The Velotard Thread.

[Johnny75]

.
But the implication here is that they're equally bad, which clearly they're not. It's like saying shoplifting should be given the same attention as burglary. Both are clearly wrong and should be dealt with, but no-one would suggest they should command equal amounts of police attention.

I don't think anybody has disputed that.

The original post is about the idea of bringing in awareness courses for drivers in order to make roads safer and provide discounts for drivers! To oppose that idea with the argument that there are also bad cyclists is far more head-in-the-sand than anything I've said.

Who has opposed the course because of the bad cyclists argument?

And at no point have I said bad cycling should go unpunished. It's just not relevant to the original point, deflects from the more important issue and cements the whole "car is king" mindset.

Of course it's relevant otherwise you have the same mindset in reverse. The 'go do what you want attitude' is what causes the 'car is king' mindset in the first place. We really don't want to be fostering that mindset for cyclists. It's the 'them and us' argument all over again.

It should be the same for everybody.

 

[machin05]

..

 

[machin05]

I just don't understand how someone can say - "here have some money off your insurance and in return learn how to make the roads safer for everyone", and you saying "no thanks, someone who ran a red light might benefit from those improvements".

 

[Johnny75]

I just don't understand how someone can say - "here have some money off your insurance and in return learn how to make the roads safer for everyone", and you saying "no thanks, someone who ran a red light might benefit from those improvements".

Eh? At no point have I said that.

I have no problem with people being educated about making roads safer. I would very much like it if we punished bad cycling as that too makes roads safer.

 

[Johnny75]

As soon as expressed support for it, two posters felt the need to point out that some cyclists exhibited bad behaviour whilst not showing support for the idea. I don't think bad cycling is relevant to an idea that makes the road safer for good cyclist (well, ALL cyclists) and just perpetuates the whole "it's not the drivers fault" argument.

Funnily enough the pedestrians that were almost run over by those terrible cyclists in London didn't have that view. Who didn't show support for the idea?

Absolutely no chance! I have already posted the attitudes and poor behaviours I have to deal with on the road and there's no way I'd consider myself a bad cyclist.

There are plenty of bad behaviours on both sides. Cars are obviously more dangerous with bad behaviour but to say that allowing cyclists to do what they want is OK isn't helping.

 

[machin05]

As a proportionate issue, it's not even worth mentioning at this stage, imo.

 

[machin05]

Funnily enough the pedestrians that were almost run over by those terrible cyclists in London didn't have that view. Who didn't show support for the idea?



There are plenty of bad behaviours on both sides. Cars are obviously more dangerous with bad behaviour but to say that allowing cyclists to do what they want is OK isn't helping.

If you could show me your post in support of the scheme....?

 

[machin05]

And likewise, I havent supported the idea that cyclists can "do want they want".

 

[Kenny]

As soon as expressed support for it, two posters felt the need to point out that some cyclists exhibited bad behaviour whilst not showing support for the idea.

I was just offering a counter to your point and made a point of using the word some and not most of or all of. It was fresh in my mind as it happened on Tuesday Night and it was downright dangerous, if it was just the standard "how annoying I can't go by and I am stuck at 10mph" I wouldn't have said a word. Now I could post about incidents of me versus other drivers but as I don't cycle bringing a car v car situation to a discussion is pointless.

I am not anti cyclist I am just anti fucking moron on the road

To be honest I don't think money off should be offered for doing a course because if you are a tit on the road, once you have done the course nothing will change for the majority, apart from the insurance costs. If they are going to do the course, include it on the day you have to do the Written and Hazard tests.

 

[Johnny75]

If you could show me your post in support of the scheme....?

Is this like the poppy thing? Whereby if I don't show support by typing out I LOVE CYCLISTS AND THIS SCHEME SHOULD BE MADE COMPULSORY FOR EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET I'm castigated as hating the scheme and wanting to aim my car at every cyclist whilst being on my phone and talking to my unbuckled kids in the back.

As a proportionate issue, it's not even worth mentioning at this stage, imo.

I think that's an embarrassing position to take. It comes across as 'cyclists are better than everybody else'.

 

[Langers]

Ever thought of taking up running?

On the pavement, obvs.

 

[Kenny]

Ever thought of taking up running?

On the pavement, obvs.

Have you seen the nutters who cycle on the pavement? Especially the ones who have stabilisers #bloodbath

 

[Johnny75]

Ever thought of taking up running?

On the pavement, obvs.

Fuck that you'll get run over by a cyclist running a red light

 

[machin05]

Is this like the poppy thing? Whereby if I don't show support by typing out I LOVE CYCLISTS AND THIS SCHEME SHOULD BE MADE COMPULSORY FOR EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET I'm castigated as hating the scheme and wanting to aim my car at every cyclist whilst being on my phone and talking to my unbuckled kids in the back.

Riiiiiight ?!?

 

[Langers]

Fuck that you'll get run over by a cyclist running a red light

Ha - like they'd be able to catch me....

 

[lemonjelly]

have only had a passing interest in this, but fucking hell:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/46542615
wonder if it's any coincidence that sky announced today they withdrawing from their sponsorship of cycling?

 

[lemonjelly]

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jan/04/cycling-uk-angered-by-highway-codes-victim-blaming-helmet-advice
the video in the article is quite interesting too.

 

[machin05]

We're not allowed to educate drivers, remember....

 

[lemonjelly]

We don't get past the 2nd paragraph before the outdated G&S starts whinging about the impact on motorists.
FFS dimwits, get people outta cars, and congestion will ease.
https://www.expressandstar.com/news/transport/2019/02/09/136m-cycle-routes-plan-unveiled/

I'm not 100% these are the routes that need cycle lanes, but more visible cycle safety is needed.

 

[Kenny]

We don't get past the 2nd paragraph before the outdated G&S starts whinging about the impact on motorists.
FFS dimwits, get people outta cars, and congestion will ease.
https://www.expressandstar.com/news/transport/2019/02/09/136m-cycle-routes-plan-unveiled/

I'm not 100% these are the routes that need cycle lanes, but more visible cycle safety is needed.

Hugh sounds like a well balanced chap. Comes across really well in that article...