Cyclists v Drivers an arbitrary distinction?

[Mrs Miggins]

slight derail but isn't celery one of those foods that take more calories to eat and digest than you actually gain from them* so in effect 2 sticks of celery would be less fattening than 1 stick

*it's probably bollocks but I've heard people say it before !

I'm afraid that that is a lie....*people* talk one helluva lotta shit my friend

 

[Termite Man]

(Roadkills jumping red lights example amounts to the same thing and, as it includes a pedal cycle, it may be easier for some to comprehend the analogy anyway ... )

I disagree . While jumoping lights and mounting the pavement may be slightly safer in that instant it creates a division between drivers and cyclists which can lead to animosity and the kind of attitude that cobbles has . That can't be a good thing and I don't believe it makes the road safer if one type of road user has an active hatred of another type .

 

[Termite Man]

I'm afraid that that is a lie....*people* talk one helluva lotta shit my friend

thought it might be . Damn celery

 

[Mrs Miggins]

thought it might be . Damn celery

Damn people!

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Most cyclists jump red lights and mount the pavement now and then. It's technically illegal, but most of us accept that there are many instances where it's safer and more convenient for all concerned if the law is employed slightly flexibly. Why should that not be the case with drivers as well?

Do most people accept that?

 

[Crispy]

I disagree . While jumoping lights and mounting the pavement may be slightly safer in that instant it creates a division between drivers and cyclists which can lead to animosity and the kind of attitude that cobbles has . That can't be a good thing and I don't believe it makes the road safer if one type of road user has an active hatred of another type .

agreed

 

[co-op]

The police have decided no such thing ... but, unlike "[Only] Speed Kills" fuckwits, they apply some common sense and discretion. Unfortunately they have been largely replaced by cameras ... which don't.

See my earlier post. Which boils down to the reason being comparison to an arbitrary, one-size-fits-all speed limit which is given mythical importance ...

The police (if you're a good example) do seem to have made that decision (that speed limits don't matter): having claimed that the police aren't ignoring the law here you almost immediately describe speed laws (above) as being given "mythical importance".

No, they're not being given "mythical importance". It would just be nice if they were given any importance whatsoever. Speed limits are applied by law and breaking them is a criminal offence. Tens of thousands of people are killed and maimed by cars every year, the carnage dwarfs any other cause of death by human agency. It would probably be tens of thousands more but we are supposed to be impressed by the "reduction" over the years. The fact that that has mostly been achieved by intimidating pedestrians, cyclists, riders etc off the roads is no acheivement imo.

Also many - most? - speed cameras apply a massive degree of "discretion" - very few penalties are sent out by them. What they do do is faithfully record the average speeds drivers do past them, information which the DfT doesn't go out of its way to publicise.

In 2000, 66% of drivers recorded by cameras (ie where people knew their speed was being checked and were dipping their speed) were going over 30mph in a 30 zone, 32% were going over 35mph, 11% were going over 40mph and a trusty 2% were going over 45mph. Of course the overwhelming majority of these drivers did not receive a penalty. Theres that "discretion" you were bemoaning the lack of.

You don't think those figures indicate a more dangerous road for pedestrians and cyclists than one where people were driving (as they should, unless conditions are perfect) below 30 mph?

The police have blatantly decided that they are going to ignore this whole area of the law. That may be a defendable position, but your denial that it's been taken is just ridiculous.

The fact that you have leapt to wild conclusions that I am saying "only" speed kills (I haven't, and wouldn't, the evidence doesn't support the position) and - albeit justindirectly - called me a "fuckwit" in the process, to me shows yet again the bizarre touchiness and barely-buried anger that underlies many car-drivers' attitudes, and probably also explains a lot of the irrational fury that they vent while driving.

If you drove a little slower your frontal cortex would probably be getting enough oxygen to keep the debate rational even when you're sitting at your computer.

 

[co-op]

If I drove past my local school at 30mph at 3.30 in the afternoon, would that be safe and sensible? Meanwhile, if I drive down a dual carriageway at night at 80mph, am I actually putting anyone in greater danger than I would be at 70...?

Most cyclists jump red lights and mount the pavement now and then. It's technically illegal, but most of us accept that there are many instances where it's safer and more convenient for all concerned if the law is employed slightly flexibly. Why should that not be the case with drivers as well?

I'm not arguing for an inflexible interpretation of the law, as far as I'm concerned cardrivers can go as fast as they like on motorways, they will probably only kill each other and they are entitled to make their own risk assessments in that case.

I'm just pointing out that the idea (I think put forward as some kind of "obvious consensus" position on this thread) that "most road users are kindly souls, shame about the small unrepresentative minority etc etc" doesn't really stand up. Most car drivers ignore the speed limit. In urban areas that's directly dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists. They also use their mobiles, fail to indicate, jump red lights and generally mangle the law in a dozen ways, nearly all of them, absolutely routinely - all of which increase the danger to other road users.

It's utterly systemic and to blame a few bad apples is kind of crazy.

 

[nino_savatte]

I disagree . While jumoping lights and mounting the pavement may be slightly safer in that instant it creates a division between drivers and cyclists which can lead to animosity and the kind of attitude that cobbles has . That can't be a good thing and I don't believe it makes the road safer if one type of road user has an active hatred of another type .

Yep.

 

[Roadkill]

Do most people accept that?

I think so, yes.

I'm not arguing for an inflexible interpretation of the law, as far as I'm concerned cardrivers can go as fast as they like on motorways, they will probably only kill each other and they are entitled to make their own risk assessments in that case.

I'm just pointing out that the idea (I think put forward as some kind of "obvious consensus" position on this thread) that "most road users are kindly souls, shame about the small unrepresentative minority etc etc" doesn't really stand up. Most car drivers ignore the speed limit. In urban areas that's directly dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists. They also use their mobiles, fail to indicate, jump red lights and generally mangle the law in a dozen ways, nearly all of them, absolutely routinely - all of which increase the danger to other road users.

It's utterly systemic and to blame a few bad apples is kind of crazy.

Tbh your view of car drivers is so negative that I can't take it seriously. I thought this observation you made a page or so back was rather good:

I'd always question this idea that you can simplify anti-social behaviour down to a simplistic division between "cunts" and "us", the nice people. It's a deeply reactionary way of seeing the world, by the same (environment-free)logic, young black men in South London are obviously naturally more likely to be "violent cunts" since they stab and get stabbed in such high numbers.

The problem is that your attitude to car drivers isn't a million miles away from the attitude of sections of the media to young black men in south London. It's as if drivers are some slightly inexplicable 'other' to be regarded with wary hostility and whose motives are always to be regarded as suspect. I don't know what sort of drivers you associate with, if any, but the vast majority of people I know who drive certainly don't have the kind of wholesale contempt for the law, and for the safety of others, that you attribute to them.

There is a lot of bad driving out there, though. There's no getting away from that, and there's a good case to be made for toughening up the driving test.

 

[detective-boy]

That can't be a good thing and I don't believe it makes the road safer if one type of road user has an active hatred of another type.

I wasn't advocating it - I was suggesting that it was prima facie evidence of riding dangerously (as being on the pavement is more dangerous than being on the road, going through a red light more dangerous than stopping at it ...)

 

[detective-boy]

(if you're a good example)

I'm not a fucking copper. I haven't been for six years. How many times do I have to say that ...

 

[detective-boy]

In 2000, 66% of drivers recorded by cameras (ie where people knew their speed was being checked and were dipping their speed) were going over 30mph in a 30 zone, 32% were going over 35mph, 11% were going over 40mph and a trusty 2% were going over 45mph.

As these offences are so dangerous, and inevitably lead to death and carnage, please could you provide us with the statistics for deaths, serious injuries or, in fact, an accidents at all, in those areas at the times those statistics were recorded?

 

[Agent Sparrow]

I think so, yes.

Dunno, it's not the impression I get from reading the forum here and from hearing things said.

 

[co-op]

I think so, yes.




Tbh your view of car drivers is so negative that I can't take it seriously. I thought this observation you made a page or so back was rather good:



The problem is that your attitude to car drivers isn't a million miles away from the attitude of sections of the media to young black men in south London. It's as if drivers are some slightly inexplicable 'other' to be regarded with wary hostility and whose motives are always to be regarded as suspect. I don't know what sort of drivers you associate with, if any, but the vast majority of people I know who drive certainly don't have the kind of wholesale contempt for the law, and for the safety of others, that you attribute to them.

There is a lot of bad driving out there, though. There's no getting away from that, and there's a good case to be made for toughening up the driving test.

You've missed my point which was that the cunts/us split is classic tory inidvidualist stuff, but actually our behaviour is usually much more environmentally influenced than we are happy to believe - eg you don't get a lot of knife crime amongst posh white publice school boys.

So I'm not "against car drivers" - in the sense of anyone who has ever driven a car = a cunt. But that when people get into a car they change. Eg they start to believe that they can break the law with impunity (as I've pointed out in a practical sense they're right since the police don't enforce these laws anyway) - but what happened to their moral self-sense? Why don't they nick stuff from the corner shop (quite easy, not really likely to lead to a conviction if caught) or push a kid off their bike and take it for their children (ditto, on the likelihood of getting caught)?

Why do they become so aggressive?

Answer (possibly) - humans aren't really built to handle the degree of power they're being forced to handle in a car?

It may be a wrong answer (I've got others, but that's the nly one I've floated on this thread), but to deny that there's a problem here seems to fly in the face of realityto me.

 

[co-op]

I'm not a fucking copper. I haven't been for six years. How many times do I have to say that ...

As often as you start debating with someone new, using a username of "detectiveboy" and quoting the law, police procedure etc from an inside perspective?

Try seeing it from my point of view, how am I supposed to know what you know if you don't tell me?

Besides, how does the fact that you haven't been a policeman for 6 years change my point? Do you think there has been some sea-change in police attitudes to driving crime in the last 6 years? No, me neither.

 

[co-op]

As these offences are so dangerous, and inevitably lead to death and carnage, please could you provide us with the statistics for deaths, serious injuries or, in fact, an accidents at all, in those areas at the times those statistics were recorded?

No, because those stats weren't collected, nor would they be capable of bearing the weight of "proof" you want here. I could quite easily reduce pedestrian casualties to zero on any given road by banning pedestrians; that's effectively been part of the street design agenda that's turned our roads into racetracks for boyracers.


You can't quite bring yourself to answer my question; do you think that urban roads with 20 or 30 mph limits are as safe for pedestrians and cyclists when the vast majority of motorists routinely break those limits as on a hypothetical road where they don't? (never mind the myriad of other motoring laws, all designed to increase the safety of other road users, about using mobiles, indicating, jumping red lights which I see broken every time I go out)

And are you still seriously trying to maintain your position that the police give a shit about this?

 

[Crispy]

There's definitely something there, because riding my bike changes the way I think and react. I have to be careful to hold it in check, becuase it's very easy to slip into the aggressive self-righteousness that so many people hate cyclists for! It's a function of being exposed and vulnerable, with elevated adrenaline and heartrate. Similarly, driving a car encourages a feeling of power and isolation from the rest of the world. Environment -> behaviour.

 

[co-op]

There's definitely something there, because riding my bike changes the way I think and react. I have to be careful to hold it in check, becuase it's very easy to slip into the aggressive self-righteousness that so many people hate cyclists for! It's a function of being exposed and vulnerable, with elevated adrenaline and heartrate. Similarly, driving a car encourages a feeling of power and isolation from the rest of the world. Environment -> behaviour.

I'm posting a lot on this thread so apologies for that, just to add; I have also mentioned that cyclists get over-aggressive too and again I'd see that as a function of the 'cycling environment' (usually ime based on having kinetic speed that you don't want to "lose").

The big difference between cyclists and motorists is the question of what they personally risk with their driving behaviour - cyclists risk painful > serious personal injury, motorists risk nothing. But personally I think cyclists can be every bit as intimidating to pedestrians as cars can - I see it a lot here in London and I don't see it as in any way different from cars imtimidating cyclists.

It's one reason why I don't get wound up by motorbikes even though they are as guilty of (or worse than) most cardrivers in terms of the law; at least they have their asses on the line. If they get it wrong it will hurt. Perhaps consequently, I have almost never seen one get in a ruck with a cyclist.

 

[Roadkill]

You've missed my point which was that the cunts/us split is classic tory inidvidualist stuff, but actually our behaviour is usually much more environmentally influenced than we are happy to believe - eg you don't get a lot of knife crime amongst posh white publice school boys.

I'm not questioning that behaviour is heavily influenced by environment. I'm questioning this:

So I'm not "against car drivers" - in the sense of anyone who has ever driven a car = a cunt. But that when people get into a car they change. Eg they start to believe that they can break the law with impunity (as I've pointed out in a practical sense they're right since the police don't enforce these laws anyway) - but what happened to their moral self-sense? Why don't they nick stuff from the corner shop (quite easy, not really likely to lead to a conviction if caught) or push a kid off their bike and take it for their children (ditto, on the likelihood of getting caught)?

Why do they become so aggressive?

I don't think I've ever known anyone whose personality changed that much when they got behind the wheel. Some drivers are impatient, yes: they're usually people who are impatient in most other aspects of life. Some drivers are aggressive: again, usually people who are anyway. Some drivers bumble along in their own little world, neither aggressive nor impatient but rather oblivious to others and verging on the clumsy. Some drivers are very punctilious. Don't we all know people who are like that anyway?

I just don't accept that driving a car makes people think they're immune from the outside world to the extent that they can ignore the law and wilfully put others at risk.

Driving does influence the way people behave, but IME not that much more than most other activities, and as Crispy's comments indicate, cycling can also make some people fair aggressive. Tbh it did me when I commuted by bike, I think to a greater extent than driving a car. As well as the point about not wanting to lose speed (you're quite right about that), it's a self-preservation thing. It tended to encourage a bit of a 'me against those idiots' mentality. I think that's probably a function of getting about on busy city streets regardless of the means of transport. After all, if you want to see some fairly aggressive 'get-out-of-my-way' behaviour, the tube during the rush hour is quite a good place to go!

Answer (possibly) - humans aren't really built to handle the degree of power they're being forced to handle in a car?

It may be a wrong answer (I've got others, but that's the nly one I've floated on this thread), but to deny that there's a problem here seems to fly in the face of realityto me.

There is a problem, sure, but in part it's lack of competence. It's also a function of overcrowded roads leading to more competition for space, the increasingly frustrated expectation that there's a right to drive everywhere (which is something that obviously does need to change) and the attitudes that some/many people hold long before they get into a car or onto a bike. I do concede that cars (and vans, for that matter) are probably worse in this respect than most other means of transport, just because it's your own space and it feels safe, but it's a difference of degree which I think you're exaggerating.

I don't think it can be just the 'power' that a car makes you handle, because if that is the case why aren't most bus drivers complete lunatics?! They might not have the acceleration the average car has, but they've a lot of height and weight to throw about, and most of them do so with admirable restraint!

 

[detective-boy]

As often as you start debating with someone new

It's like fucking Groundhog Day. It's so tiresome repeating every thread every 23.6 days ...

* Leaves thread *

 

[co-op]

It's like fucking Groundhog Day. It's so tiresome repeating every thread every 23.6 days ...

* Leaves thread *

Ciao!

 

[co-op]

I just don't accept that driving a car makes people think they're immune from the outside world to the extent that they can ignore the law and wilfully put others at risk.

I see it every time I go out of my front door so I'm disagreeing with this.

 

[Roadkill]

I see it every time I go out of my front door so I'm disagreeing with this.

I see some drivers behaving like idiots, I see some being perfectly considerate. I don't know any of them, so I don't feel qualified to make a judgement on what effect driving has on their behaviour.

Presumably you get lifts from friends and acquaintances now and then. Do they all turn into selfish, aggressive lunatics once they get behind the wheel?

 

[fredfelt]

I liked this article that discusses behaviour and private motor car..

I believe that while there are many reasons for the growth of individualism in the UK, the extreme libertarianism now beginning to take hold here begins on the road. When you drive, society becomes an obstacle. Pedestrians, bicycles, traffic calming, speed limits, the law: all become a nuisance to be wished away. The more you drive, the more bloody-minded and individualistic you become. The car is slowly turning us, like the Americans and the Australians, into a nation which recognises only the freedom to act, and not the freedom from the consequences of other people’s actions. We drive on the left in Britain, but we are being driven to the right.​

From

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/12/20/the-anti-social-bastards-in-our-midst/

 

[co-op]

I see some drivers behaving like idiots, I see some being perfectly considerate. I don't know any of them, so I don't feel qualified to make a judgement on what effect driving has on their behaviour.

But you can contrast the behaviour of "car drivers in general" with that of "people in general"? IMO it's highly analagous to "internet debating" and "normal debating"; one format elicits a lot more aggression, egotism, and extreme behaviour than the other.

Presumably you get lifts from friends and acquaintances now and then. Do they all turn into selfish, aggressive lunatics once they get behind the wheel?

Since I got a bit serious about limiting my contribution to this problem, no I don't take lifts, it seems a bit like cheating. It's not 100%, but I keep a log - 6 miles in private cars in the last 3 months (including taxis).

But since you ask, when I did, yes I was really quite amazed at how people changed at the wheel. Not all the time of course, but outbursts of extraordinarily infantile behaviour were utterly typical; behaviour that I have - for the most part - never seen the same people get up to when walking around, in a pub, at home etc.

 

[Roadkill]

Since I got a bit serious about limiting my contribution to this problem, no I don't take lifts, it seems a bit like cheating. It's not 100%, but I keep a log - 6 miles in private cars in the last 3 months (including taxis).

But since you ask, when I did, yes I was really quite amazed at how people changed at the wheel. Not all the time of course, but outbursts of extraordinarily infantile behaviour were utterly typical; behaviour that I have - for the most part - never seen the same people get up to when walking around, in a pub, at home etc.

Now that is very serious indeed!

Tbh I can't say I've noticed that people change that much behind the wheel. Not most of the people I've known and accepted lifts from on anything like a regular basis.

Meanwhile, you do see an awful lot of rather aggressive, 'get-out-of-my-way' behaviour on the tube during rush-hour. Insofar as there is a problem, I really don't think it's limited to driving...

 

[co-op]

Meanwhile, you do see an awful lot of rather aggressive, 'get-out-of-my-way' behaviour on the tube during rush-hour. Insofar as there is a problem, I really don't think it's limited to driving...

Indeed. And have you checked out the joggers on the South Bank? They'll run you down.

It is systemic. But I'd suggest that being wrapped in a ton and half of metal when you're starting to see red makes you a bit more of a problem than your more egalitarian commuter-on-commuter strop-up at the doors of a train.

I'd also suggest it makes you more likely to think you can get away with it. But we've been here before....

 

[co-op]

Now that is very serious indeed!

Well I can't really kindle a decent head of indignation and sanctimony if I'm accepting lifts can I? It'd be like those people who "don't smoke" but ponce off you all night instead.

 

[Roadkill]

It is systemic. But I'd suggest that being wrapped in a ton and half of metal when you're starting to see red makes you a bit more of a problem than your more egalitarian commuter-on-commuter strop-up at the doors of a train.

I'd also suggest it makes you more likely to think you can get away with it. But we've been here before....

Thing is, most people I know who drive regularly - and in London it's not many, but elsewhere a lot of people need to - are very conscious of the responsibility that they're taking on when driving. I'm sure there are plenty who aren't, and when I was 17 I was one of them, but I have difficulty squaring the idea that driving a car makes you oblivious to the outside world, or makes you much more impatient or aggressive than you'd already be, with my experience.

Sure, the consequences of being a bastard behind the wheel are worse than those of barging people out of the way at London Bridge station, but the psychology isn't much different. And IME most drivers are well aware of the consequences that behaving like that could have for them.

Well I can't really kindle a decent head of indignation and sanctimony if I'm accepting lifts can I? It'd be like those people who "don't smoke" but ponce off you all night instead.

Well, we all deride such people, but we give them a fag anyway...