Most of the cyclists I see are on the pavement.

As a pedestrian I don't have a problem with cyclists on the pavement. They are a lot closer in size and speed to pedestrians so I think it's far more appropriate they share the pavement than them sharing the road with buses, trucks and cars.

They just need to make sure they aren't bombing round blind corners on a hill, like some stupid kid did a couple of months ago. I'd have no problem sticking my fist into a stupid kids head if he was going to hit me.

Some cyclists seem to be more aggressive nowadays, especially the Bradley Wiggins wannabes but I put that down to the clothes they wear being too tight around the crotch area.

In general, I'd say it isn't the cycle that's to blame, more the person using it and perhaps Dave and co could enact laws that mirror legislation brought in to control aggressive animals such as the dangerous dog act.

If you ride your cycle like a pit-bull, you get put down but if someone is daft enough to enter your property unbidden, you have the right to batter them with the bike pump, spare wheel, or even the bike frame for as long as you like and this whilst wearing your cycling gear. It's a win, win for the responsible cyclist.

Don't you know, they are saving the planet.

You can even get the tax man to assist your purchase if you CHOOSE to cycle to work, but if you HAVE to drive to work, you get nowt.

Saftey standards managers in the industry i work in will never deem any accident between a car driver and a bus driver as 50/50 for disciplinary purposes, the reason being that the bus driver is trained to a higher standard and therefore is 'more' culpable than the car driver.
It's been that way for as long as i've worked in the industry. Accident are deemed blameworthy or not blameworthy there is rarely, if ever, shared blame.

...so a fairly bog standard response then, "jumping red lights", "wrong way down a street" and one that I haven't seen before "using pedestrian lights to cross the road".

Did anyone read the article linked to on the original post ?

Have you read how different things are in Holland and how things could be here if cycling was treated as "the norm" for short journeys (lets say up to ten miles) rather than cars be treated as "the norm" and cycling a bit of a weird thing to do ?

And why does jumping red lights get under so many peoples skin, is it jealousy - lets face it, any cyclist who decides to take on a motor vehicle in a head to head (or sideways swipe as the case will be), is going to die, so why are so many motorised drivers so bitter about seeing cyclists gamble with their own lives so recklessly ?

Do you feel the same about motorbike riders who drive down the outside of traffic queues too, do you suddenly realise that the problem with the queue of traffic that you are sitting stationary in is actually YOU and your chosen form of single user transport and that if you'd all used two wheels instead then probably everyone would get to their destination twice as quickly ?

Pedestrians will only get my respect when they obey traffic lights.

Because until the cycle community address the quite sizeable minority of cyclists who think they are perfectly entitled to jump lights, use pavements and ride like loonies, you are always going to get this brought up.



Because there is always some poor bugger in a car who has to live with the consequences of these idiots actions through no fault of their own. The questions, the breath tests, the ramp up in insurance and the thoughts of "what if".

Read the article on the first page & if you ever have the chance compare to what happens in a country where the majority of the population would ride a bike to a nearby appointment, there is a tipping point where the sizeable minority becomes a tiny minority, where, as the article says, most cyclists don't dress up in special clothes to ride a bike and don't wear helmets because they feel safe in their separation from motorised transport.



See above, it wouldn't happen if the situation were handled properly - and why would you have a ramp up in insurance if its not your fault ?

Possibly because insurance companies operate a no CLAIM bonus and not a no BLAME bonus?

They also offer a protected no claims bonus do they not, and if you are the sort of motorist that drives around without that or without doing a price and features comparison on your insurance at least once a year, then frankly sir, you are a fool.

But to get back to the original point - why the bitterness and predictable jibes about something that can be fixed by a bit of imagination and simple road markings and which might even lead to an increase in citizen health - why not follow the lead set by other european countries and recognise that the pedal cyclist has a legitimate right to use the road system without the ever present danger of being crushed by someone who's line of defence is always "sorry mate, didn't see you" ?

Just to clarify, when driving down narrow country lanes I usually stop and pull in for cyclists approaching (same for horses, dog walkers and people with children). Mind you, the di[ic[/ikhead Eddy Merckx wannabe that I nearly cleaned out on Wednesday ain't going to be cycling for too much longer. On a single track, narrow lane in Wiltshire, I was driving uphill when this clown came careering round a blind bend, in the middle of the road. He just managed to avoid my van and went scooting down the hill, gesticulating like a loon.

Its OK, he'll probably kill himself soon enough, Darwins Law is invoked far quicker on such cyclists than on motor vehicle drivers.