Jump to content

People going to work on bikes.

Recommended Posts

I want the law to be brought in line with the reality tbh.  Two former home secretaries said that cyclists should use pavements and when the police patrol on cycles they use the pavement.

 

So, this morning, I have a requirement to go to work, explain to me how the bike is less necessary than the car in my garage or my feet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Cyclone said:

So, using a bike doesn't reduce congestion and pollution then?  And so isn't of benefit to everyone.

Motor vehicles are definitely necessary for society, private cars, not so much.  I get that they're convenient, I've been to Leeds today by car, I couldn't cycle it and it's a lot quicker than public transport.  But necessary, I think you'll struggle to make that argument.

It’s just pedantry to pick on the word necessary.

 

very little other than say  maslows hierarchy of needs is necessary but to fulfil some of  those needs we use available tools - a car being one.

 

we could all live in tents because  a house isn’t necessary.

 

i could get to work via public transport but it would be so elongated, stressful and extend my working day to impractical levels - at the expense of my family life etc.

 

so is a car necessary in some instances - I would say so - it’s certainly convenient and allows people to fulfil other needs as as a consequence. 

Edited by makapaka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Because everybody's circumstances are different, you can't go proclaiming what is or isn't necessary for them.

It's necessary for me to get to work, it's not necessary for me to drive (using fuel), park and pay £10+ every day for the luxury of doing so.

I live a fair distance away from work (10 miles), but it takes me the same amount of time to cycle in as it does to drive, get parked and walk from the car park to work, with none of the cost.

 

For me, a method of getting to work is necessary, the choice comes down to the fact that one costs a lot and the other doesn't.

Edited by RootsBooster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cycle from malin bridge to Amrc at Catcliffe in about 40 minutes as opposed to 30 in the car. Yes I do use the pavement sometimes ( like cops on bikes) when I consider it neccessary and ( wait for the howls of anguish)  go through reds sometimes ie,  peds have all crossed the crossing, shall I sit here another 20 seconds till the lights change?  Think not.  Can't honestly see what all the fuss is about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Magneteer said:

I cycle from malin bridge to Amrc at Catcliffe in about 40 minutes as opposed to 30 in the car. Yes I do use the pavement sometimes ( like cops on bikes) when I consider it neccessary and ( wait for the howls of anguish)  go through reds sometimes ie,  peds have all crossed the crossing, shall I sit here another 20 seconds till the lights change?  Think not.  Can't honestly see what all the fuss is about. 

Even when it's safe to jump a red, doing so contributes to the disdain many motorists already have for cyclists. This can mean they take less care in overtaking, etc.

Edited by RootsBooster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

Even when it's safe to jump a red, doing so contributes to the disdain many motorists already have for cyclists. This can mean they take less care in overtaking, etc.

Well, if a motorist decides he's going to take less care in his driving, then he is surely going to come a cropper at some point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Magneteer said:

Well, if a motorist decides he's going to take less care in his driving, then he is surely going to come a cropper at some point. 

Who do you think will fare worse between the motorist and cyclist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RootsBooster said:

Who do you think will fare worse between the motorist and cyclist?

Ah you mean they are likely to take some form of revenge ? Don't think so.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Magneteer said:

Ah you mean they are likely to take some form of revenge ? Don't think so.

 

 

No, that's not what I mean. 

If a motorist who takes less care in overtaking a cyclist is likely to 'come a cropper' who, out of the two, will come off worse from the incident?

Edited by RootsBooster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, makapaka said:

It’s just pedantry to pick on the word necessary.

 

very little other than say  maslows hierarchy of needs is necessary but to fulfil some of  those needs we use available tools - a car being one.

 

we could all live in tents because  a house isn’t necessary.

 

i could get to work via public transport but it would be so elongated, stressful and extend my working day to impractical levels - at the expense of my family life etc.

 

so is a car necessary in some instances - I would say so - it’s certainly convenient and allows people to fulfil other needs as as a consequence. 

It's absolutely key to what he said.

 

Say his sentence again with that word and it's entirely meaningless.

 

He said that cars are more necessary than bikes.  How can it possibly be pedantry to look at what that means...

6 hours ago, Magneteer said:

I cycle from malin bridge to Amrc at Catcliffe in about 40 minutes as opposed to 30 in the car. Yes I do use the pavement sometimes ( like cops on bikes) when I consider it neccessary and ( wait for the howls of anguish)  go through reds sometimes ie,  peds have all crossed the crossing, shall I sit here another 20 seconds till the lights change?  Think not.  Can't honestly see what all the fuss is about. 

I'd rather you wait, as a cyclists.  To avoid giving ammunition to people who can't help generalise and lump me in with you, and then use that as justification for driving dangerously around me.

6 hours ago, Magneteer said:

Ah you mean they are likely to take some form of revenge ? Don't think so.

 

 

No, he means less care in overtaking cyclists because they stereotype them as red light jumping law breakers who don't deserve to be given a safe overtake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

No, he means less care in overtaking cyclists because they stereotype them as red light jumping law breakers who don't deserve to be given a safe overtake.

mmm,   I think your'e over egging all this, the pair of you. In 20 years of commuter cycling I've never seen or experienced that style of overtaking, in fact I mainly witness drivers with cyclist empathy, although there are careless drivers out there i'm sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Magneteer said:

shall I sit here another 20 seconds till the lights change?  Think not.  Can't honestly see what all the fuss is about. 

And there we have it in a nutshell! Why is it ok for you, as a cyclist, to not bother waiting for the lights to change to green, but not for me as a motorist?

54 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

 

He said that cars are more necessary than bikes.  

Because they are. Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.