'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby leftpoole » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:03 am

reohn2 wrote:One of my pet hates is snobbishness,our society is riddled with it,and non more than those who categorise cyclists into 'real' cyclists and not proper cyclists or only 'people riding bikes' or POBs,etc.
There are many types of cyclists and anyone riding a uni/bi/tri or quad cycle are cyclists,when they get off it and walk they become pedestrians,likwise anyone driving a car are motorists until they get out of it,get on a bike then they become cyclists.

There are idiots about in any walk or ride of life,unfortunately there's not enough police enforcing the law to make people think twice about their actions or responsibility toward the rest of society.

Regarding the OP's opinion that anyone riding on a pavement is an idiot,if he hadn't taken his ball home I would like to have asked him to clarify his statement.IMO in certain circumstances riding on the pavement is an idiotic thing to do,OTOH in another situation it's the safest .
To clarify,city/town centre with lots of pedestrians walking about riding on the pavement is stupid antisocial and dangerous.Fast busy 60mph unused pavement, it can be the safest option.
There's a stretch of very fast very busy dual carriageway not far from where I live (google earth A580 from j23 m6 east toward Manchester),which has a perfectly well surfaced cyclepath completely seperate from the road,yet I still on occasion see cyclists exercising their right to ride the carriageway :?
As for riding two abreast in some circumstances it's ludicrous ie; two cyclist on a fast A road,but at other times it's the best and safest way to ride ie;six or eight riders are no worse to over take than a slow moving tractor/traction engine/horse and or cart,etc,but invite close and dangerous overtaking by motors if they file out.
The key thing is context,when and where to or not,unfortunately there are a lot of very selfish and ignorant people using our roads,some are pedestrians some are cyclists and some are motorists but that said the ones who are likely to cause the most injury and disruption are those driving motors of any kind.
There is also a very unhealthy class system operating in UK society which is a blight on our country and we are all the worse for it.
Just my 2d's worth.


Hello,
On reflection I shall add comment. There are it appears a number of genuine enthusiastic 'cyclists' making points.
If Si and others feels that I am a snob, then fair enough, maybe I am! If anyone else thinks the same, fine I am not concerned.
There are it appears people who I assume to be CTC members (a Club of what I have assumed to be grown up people?) who actually see no wrong in pavement riding!
My response is that my opening post was trying to show that idiots on pavements cause untold damage to Cycling and its cause. Cycling via CTC generally are supposed to stand up for cyclists. Cyclists are in my mind people of all ages and one must assume creed and religion also, who behave because they want to be seen as genuine people and not idiots.
Riding on the pavement caused the dispute in my opening post. The poor man who was in the right was assaulted and is now in Hospital with a broken body. NOT real cyclists but yobbos.
If genuine cyclists ride on pavements they are lawless as riding on pavements is against the law no matter where when or how!
Please remember that the more the motorist (and I am one) sees cycles on pavements the more they believe cycles should be on pavements.
I know the roads of todays World are pretty busy, in fact where I live is very busy (even more so during all School Holidays as I live at the seaside) but if all cycles rode on the rode it would give motorists and the bunch of idiots supposed to be Government a better view. Volume equals visibility?
The CTC representatives that I have seen on TV or read about online in Newspapers do not give our cause much sense. I read that one CTC representative advocates running red lights because it is safer? It is breaking road law. How idiotic can that be?
Sustrans is doing a great job for family cycling and commuting I guess but again if motorists are aware of off road lanes they will believe cycles belong off road.
I hope that I have made my point now? I am sorry if some people feel upset in any way, maybe I am a little more to the point than most.
I rest here. But please the only reason I write is because the subject is close to my heart and mind and one which affects me in a great way. I have my reasons to feel the way I do. I pay Members fees every year to CTC but feel very let down. The ONLY reason I remain a member is because one day I may require a little help from the 'valued' insurance I am 'given'.
Best regards,
John
leftpoole
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Dorset.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby beardy » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:17 am

Exerting your right to ride on the road can be quite an effort.

I have to admit that yesterday, I was feeling quite knackered and there was a lot of cars on roads that I normally have more to myself, so I did a bit of pavement cycling.

I definitely upset/annoyed/offended a lot more people for the period that I was on the road. If I offended anybody while cycling on the pavement then they were too far away from me to be noticed.

As for lawlessness, yes it is but it is really very minor stuff compared to what almost all the car drivers were up to. I will happily take my ticket if any policeman can be bothered but generally they are more inclined to remove you from the road and put you on the pavement!

PS: I had already taken a 65 mile route over hilly terrain instead of the flat direct 55 mile route, in order to avoid upsetting too many motorists with my presence.
beardy
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:10 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Si » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:25 am

Fear not - I do not think you a snob, I don't know you well enough to make a decision. Rather my issue was that all this talk of 'real cyclists' gives the _impression_ of a snobbish or elitist attitude. Such an impression will do little to further our cause and is upsetting to those who feel that they are on the wrong end of it: as already demonstrated with my little 'extreme' example.

The problem with pavement riding, RLJing, is that it isn't a black and white issue - there is no single answer for all cases, rather each context has its own set of issues. You might say that pavement cyclists are 'idiots' ..... thus would you think that someone who makes their four year old ride on a busy, multi-lane, main road rather than the pavement is not sensible? Or would it be more sensible for them to have the child ride carefully on the pavement? See - no single right or wrong answer.
User avatar
Si
Moderator
 
Posts: 12404
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby leftpoole » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:34 am

re 'idiots' ..... thus would you think that someone who makes their four year old ride on a busy, multi-lane, main road rather than the pavement is not sensible? Or would it be more sensible for them to have the child ride carefully on the pavement?

Above post.
Response, I should really mention that although not written I agree fully that Mothers or Fathers with youngsters on bikes that pavement riding should be tolerated.
Regards,
John
leftpoole
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Dorset.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Vorpal » Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:16 am

Yes, but even for the 4 year old, pavement riding is still not legal.

I don't know about other parents, but I don't want to have choose between the law, and safety; and it should not be necessary.

I don't ride on the pavement. I have let my children do so, as long as they were cycling at pedestrian speed. However, as soon as Mini V could (and wanted to) go a bit too fast for the pavement, and I believed that she would stop for junctions and follow my instructions, she rode on the road, with me in a protective position just behind and outside of her.

She rode that way from about 5 years of age, even on the country lanes. I don't know what I would have done if we'd lived in place where I didn't feel it was safe for her to ride. If we had lived in one of many towns and cities with limited cycle-friendly infrastructure, her capability would have outstripped access to safe places to ride within weeks of learning how to ride a bike.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Vorpal
Moderator
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:34 pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Elizabethsdad » Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:21 am

Cunobelin wrote:
Si wrote:Image


Which really rather raises the question as to why this image should cause concern?

With considerate drivers driving responsibly with due respect for other road users... there should be no problem with this.

Is this picture photoshopped? I ask because it looks like the girls back wheel isn't touching the ground suggesting she and here bike were pasted in from another picture.
Elizabethsdad
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby kwackers » Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:27 am

Elizabethsdad wrote:Is this picture photoshopped? I ask because it looks like the girls back wheel isn't touching the ground suggesting she and here bike were pasted in from another picture.

Yep, The lighting and the shadow are wrong too.
kwackers
 
Posts: 8716
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Warrington

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Vorpal » Tue Apr 22, 2014 1:07 pm

yes, it's photoshopped. I think that was included in a psot the last time this picture went around. It's not meant to be a real picture. It's a concept, not a photo.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Vorpal
Moderator
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:34 pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Bicycler » Tue Apr 22, 2014 1:29 pm

Wasn't it part of a collection of photoshopped images where Dutch cyclists were transplanted into UK roads?

I understand John's view that we should obey the law as it applies to us. I do make every attempt to obey the law and do not ride on the pavement where it is not officially designated shared use. I would not advocate the breaking of laws and share his reservations about any part of the CTC being seen to do so.

As a motorist and former instructor John will know that there are many illegal actions which are commonplace amongst drivers and rarely questioned (pavement parking, running amber/red lights, speeding, leaving engines running whilst parked, misuse of horns, misuse of fog lights, not using parking lights, parking facing the oncoming traffic overnight or on one way streets etc. etc.). These acts are rarely questioned unless they cause inconvenience or danger to others, they are thought of as trivial or they are justified as necessary or pragmatic. I think we need to look at cycle illegalities in the same manner and distinguish between those which are genuinely stupid and dangerous and those that are relatively harmless. To my mind, pavement cycling can fall into either category.

Though I don't do it myself, I can understand why some feel the need to take to the pavement. There are a few roads which I would not ride a bike along and which do not have cycle paths. If I had to use those roads (and they had suitable pavements) I guess I would have to use the pavements. I understand that my idea of a safe road is not shared by every cyclist and they may feel unable to ride roads which I do. In these cases I think that their use of a pavement in a safe and considerate manner should be tolerated.

Having said that, it does annoy me to see cyclists riding along pavements beside every perfectly safe minor road. Even worse are the types who yo-yo between road and pavement every time a car comes along. This isn't good practice and it sets a bad example for others. There is certainly an abundance of poor roadcraft amongst cyclists and I would love free training to be more widely encouraged for adults and taught to every child at school. I feel that greater confidence can only enhance cyclists' enjoyment of cycling as well as making journeys quicker and more comfortable. It cannot be much fun to be in constant fear of everything and bumping up and down kerbs.
Bicycler
 
Posts: 1356
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 3:33 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Si » Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:27 pm

Elizabethsdad wrote:Is this picture photoshopped? I ask because it looks like the girls back wheel isn't touching the ground suggesting she and here bike were pasted in from another picture.


Yep, it's from: http://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/12/ near the bottom.
User avatar
Si
Moderator
 
Posts: 12404
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby reohn2 » Tue Apr 22, 2014 7:05 pm

Idiot steps forward :roll:
There are two places within a fifty mile radius of where I live that I ride on the pavement,both aren't shared use facilities,both provide me with a safer(albeit perceived)alternative to the road at that point both are very fast,very busy sections and I feel I assist motorists at those places.I've never ever,in the thirty years I've used the footpath to cycle on at these points,seen a pedestrian using the footpath,should I come across someone walking I would stop and give way.FWIW IMO both sections should be shared use facilities.
BTW both sections I use have a better surface than the road :).
Although I'm an illegal and not ''real'' cyclist(whatever that maybe :? ) I'll carry on doing it in the
knowledge that I'm a considerate and real cyclist(I know what that is :) )
As for the goons who ride on footpaths in busy town centers,scattering pedestrians in their wake,I have no tolerance for as I've no tolerance for inconsiderate and dangerous motorists or deliberately obtuse pedestrians on shared use bridleways/towpaths,etc.As I posted previously there are idiots in all walks of life and in all societies,the UK seems to have more than it's fair share it seems me :? .
The drying leaves begin to speak of summers end,
in preparation for golden days
All too soon the swallows will turn south for warmer climes
and another phase of endlessness begins......
reohn2
 
Posts: 15392
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:21 pm
Location: Lowton,smack dab between Liverpool and Manchester

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Chris the Sheep » Tue Apr 22, 2014 7:48 pm

There are two spots on my route to work where I use a shared pavement, simply because the behaviour of drivers in those locations is so poor, and I can't be doing with the stress. I resent those who campaign against shared use because of a fear of losing the right to access the road.

One of those sections involves a climb over a railway bridge, with four lanes squeezed onto it and from which I needed to make a right turn while going uphill. For two years I illegally used the pavement on that section without issue (I always used the road in the reverse, downhill, direction); when the pavement was closed for resurfacing I encountered aggressive, bullying, dangerous driving EVERY DAY simply for trying to use the prescribed lane for the right turn. Car drivers like to blast up that right turn lane to jump the queue of traffic in the straight-on lane, but it was ME who was the problem in their minds.

When the resurfacing was finished, the pavement magically became shared use.

I am not selfish, I am not a 'yobbo', I am not an idiot, I'm a decent person trying to get to work safely without being called a w****r for daring to get in the way of some cars. This is the reality and I am not going to subject myself to abuse just to suit a greater cause. My pavement cycling is about half a mile out of ten, the rest is on-road, following the rules, taking the lane where necessary etc etc. Don't judge me by that half mile.
Chris the Sheep
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 1:20 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Wilf Roberts » Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:56 am

Like Vorpal I sometimes end up accompanying my 5yr old on the pavement. Where possible we'll use segregated cycle paths, and even roads if I feel they're safe, but the stark reality is that many roads in my area (Poole, Dorset) that really should be safe enough for him to ride are not because of the habits of motorists, and the road planning of the, erm, "road planners" (?). I mean, even the main park of the town has a relatively busy road running through it, such is the motor-centric worldview here. I make sure when we are on a pavement we are considerate and polite to any pedestrians we encounter, and I'm yet to experience any antipathy towards us.

The story in the local paper leftpoole linked is about an OAP being assaulted after a verbal confrontation. That confrontation happened to be about someone cycling on a pavement, presumably inconsiderately or even dangerously. But such a confrontation could easily have resulted from someone littering or swearing loudly - would the headline then have been "Confectionary consumer attacks OAP" or "Speaking person attacks OAP"?
Wilf Roberts
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:05 pm

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby leftpoole » Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:11 am

UPDATE
Following this topic I feel that the below link should make someone laugh at the very leaset!!!
John

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... _friendly/
leftpoole
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Dorset.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Postby Edwards » Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:19 am

Wilf Roberts wrote:The story in the local paper leftpoole linked is about an OAP being assaulted after a verbal confrontation. That confrontation happened to be about someone cycling on a pavement, presumably inconsiderately or even dangerously. But such a confrontation could easily have resulted from someone littering or swearing loudly - would the headline then have been "Confectionary consumer attacks OAP" or "Speaking person attacks OAP"?


But the attitude of some cyclists has become a problem for some pedestrians. In this thread I was given permission to punch cyclists. :wink:
Keith Edwards
I do not care about spelling and grammar
Edwards
 
Posts: 5326
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:09 pm
Location: Birmingham

PreviousNext

Return to On the road

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests