Do not get me started on the merits, or otherwise, of cycle helmets. They would not alter the outcome of the vast majority of serious accidents to cyclists. A complete red herring.
And what about the cyclists who continuously break laws, ride irresponsibly and act abusively? I suppose they still get away with it..?
OK, fair trade, but only the ones who 'continuously break laws, ride irresponsibly and act abusively'.
Agree with Glidd on the state of the roads - if you have only ever driven a car you won't notice the same - but get on a bike and most of our roads, especially on the left/gutter where we are forced to ride look more like post-shelling Beirut than a first world capital! They are unbelievably dangerous to cyclists - they can take you out without a car in sight! Mind you, bunny hopping massive holes in the road, clipped in on a road bike is still good fun.... Speed and confidence on the roads does make a big difference here, but the speed differential point in London is largely mitigated by the fact that congestion is so bad, average road speeds are 4-11 mph according to some stats. That sounds about right. I am miles quicker on the push bike than in the car and about twice as fast again on the motorbike. There is no police presence. There are no cameras in town. It's Mad Max commuting! The issue is that there simply isn't anywhere near enough space for any of the road users that try/need to use the roads in London - but as a cyclist you are most vulnerable. Second most is the motorcyclist as at least you have better safety gear (as you don't have to pedal so can wear stuff that weighs more), but it's splitting hairs if you go under a cement lorry frankly. The statistics on deaths year to date, showed 112 cyclists dead so far this year. No idea how many seriously injured, or less seriously. What was a surprise, was that most of these weren't in London at all. I think the stats are probably about the same then as for motorbikes. In London, relatively lots more actual incidents, lots more injuries, but relatively fewer deaths as speeds so low in absolute sense. Out of London, fewer incidents, but more relative deaths, as car driver speed is higher. Look at the 112 deaths, few are London despite the density of cyclists, many are fast country roads. I think London is full of frequent accidents and relatively few deaths on both cycles and motorbikes due to low average speeds..... Never sure why there are so many motorcyclists who are anti cycling - we are both on two wheels and are minority road users. You should think we would be on the same team!
Cham I have my own point of view as to why bikers take side of car drivers not fellow two wheelers. It all comes down to immunity and "special" treatment cyclists enjoy. Couple that one with fact that many (it is not minority like many try to say here, every set of lights I see minimum one cyclist not stooping for red) abuse those extra special freedoms daily. Driver\Rider has to take lessons, tests, buy expensive vehicle, insure it and tax it. Then he\she gets penalized for most mistakes they do, no matter how small. Cyclists pickup £15 bicycle with no brakes on it and are instantly immune to law. It is obvious that we will gang up as we are pissed off.
Speed and confidence is one thing, riding like a twat something else entirely, and sadly there's far too much of the latter going on. Once again I have to point out the difference between journey speed and road speed, although I agree with your thinking that country roads are more dangerous for cyclists. In town, of the hundreds of accidents I've seen, the cyclist is almost always to blame for the collision, whereas in rural areas I suspect the blame would be reversed for the most part. In both cases road awareness is the key to safe passage (on all parts), but for many cyclists road awareness seems to come a poor second to maintaining a good average speed. Totally agree with that sentiment.
if you were to go on a cyclist forum, you'd probably see the inverse of this argument - motorcyclists passing close, speeding, riding around without tax, loud cans... There are idiots in both camps. Ignore the guys who aren't going to make it past 2 years alive and maybe try to educate people in larger vehicles so that we can travel with some degree of safety.
As truth as it is those arguments would be flawed in many ways. How do cyclists know who did\did not pay tax? While we know they did not and we know that if road tax offender gets stopped he gets done cyclist does not. Loud cans well I guess half of cyclists would not notice with their beats over the ears headphones at loud setting. Speeding we all do it on any side of argument so drop that one. Finally define passing to close as point of view is in many cases problem here. When I filter I go very close to cars sometimes. In name of fairness I give same treatment to all road users if need be. Finally look at it this way cyclists are fully aware they will not be faster then biker off the lights (unless they skip red) yet many insist on stooping right in front of you blocking you. Then they complain they got passed to close, well da.
When I was taught to drive I was told to give cyclists a wobble area incase they hit a pot hole when overtaking them which I still do What amazes me is watching the car drivers that skim past a cyclist because they can't wait! My son came home the other day annoyed with a bus that had gone past him and then turned left into another road as it passed him. He took me to the place and what I think happened is the bus assumed it had time to turn but forgot that my son on his bike pulling his brakes on wouldnt be able to stop that quickly. The driver knew he was there as he had to overtake him Im presuming that unaware drivers who don't use two wheels think they have time to turn or dont have any spacial awareness or just can't judge when something could be dangerous
Well, I'll tell you what it is really: cars just don't care. As a cyclist, the worst that will happen to a car driver is that he'll get a bump on his car. Using the road is like a game of chicken. That's why large lorries often pull out on you or can't be bothered to wait their turn because if there is an accident, it's not them who are going to come off worst. In you car you know this, so you don't force the issue. Sadly, on a bicycle, you pretty much have to give way to everyone, whether it's your road or not. And as a large section of the population seemed to be signed up to the idea that all cyclists are just scumbags in lycra, well, it's hardly surprising that cyclists are cut up.
A classic method by which cyclists die on city streets, particularly if there are railings to keep the pedestrians on the path. It isn't dangerous to them though, which is the point Glidd makes.
I get that But why if you want to turn left don't big vehicles just wait till the cyclist has gone by the junction. You don't run a cyclist over because you gave them room and a cyclist doesn't just decide to visit the underneath of said vehicles because they were given room.
But cyclists are far worse in this respect than any other road user, they really don't give a crap for anyone else but themselves. I'm not saying UK motorists are squeaky clean - they are certainly not; the worst in the EU in my opinion - but for that very reason cyclists should be more aware of their surroundings. They are not, though. They thrive on 'being in the right', even though it could kill them. Their loss. Most motorists take the bare minimum of training before hitting the streets. Not cyclists. And it shows.
cyclists are their own worst enemy if they showed other road users basic courtesties then perhaps they would get it it return but blatent flauting of laws, having no means of identification and being beyond the reach of the law does not endear them to other road users
On the rare occasions when I ride a pushbike, I am very cautious. Knowing I am - temporarily - the lowest form of life on the road, I always give way to everything. I wouldn't dream of trying to go quickly on a pushbike; that's what motorbikes are for. A a result I am quite safe.
