Safe Speed Forums

I always thought that the crass generalisations were made by weepej about drivers.

Almost every comment you can make about any group will not apply to some or most of its members. It's the nature of criticism that the errant few give the whole group a bad press. I exaggerate for effect and to provoke a response and so do you.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

No, well, I might have done. But I was just thinking about laws and how they were first concocted. I don’t imagine much thought, if any, goes into any of them in the first place but that they had to start somewhere. (Maybe I had a brain fart soz; it was late). Allow me to put it this way..

In defence of the Lycra clad brigade, the nutters I often see around where I live are these hoody-type and they ride some sort of chopper thing which looks way too small for them. The distance between their bum and the lowest stroke of the peddle is far to too short, making their knees stick up, and they’ve got the ‘pant’s falling down’ routine going on.

I guess they think its cool. Maybe they are off duty doctors, although I doubt it, but I tend towards defending people on their attire. Kinda comes with my job really, where you can never judge a book by its cover. But these type are quite rife where I am and they often come in twos or threes riding up and down and across the road, like they’re on the make or up to something nefarious. So from my experience and observation, these are the worst ones I see; not Lycra or anyone dressed ordinary/functional but loutish yoofs with an owl-like head acting like a radar.

Both you and Malcolm, I suspect, are coming from your own experience of the area in which you live. So I’m not sure there’s a right or wrong about this issue but based simply on your personal observations.

I’m sure I’ve just came across as a nob for discriminating against the ones I most commonly see riding dangerously.. I'm sticking to my guns one that one though

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Yes, what would often be referred to as "scrotes"

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Ah yes.. Selfish Cyclists Rampaging Over Terrain Everywhere Stupidly.

They’re like a different breed of human; half rhinoceros, half cyclist. A rhinocerman or humoceros

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Really, where?

- We do have an increase in the 'guilty until proven innocent' in the UK with automated enforcement, which is most troubling.

I wonder if some of what you are experiencing is a mix of : area coincidence of concentration of a specific (perhaps) cycling group that go out on a 'run', confidence is in part mistaken for aggression or 'prime positioning', and possibly some 'aggression' or PP, is from some cyclists that have been scared and so act over aggressively to 'compensate' ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

This is not "guilty until proven innocent" though, that's just how it's spun by its detractors. It just adjusts the burden of proof to the bigger and/or heavier vehicle (which would be the cyclist in the case of a cyclist on pedestrian collision), and only in civil cases, so describing it as guilty until proven innocent is total and utter spin.

Ill informed ? Talking generally is not necessarily a problem when debating a topic. Some topics will look into certain issues in greater depth than other areas, is that wrong in your opinion?
Do you not think that if more Police were on the roads enforcing (for sake of argument) cyclists running a red light, that as many cyclists would run them ?
What if too there were many public info films showing the dangers and legal problems of running the red light, do you think the same numbers of cyclists would still run the red light?
Malcolm is chatting about some experiences and observations and seeking out others thoughts on the matter ?

Personally when I travel around the UK I see every kind of cyclist and each 'type' can act in every kind of manner. I don't see that all lycra cyclists act badly but we are discussing Malcolm's topic and he does.

I said that 'I think' which should have informed you that the following is drawn from my knowledge, experiences and considerations only. This is done to add to the discussion to help develop the overall discussion & debating points. Saying that I see people behave in a selfish manner is not 'wrong' because I do. The fact that I am prepared to deal with it in a courteous and careful manner is another issue. The point that people want different things, helps to bring to the conversation that we are all 'different' trying to cope with 'general rules and regs'. Lack of reminders to the current rules and lack of enforcement enables people to feel free to do as they wish.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

If you want to talk about 'strict liability' then please start a new topic. ... and I didn't describe it as that so I didn't and didn't 'spin' it thank you.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Strict liability came into this because malcolmw asked why he didn't see "normal" cyclists on his roads.

I believe there are several aspects to this, but the reason many state that they don't cycle is the danger (real and perceived) they face on the roads from motorised vehicles, which in my opinion is partly down to the lack of care shown around cyclists by some of those using them (indeed sometime outright aggression).

Implementing a dutch style attitude to liability in my opinion would have a dramatic affect on this attitude and would ultimately lead to more taking up cycling and hence increased demand for safer infrastructure from the bigger body of cyclists, then more cycling and ultimately a complete dilution of the "lycra brigade" by casual cyclists (the former would still be there of course but would not tickle malcomw's selection bias nerves).

Hence I think strict liability is very on topic here which is why I raised it.

And before anybody says this is all fantasy, just look at Holland (And Italy, Germany, France...).

i have to say that since reading this topic i've been more sensitised to the amount & "type" of cyclists i've seen and with regard to coventry & solihull at either end of the working day i find road bikes and lycra to be in a significant minority. lots of regularly clothed hybrid/mtb riding types with varying degrees of road sense & rule adherence!


almost came a cropper on saturday morning however, minding my own business going round a sharpish left hand bend on a single lane road to suddenly be faced with about a dozen club kitted cyclists coming the other way using the full width..... closing speed maybe 35+mph
(i'm pleased to say on our club rides when faced with similarly narrow winding lanes somewhat more cautious riding usually prevails.)

I think I mentioned it on SS ed, but one of the nastier sides of the cycling fraternity I came across was one lot on the way to Clent Hills. (Good workout up there, as I’m sure you know ).

I, along with two other buddies, were pootling along minding our own business when a flock of other cyclists from a club came around us like a swarm of wasps and overtook us about three abreast. Not that quickly either tbh, cuz that was in my very fit days using my trusted Stumpjumper. (£530’s worth back in ~1989/90). It was like they were miffed, from the way they past us so closely, and some nob in the group shouted “you’re slowing down the peloton!!”.

Well, excuse me for occupying a public road on Sunday you bunch of f k wits! I mean what right do they have to act like self appointed traffic police when I was doing absolutely nothing wrong and ruin my day with their s y attitude!

It’s one of the only occasions my back was up higher than a buffalo’s shoulders against my so-called fellow cyclists. (The Lycra type Malcolm refers to who think they own the damn road). Thankfully, their type are few I hope.

If I can make concessions for antediluvian motorists in Morris Minors bogging the traffic down and think of other road users feelings so should they. Pah!

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Sorry about the belated response.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_time_trial

I grant that Wikipedia is not always correct but...

Some time trial websites are full of pictures of people in Lycra talking about beating their personal best time. They don't seem to be regularity events. The casual observer might think they meet all the criteria for a race.

In any event, why are even these events allowed on open public roads?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

here ya go.. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1960/250/made

because special allowance has been made (sorry) on the basis that (paraphrasing here) you are not racing each other (well not directly on the road at any rate), a maximum of 4 riders in any "group" start at minimum 1 minute intervals, appropriate police authorities are notified of the event & appropriate information 28days in advance.

Do you think it possible that 1960 legislation is inappropriate for 21st century traffic conditions?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

i think it's possible.
but then the choice of courses & risk assesment (including traffic conditions) isn't part of the legislation.