spleen venting and the actual respect for fellow human life out there on the streets, then we should all find it pretty amazing that lines painted on the road, a few signs and boxes on sticks with coloured lights are all it takes to protect us from one another.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoFair point jack, but mention “cyclists on the road” down the pub and you are just as likely to hear such vitriolic nonsense – whereas mention “Justin Bieber” and you’ll probably just get some eye rolling and people politely backing away.
If the issue is a misguided sense of entitlement and priority then I think it goes far beyond traffic signals and road layouts.
The number one thing that comes out from any comment section is the usual “bikes don’t pay for car tax, fuel tax, insurance, MOTs or driving licenses so they have less rights than cars”
I’m not sure how you can ever make those people happy.
jackthedogFree MemberPosted 11 years agoFair point jack, but mention “cyclists on the road” down the pub and you are just as likely to hear such vitriolic nonsense – whereas mention “Justin Bieber” and you’ll probably just get some eye rolling and people politely backing away.
Online or in the pub, it’s all trap flapping. Meet me in person and you’ll hear me claim out loud that I want to stuff my own eyes down my ears, but I won’t actually do it. Nor do I really want to see every football fan hanged, despite having screamed it in sheer frustration every other week when trying to park near my old house on match day.
Given legal clearance and the necessary equipment, would the person happy to go on record on a national newspaper website saying
Hang them. Hang them high.
actually indiscriminately put to death everyone who has ever ridden a bicycle on the public highway?
Those same tired old points regarding tax and insurance argued by motorists are a symptom of the learned sense of entitlement, not the cause. They’re bitterly moaning about their own burdens rather than the lack of ours, as shown by the failed logic of simultaneously opposing high taxes while demanding they be extended to more road users.
The ‘motorist’ feels victimised at every turn having been reduced from king of the road, symbol of hope, freedom, aspiration and progression to social pariah in less than a generation. As such they guard whatever they feel remains of their supposed turf with all the unnecessary and misguided ferocity of an abused snarling dog angrily guarding its food bowl.
They (I should say we – I drive too) needn’t feel like this. They (we) do so only out of ignorance. The point comes down to whether we want to continue building our world around ignorance or enlightenment. As shown above and elsewhere, the latter is slowly becoming the accepted way to go after decades of the former having been proven a failure.
I’m not sure how you can ever make those people happy.
You make drivers happy by reducing their sense of entitlement. It’s counter intuitive but proven methodology. Just as spoilt children are the most unpleasant, just as the rich seems the most selfish while the poor the most kind.
No human is born with an ingrained hatred of cyclists. Generally we learn to ride a bike before we learn to drive a car. It’s what happens after that’s responsible for shaping attitudes, and that is what needs to be tackled. And thankfully, albeit slowly, it is.
AlexSimonFull MemberPosted 11 years agoThere’s a new ‘shared space’ project just completed in a previous traffic bottleneck of Pynton
What you can see on the map above has now been replaced by a ‘free-for-all’.
Nobody really knows who’s got right-of-way, so everyone just inches through it, looking every-which-way.
I like it, but my wife is petrified to drive through it – and actively avoids it.
(those roundabouts aren’t really 3-dimensional – just different coloured and shaped cobbles)
cynic-alFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI was impressed how well the Etoile (Arc de Triomphe) works despite having no lane markings etc.
Everyone just drives on and then works it out.
richmtbFull MemberPosted 11 years agoYou make drivers happy by reducing their sense of entitlement. It’s counter intuitive but proven methodology. Just as spoilt children are the most unpleasant, just as the rich seems the most selfish while the poor the most kind.
I thnik you are right.
Picture this: Driving or riding approacing a pelican crossing – you have a green light, a bunch of pedestrians ignore the “red man” and cross. This annoys you the pedestrians are breaking the rules.
Now the same scenario with a zebra crossing. You see the peds. You slow down or stop, the pedestrians wave thank you and cross.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoYou make a sound argument jack. I’m not sure I’m completely convinced, but I’d vote for you anyway 😀
JunkyardFree MemberPosted 11 years agomleh
you describe two different scenarios where one lot break the rules
I agree people who break the rules are annoying but not sure culturally what they suggest will work.
i am happy to give it a try but I am not convinced no rules will suddenly turn asshole road users into considerate raod users.
konabunnyFree MemberPosted 11 years agothey are a very similar peoples to us being descended from the same tribes with very similar attitudes and so on.
Ahhhh, yes, the famous “tribal origins” school of traffic management.
pypdjlFree MemberPosted 11 years agoNot sure I really see the benefits from a cyclists point of view. Traffic lit junctions are rarely a problem, people not seeing you / not paying attention to their driving / passing too close and too fast are more pressing concerns.
TandemJeremyFree MemberPosted 11 years agopypdjl – safer quicker less stressful road conditions benefit everyone
pypdjlFree MemberPosted 11 years agoWell yes they would do, I can’t see this making much of a difference though.
jackthedogFree MemberPosted 11 years agoi am happy to give it a try but I am not convinced no rules will suddenly turn asshole road users into considerate raod users.
There is and always will be a minority of helplessly assholey assholes. That’s a sad fact we can’t change.
However the majority of today’s assholes don’t really mean to be assholes, nor do they really wish to be thought of as assholes. It is the behaviour of this majority of accidental assholes we’ll tackle as a by-product of making life easier, safer and more efficient for the actual majority of people – those that are reasonable, well mannered, caring and have learnt how to conduct themselves in a developed society.
There are a lot more of these people than we ever notice, hidden by their ubiquity while we focus on the tiny minorities we hate.
And in the process, we might just make the compatibility between us and those helplessly assholey assholes just that bit safer by creating a situation where we can take avoiding action, rather than encouraging us to sail along with the dangerous assumption that coloured lights, reflective paint and kerb stones alone can protect us from them, despite the evidence that it doesn’t and never has.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoTraffic lit junctions are rarely a problem, people not seeing you / not paying attention to their driving / passing too close and too fast are more pressing concerns.
The Scotsman article mentioned earlier does say: “Police are particularly targeting drivers’ behaviour at junctions as, between 2004 and 2009, 74 per cent of cycle casualties in the city were injured at or within 20 metres of a junction.” which suggest that junctions, lit or unlit, are a contributing factor.
cookeaaFull MemberPosted 11 years agojackthedog has it…
Nothing much that can really be added, only that I think the root cause of this “drivers sense of entitlement” can be traced directly to one person – Clarkson…
The solution is quite clear; one final act of brutality we mush Hang him, Hang him High!*
Then move forwards towards our cultural enlightenment, and never speak of that final cruel act upon which it was built…Long live the “Green Nazi Thugs!”
*I am of course joking… mostly.
pypdjlFree MemberPosted 11 years agowhich suggest that junctions, lit or unlit, are a contributing factor
Well yes, junctions are clearly a hazard, I would say unlit ones are currently far more of one though, specifically side roads.
richmtbFull MemberPosted 11 years ago74 per cent of cycle casualties in the city were injured at or within 20 metres of a junction.
Smells like bullshit to me. What percentage of any all accident occur at junctions? That stat is only meaninful if it substantially higher than for all vehicles. It won’t be.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoThat stat is only meaninful if it substantially higher than for all vehicles. It won’t be.
Not sure I get your point. If the accident rate is higher for all vehicles at junctions then doesn’t that just mean that junctions are generally riskier places for all road users? Which seems likely.
richmtbFull MemberPosted 11 years agoNot sure I get your point. If the accident rate is higher for all vehicles at junctions then doesn’t that just mean that junctions are generally riskier places for all road users?
That is my point. It meaningless to point out that cyclists are at greater risk eveyone is at greater risk. So its junctions that are the problem not cyclists.
Quoting the stats the way the Scotsman article does suggests its cyclist who are the problem.
Don’t worry Graham we are on the same side!
SandwichFull MemberPosted 11 years agoThose are the kind of people I would worry about sharing a sign-and-light-free road with!
They won’t get to stay that way long as I would expect licences to be revoked and jail-time handed out “pour encourager les autres”.
GrahamSFull MemberPosted 11 years agoQuoting the stats the way the Scotsman article does suggests its cyclist who are the problem.
Yeah I see what you mean. I don’t think that was necessarily their intent though. I read it as expanding on why motorists encroaching into the ASLs was a genuine issue.
Many motorists seem to regard it as not-a-real-offence, like going through an amber light or driving in bus lanes.
The topic ‘57% of ALL cyclists run red lights, according to IAM?!?’ is closed to new replies.
