harassment you've suffered from cyclists

[Major Tom]

]

however, when a cyclist puts people/'s safety at risk by riding recklessly down crowded pavements, or performing absolutely idiotic manouvers on the roads, you can loose allies.

Cyclists get your point, the people you need to convince are other road/pavement users. reckless cyclists are the ones that get noticed by these potential allies. they loose you support. and general support is what you need. The sooner it becomes as generally unacceptable to endanger cyclists as it is to walk naked down the middle of oxford street, the better.

My point earlier was that there is nothing that any cyclist can do short of vigilantism - we surely should just do what we think is right and within our own codes of ethics.

i don;t lose sleep over our "cause", because there isn't a cause. Just read the letters pages of London Cyclist to realise how difficult it can be to find two cyclists to agree on almost anything.

as for convincing the public of our "cause" - I find that most are pissed off that we're even on the roads at all - the ones who are annoyed when they step in a cyclist's path without looking and nearly get run over - the ones who perceive that their bus is being held up - the ones who drive and hate cyclists anyway - the ones who've been attacked by cycling gangs of kids on the pavement - the ones who tut or shout abuse when they see me using off road cycling facilities, and probably beleive i'm a pavement cylclist.

You'll never convince most people who don;t cycle that we are "good people" so forget it.

 

[toggle]

You'll never convince most people who don;t cycle that we are "good people" so forget it.

depensds how you go about it. i'd love to see a massive campaign such as the anti drink drive ones, see some photogenic young people getting injured through driver carelessness. educate some p[eople, then more people, then it becomes less socially acceptable to drive like a cunt.


btw, i don't cycle. I'm lucky, i'm safe in a big tin box when some cunt starts to bawl abuse at me for not overtaking a cyclist dangerously close.

 

[William of Walworth]

My point earlier was that there is nothing that any cyclist can do short of vigilantism - we surely should just do what we think is right and within our own codes of ethics.

i don;t lose sleep over our "cause", because there isn't a cause. Just read the letters pages of London Cyclist to realise how difficult it can be to find two cyclists to agree on almost anything.

as for convincing the public of our "cause" - I find that most are pissed off that we're even on the roads at all - the ones who are annoyed when they step in a cyclist's path without looking and nearly get run over - the ones who perceive that their bus is being held up - the ones who drive and hate cyclists anyway - the ones who've been attacked by cycling gangs of kids on the pavement - the ones who tut or shout abuse when they see me using off road cycling facilities, and probably beleive i'm a pavement cylclist.

You'll never convince most people who don;t cycle that we are "good people" so forget it.

No, but there IS a false 'argument' that the bad driving or careless behaviour or lack of good cycling facilities is a 'justification' for some cyclists acting like twats themselves, and making us as a group, even more unpopular.

I don't really agree with your last sentence, of course there are some people who are irreversably and permanently hostile to us, but that doesn't excuse some bad cyclists HEIGHTENING that and providing them with free and extra ammunition. To show a few people at least, who may be hostile because of one or two bad incidents but might be persuadable, that not all of us cycle like twats, is not that unreasonable an idea surely??

We should be able to get more pedestrians onside, and in alliance** with cycling groups/interests against the worst excesses of motorist dominated transport/road culture. Some cyclists are their own worst PR agents ... and a fucking embarassment to boot.

**I appreciate that's an impractical pipedream at the moment, given how polarised and mutually hostile different grups of roadusers are. Plus pedestrians aren't very organised in terms of identifiable pressure groups ...

 

[Major Tom]

btw, i don't cycle. I'm lucky, i'm safe in a big tin box when some cunt starts to bawl abuse at me for not overtaking a cyclist dangerously close.

good for you

I don;t just cycle - I drive a bit at wekeends too - usually ferrying about my daughter or carrying heavy/ bulky things around.

I feel harrassed by other drivers for not taking liberties with cyclists' rights and safety.

When on my bike I try to encourage good behaviour from motorists with a thumbs up or a bit of friendly banter.

 

[William of Walworth]

not sure we have a "cause". I'm just interested in getting from A to B safely, quickly and by the means that I choose (bike).

Is that a cause?

Part of what I believe in is that sometimes it is safe for cyclists to pass through red lights, lights that are there soley to regulate motor traffic. The law should recognise this. By breaking the law in a responsible way here, I believe can lead to a law change. It certainly does for law-breaking motorists.

Another thing I believe is that cars should take due care and attention on the road. With the street lighting in London, cyclists are rarely invisible at night. Attacking cyclists who do not have lights is not acceptable. I've been caught short a few times, when batteries or bulbs have failed, or when I've had a light nicked. I don;t expect to be attacked for it.

Once when I was hit by a car in Mottigham, my rear light was smashed to bits. The bike was ok though, and as I set off to cycle home some wanker in lycra passed me and said - "where's your lights". Still shaking from the accident, he got an earful.

another time a woman drove into me - it was night time, she'd clearly seen me because she managed to drive into me deliberately. when I complained she pretended not to see or hear me. When I persisted, she launched into a tirade about cyclists with no lights, that she'd seen me and drove into me deliberately etc. And the worse thing was I DID HAVE LIGHTS, as required by law, red at back, white at front.

It's not always such a clear cut issue, William. Cyclists shouldn't be fighting each other while there are cunts in cars who treat our lives so cheaply.

Will get back to this later. Too many issues to do justice to now!

Is there ANYTHING I said which in any way excuses motorists acting like twats??

It's just that I don't have a blind spot to how some cyclists (out and out dangerous ones, not you) really do heighten our general, and widespread, unpopularity as a group.

 

[Major Tom]

We should be able to get more pedestrians onside, and in alliance** with cycling groups/interests against the worst excesses of motorist dominated transport/road culture.

I once sat on a pedestrian and cyclist steering group in Bromley Council, and to be honest the gulf between the peds on the group (a bunch of conservative biddies) and the cyclists was insurmountable.

The biddies usually vetoed any attempt at shared use paths, contra-flow lanes or allowing any cycling in the shopping area.

They usually used articles in the local press along the lines of "Junkie Youth on Bike Mows Down Granny"

The reality of elderly cyclists being intimidated off the road by motorists is never covered by the right wing press.

So I think the media have created this situation wherby cyclists have been demonised. This is what cyclists need to address I reckon. Why don't we challenge the often fictional stories that appear in the press all the time?

 

[Virtual Blue]

I'm a cyclist and I hate road-fearing cyclists that cycle 3mph. Bloody nuisance and when you try to take over, they purposely veer into your direction.

 

[Spion]

I'm a cyclist and I hate road-fearing cyclists that cycle 3mph. Bloody nuisance and when you try to take over, they purposely veer into your direction.

Which is what a lot of car drivers probably think of a lot of cyclists and a lot of truck drivers think of a lot of car drivers. Praps we should adopt the system you find in countries like India - if it's bigger and faster than you get out of the way?

 

[tobyjug]

- if it's bigger and faster than you get out of the way?

When I used to drive a juggernaut through London it always worked for me.

 

[editor]

When I used to drive a juggernaut through London it always worked for me.

Golly! How amusing!

There's a word for people who use an unfair advantage to bully and intimidate others.

Now, what is it?

 

[William of Walworth]

Rushed respinse, really want to get back to this properly

I once sat on a pedestrian and cyclist steering group in Bromley Council, and to be honest the gulf between the peds on the group (a bunch of conservative biddies) and the cyclists was insurmountable.

The biddies usually vetoed any attempt at shared use paths, contra-flow lanes or allowing any cycling in the shopping area.

They usually used articles in the local press along the lines of "Junkie Youth on Bike Mows Down Granny"

The reality of elderly cyclists being intimidated off the road by motorists is never covered by the right wing press.

So I think the media have created this situation wherby cyclists have been demonised. This is what cyclists need to address I reckon. Why don't we challenge the often fictional stories that appear in the press all the time?

Disagree with almost none of this post, especially about the media lies and the people who lap them up.

Perhaps it's easier to lap them up though, when they see them in part confirmed in real life, on occasion??

It's a distraction from them (pedestrians) paying attention to their real enemy -- car culture. But bad cyclists are a shackle round our ankles, because while some shock horror stories are obviously mythical, as well as second hand anecdotal and/or made up, and need to be challenged on that basis, there's enough low-level cyclist arsery around to make a really effective challenge to mythology quite a lot harder ...

 

[tobyjug]

Golly! How amusing!

There's a word for people who use an unfair advantage to bully and intimidate others.

Now, what is it?

In my case being only 5feet 3 inches tall, getting my own back.

 

[parallelepipete]

i don;t lose sleep over our "cause", because there isn't a cause. Just read the letters pages of London Cyclist to realise how difficult it can be to find two cyclists to agree on almost anything.

The letters pages in LC (which I still read up in Glasgow for inspiration) shows lots of disagreements on strategy (on-road vs. pavement lanes, helmets or not, police fair or not, etc.), but not on the overall policy, which is for a big shift from cars to bicycles in London. There's your cause.

You'll never convince most people who don;t cycle that we are "good people" so forget it.

But if you adopt that fatalistic attitude, then relations between cyclists and other road users will never improve, and we're the ones who suffer.

 

[Major Tom]

But if you adopt that fatalistic attitude, then relations between cyclists and other road users will never improve, and we're the ones who suffer.

It's not fatalistic. I don;t believe that the demonisation of cycling has anything to do with reality. More to do with the hate-filled pages of our newspapers - or the bile of radio phone in shows.

There's precious little that responsible cyclists can do to change attitudes - except, maybe, challenging the media lies at their root.

I'm not going to waste my time on a PR exercise for cyclists. Am I not allowed to shout obscentities at bus drivers who cut me up? Am I not allowed to engage in a robust discussion with jay walking pedestrians - or pedestrians walking on the cycle path?

 

[lighterthief]

Am I not allowed to shout obscentities at bus drivers who cut me up? Am I not allowed to engage in a robust discussion with jay walking pedestrians - or pedestrians walking on the cycle path?

Of course you are allowed. However I personally don't think this is a very effective way to communicate with the non-cycling public. I think it will anger those whose habits we need to change and will, sadly, make life that little bit more dangerous for all us other cyclists out there.

 

[William of Walworth]

Wanting to respond!! But so little time right now .. will wait til I can do it justice.

 

[moose]

Of course you are allowed. However I personally don't think this is a very effective way to communicate with the non-cycling public. I think it will anger those whose habits we need to change and will, sadly, make life that little bit more dangerous for all us other cyclists out there.

Blimey - how long did it take you to cycle up to that piece of moral high ground?

 

[WasGeri]

Am I not allowed to engage in a robust discussion with jay walking pedestrians - or pedestrians walking on the cycle path?

Jaywalking is not an offence in this country as far as I'm aware.

I find that shouting at people can be counter-productive (although I admit to losing my rag and doing it to car drivers occasionally) but with pedestrians I find a polite 'excuse me' or a pained expression and an exaggerated sigh does quite well.

 

[WasGeri]

Golly! How amusing!

There's a word for people who use an unfair advantage to bully and intimidate others.

Now, what is it?

I think it was a joke - hence the at the end.

 

[editor]

I think it was a joke - hence the at the end.

Nurse! The screens! My sides are splitting!

 

[lighterthief]

Blimey - how long did it take you to cycle up to that piece of moral high ground?

Too long, sadly, the legs ain't wot they used to be

 

[William of Walworth]

Blimey - how long did it take you to cycle up to that piece of moral high ground?

We're used to it moose -- being caricatured as 'do gooders' and 'smug' and 'superior' and trying to coccupy the 'moral high ground'** whenever we try and talk the good talk

(OK admittedly counterproductively/annoyingly sometimes).

**"But how can they act so superior, 'they' cycle on pavements, through red lights etc etc etc etc [ad nauseam ad infinitum] ... " (usually ranted by people who rarely have anything bad to say about dangerous drivers ... )

 

[Major Tom]

Jaywalking is not an offence in this country as far as I'm aware.

I know - but it's still annoying when I'm cycling along in the flow of traffic. I'm approaching a ped crossing - green for me. All the cars ahead of me go past the crossing, the hordes waiting to cross standing there - as soon as the last car goes past, and I'm just about to reach the crossing - lights still in my favour - every fucker waiting starts to cross - I ding my bell but am force to stop.

If there are less people I can keep going, but I usually get a fair amount of abuse.

For a cyclist momentum is a very important thing, and I think that peds should show courtesy to a road user who happens to have right of way.

Some peds even expect me to stop when there isn't even a crossing - usually waiting till there are no cars about and then happily stepping out in front of me.

 

[Spion]

I know - but it's still annoying when I'm cycling along in the flow of traffic. I'm approaching a ped crossing - green for me. All the cars ahead of me go past the crossing, the hordes waiting to cross standing there - as soon as the last car goes past, and I'm just about to reach the crossing - lights still in my favour - every fucker waiting starts to cross - I ding my bell but am force to stop.

If there are less people I can keep going, but I usually get a fair amount of abuse.

For a cyclist momentum is a very important thing, and I think that peds should show courtesy to a road user who happens to have right of way.

Some peds even expect me to stop when there isn't even a crossing - usually waiting till there are no cars about and then happily stepping out in front of me.

Sounds like with all the shit you get and the hardened attitudes it's produced in you, you'd be better off giving up cycling. It sounds like utter misery for you

 

[lighterthief]

Some peds even expect me to stop when there isn't even a crossing - usually waiting till there are no cars about and then happily stepping out in front of me.

I can highly recommend an Air Zound - perfect for sleepwalking pedestrians.

 

[Final]

I can highly recommend an Air Zound - perfect for sleepwalking pedestrians.

just followed that link and read the reviews... lmao at some of the descriptions

 

[Major Tom]

Sounds like with all the shit you get and the hardened attitudes it's produced in you, you'd be better off giving up cycling. It sounds like utter misery for you

Oh fuck off...


I enjoy cycling - I'm hardly going to let a few twats get in between me and my cycling.

It would be that much more enjoyable without the twats though

 

[Major Tom]

I can highly recommend an Air Zound - perfect for sleepwalking pedestrians.

i had one of those - some fucker vandalised it when my bike was chained up outside a shop

now i just shout

 

[parallelepipete]

Of course you are allowed. However I personally don't think this is a very effective way to communicate with the non-cycling public. I think it will anger those whose habits we need to change and will, sadly, make life that little bit more dangerous for all us other cyclists out there.

What lighter says - and believe me Major Tom, I have had zillions of arguments in my time as a seething cyclist - stopping the car that cut me up, shouting at bus drivers who pulled into me etc. etc. - in the end, all it does is confirm their suspicions of you as a 'lycra lout' (courtesy of that Melanie Phillips ).

The only thing is to ride confidently, predictably, and defensively (à la Cyclecraft), so that drivers aren't even tempted to make a stupid manoeuvre which endangers you.

And I can't bring myself to shout at pedestrians any more. All I ask is that they have bothered to look around at junctions and make eye contact with me - then it's usually clear who will give way.

 

[Spion]

Oh fuck off...

comments cut so as not to descend to Maj Tom's miserable level