Why is there so much animosity towards cyclists in Sheffield?

[Cyclone 10]

Didn't see anyone jump a red light this morning, but there was this;

 

 

---------- Post added 04-06-2015 at 08:53 ----------

 

 

Re your last line, you mean like it is an offence to cycle on a footpath?

*note

I wrote, footpath not shared footpath.

 

Nobody has disputed that, which is why the people posting don't do it...

 

Should I point out your hypocrisy as a motorist again, or have you got that one now?

[WiseOwl182 10]

No it isn't. You're wrong.

 

I've cited personal experience and two recent surveys to back this up, and the best you can come up with is "you're wrong". Your arrogance is breathtaking.

[Cyclone 10]

No I did not read earlier threads as I am commenting in THIS thread not those. Are you implying that one cannot ask a question or have a comment in a thread unless the have read EVERY other thread in the forum that may or may not impact on a particular thread first? Altus was very helpful in that he gave me the information that you were clearly not able to give me and I have noted the content.

 

Whether or not it was an instruction to the police is irrelevant as it did not constitute a change in the law so the police do not have to take notice of it. As you say a statement is just that and not a change in the law. The statement remains what it is, the opinion of 2 vote grabbing MPs who did not have the power or backing to change the law

 

I'm saying that I'm fed up of providing the same information over and over again. I've said it three times now, I don't see why you're struggling to understand what I'm saying.

 

The police report to the home secretary. They DO take notice of what they are instructed to do, the home secretary sets the national priorities for policing.

It was NOT an opinion, nor was it just from an MP, despite you wishing that this was the case.

 

---------- Post added 04-06-2015 at 08:56 ----------

 

I've cited personal experience and two recent surveys to back this up, and the best you can come up with is "you're wrong". Your arrogance is breathtaking.

 

Your surveys were shown to be nonsense, and you suffer from confirmation bias as an angry motorist.

[WiseOwl182 10]

Get on a bike and then you might form an opinion worth listening to.

As a driver, cyclist and pedestrian myself I see a minority of cyclists run red lights. A higher proportion than cars, but at the same time mainly a danger to themselves, unlike the cars that do it.

 

Don't assume I don't cycle just because I use my car for commuting. I do occasionally cycle for leisure. Plus the opinion of a cyclist is no more or less valid than any other road user - again, breathtaking arrogance.

 

At least you admit proportionately more cyclists run red lights than motorists, but otherwise your unfriendly, condescending and self-righteous tone does you no favours.

[TonyPrice 10]

Didn't see anyone jump a red light this morning, but there was this;

 

 

---------- Post added 04-06-2015 at 08:53 ----------

 

 

Nobody has disputed that, which is why the people posting don't do it...

 

Should I point out your hypocrisy as a motorist again, or have you got that one now?

 

What you could point out is where you read I was a motorist.

 

Your quite clearly taking your fitness regime too far, stop jumping.

[WiseOwl182 10]

 

Your surveys were shown to be nonsense, and you suffer from confirmation bias as an angry motorist.

 

No, one survey was claimed to be of dubious independence, which I will accept, the other was by YouGov and cannot be readily dismissed just because you don't like the results.

 

Also, I'm not angry. Judging by the posts in this thread it seems there is far more animosity towards motorists from cyclists than vice versa.

[Cyclone 10]

I have no problem with the vast majority of motorists. I'm a motorists, as are most cyclists. I have a problem with idiots who put me in danger, and unfortunately the opinions expressed on this thread suggest that such motorists are posting here.

[alchemist 38]

I'm saying that I'm fed up of providing the same information over and over again. I've said it three times now, I don't see why you're struggling to understand what I'm saying.

 

The police report to the home secretary. They DO take notice of what they are instructed to do, the home secretary sets the national priorities for policing.

It was NOT an opinion, nor was it just from an MP, despite you wishing that this was the case..

 

You did not produce the facts altus did, and I have thanked him it

 

On the other point

 

Has the law been changed ? NO

 

Can you still get a fixed penalty for breaking said law and riding on the pavement? YES

 

Despite what YOU would wish were the case

 

I dont understand why you have so much of a problem understanding such simple facts!!

[Cyclone 10]

You did not produce the facts altus did, and I have thanked him it

 

On the other point

 

Has the law been changed ? NO

 

Can you still get a fixed penalty for breaking said law and riding on the pavement? YES

 

Despite what YOU would wish were the case

I'm perfectly happy with that since I don't wish to ride on the pavement.

I understand why some cyclists will though, when the alternative is a high chance of a motorist killing them.

 

You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension brought about by an attempt to read my mind instead of what I've written.

[PeteM01 10]

The 'dismount and push' suggestion has certainly stirred things up. Some of the posters remind me of the arrogant drivers who think they are so skilled that they can 'safely' squeeze past cyclists in any circumstances just to gain a few seconds.

 

I would be happy to see better cycling infrastructure paid for from my taxes but, in the meantime, I resent having to jump out of the way of unskilled, arrogant cyclists on the pavements taking short-cuts on one-way streets and round red-lights or other obstacles. If the road is dangerous, just walk for a short distance and re-mount. Is this really so difficult to do?

[Cyclone 10]

No, one survey was claimed to be of dubious independence, which I will accept, the other was by YouGov and cannot be readily dismissed just because you don't like the results.

 

 

I can't find your original links, was this the yougov one?

 

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/21/London-cyclists-red-lights/

 

That's specifically about London. (There's a historical thread somewhere where I argue with Jezzy that many cyclists in London run red lights, it's endemic there from my observations. Sheffield is entirely different).

 

When it comes to running red lights, a majority (53%) of London cyclists avoid the practice altogether. But a significant group – 35% – admit that they at least ‘occasionally’ ignore red lights at traffic lights.

This is a survey of cyclists in London.

 

The Sunday times comes up with a 1/10 figure

http://road.cc/content/news/98721-1-10-cyclists-jump-red-lights-says-sunday-times

You can see from the details that it's a very small survey and based on that shouldn't be considered to be statistically relevant.

 

Other self reporting surveys have show drivers to jump red lights 14% of the time... Higher than the 10% of cyclists from this (small) survey;

 

STOPPING AT JUNCTIONS

 

14% of drivers jump a red light at least twice a month – Direct Line survey, August 2011

10% of cyclists found to jump red lights – Sunday Times operation, November 2013

 

There's also these results

 

Between 21%† and 31%‡ of drivers admit to using a handheld phone while driving (another 17% use hands-free, noted in article to be shown to be more dangerous than drink-driving) – †Direct Line survey, March 2012, ‡RAC Report on Motoring, 2013

23%† of drivers admit to texting at the wheel, including 44%‡ of young drivers – †RAC Report on Motoring 2012, ‡Direct Line survey, March 2012

11% of drivers admit to accessing email or social media whilst driving – RAC Report on Motoring 2012

 

None of which justifies anyone jumping a light. I wish cyclists wouldn't do it.

Because then all the holier than you motorists wouldn't have this to justify their dangerous and irrational behaviour towards cyclists.

But, it just goes to show that a minority of cyclists and a larger minority of motorists are perfectly willing to break the law if they can get away with it. Human nature I suppose.

 

---------- Post added 04-06-2015 at 09:16 ----------

 

Nevertheless, a cyclist on a crowded shared pathway should also really consider dismounting and pushing. That is self-evidently sensible and in keeping with the highway code.

 

Or they could proceded at walking pace on the bike. In better control and taking up less room. Obviously in the spirit of sharing the pedestrians will also be taking into account that the pavement is there for cycles as well.

[Squiggs 11]

I was making a more general point about cyclists and pavements. If you take the time to read my posts properly, I'm sure that will become apparent to you.

 

Nevertheless, a cyclist on a crowded shared pathway should also really consider dismounting and pushing. That is self-evidently sensible and in keeping with the highway code.

 

Or, if you read my post that seemed to prompt this, decide that the cycle path is wholly unsuitable and get on the road

 

Of course then the argument starts "there's a cycle path, why don't you use it"

Which in the above means, "why don't you just be a pedestrian"

 

This is why cyclists have to organise campaigns because in that scenario, there is nowhere for the cyclist. Damned either way by one set of opinion or the other.

 

And of course because of being damn near knocked off by 50 something trying in vain to look 30 something clutching jewel encrusted mobile phone, accelerating through red lights and not concentrating on where she is pointing her chelsea tractor.