Cyclists! Why do they ride in the middle of the road?

[Mike.Gayner]

There's a lot of false assumptions in that classic argument:
Pollution, that bike is made of steel or alloy then built in a factory and shipped across the world. It didn't happen with zero emmisions.
Cycling requires lot of carbs to be burned which means extra food consumption which means extra emmisions by food/agri industry.

That is so far beyond ridiculous I don't even know where to start.

[swbarnett]

Motorbike gear is hot and heavy too but most of us accept the need to wear it.

You're hardly doing heavy physical exercise on your motorbike. In case you hadn't noticed that's what the motor's for.

Also, not all of us are so married to it that we don't take some of it off in hot weather.

Then look at chine, you'll just have cycle congestion instead lol

Imagine what that would be like if most of those bicycles are replaced with cars.

[Shadowjack]

No you're not. You pay taxes don't you?

I have heard the "you pay other taxes" argument before and see it as a rather "so what" consideration in regard to this situation. My point remains that to use my motorised vehicles on the road, I have to pay a specific set of gummint charges that are not charged against me when I use the bicycle.

[swbarnett]

I have heard the "you pay other taxes" argument before and see it as a rather "so what" consideration in regard to this situation. My point remains that to use my motorised vehicles on the road, I have to pay a specific set of gummint charges that are not charged against me when I use the bicycle.

My point is only that one cannot say that the working cyclist has not contributed financially to the construction and maintenance of the roads. You are correct that they pay less but that's only fair because they cause far less wear and tear on the road than the average car or truck.

[Mushu]

So much bullshit I can't be bothered replying to each individual.

Riding into an opening car door isn't likely to be fatal, just because a couple of times it has resulted in injuries doesn't make it highly dangerous. Given the choice of riding into a door or being bowled from behind I know which one would give a better chance of survival.

And, smokeu, efficiency depends on what variables you are looking at. Time and effort make cycling quite inefficient. And just because I don't (and wouldn't) ride a bicycle doesn't make me fat. We as people are genetically wired to eat, the reason every first world country claims to be the fattest is because food is more avaliable than ever before in human history. It has more to do with how much they eat than with how they choose to commute.

It's not hard for a cyclist to give way to a car and would take less time than the reverse. They are slow, they are hazardous to other road users (in situations where the road is not equipped for them) and they are completely unregulated and anonymous. But the bigger problem is the groups of them that ride around on the weekend generally disrupting traffic and putting themselves and other road users in danger, ride your bike around the port Hills on any Saturday when there is good weather and you will see what I mean.

[swbarnett]

So much bullshit I can't be bothered replying to each individual.

Have you ever cycled? You'd most likely think differently if you had. Like so many fights between different groups of road users a little time is each other's shoes is desperately needed.

Riding into an opening car door isn't likely to be fatal,

OK, so what level of injury would you deem acceptable?

Given the choice of riding into a door or being bowled from behind I know which one would give a better chance of survival.

Depending on the speed of impact I might agree with you. Except for one point. If a cyclist swerves to avoid a car door they're likely to end up in the path of traffic anyway (this has resulted in at least one death in recent times). Much better for all concerned to get out there in a controlled manner.

But the bigger problem is the groups of them that ride around on the weekend generally disrupting traffic and putting themselves and other road users in danger,

This I agree with. Let's be clear though that the daily cycle commuter or the open road solo rider cannot be tarred with the same brush.

[Mushu]

Have you ever cycled? You'd most likely think differently if you had. Like so many fights between different groups of road users a little time is each other's shoes is desperately needed.

Yes I've cycled, everyday of my time at school and later when I lost my license or didn't own a car. As recently as a few years ago I was using a bike to get around but I never thought my legal right as a road user was an appropriate reason to put myself or any other road user in danger, or the right to hold anyone up.

OK, so what level of injury would you deem acceptable?

Given that most cyclist who decide to ''own their lane'' don't bother to check what's behind them in the first place and that while traveling past parked cars you can see if there is someone inside, the likelihood of hitting a car door is lower on average than that if being hit from behind so I would keep left and be vigilant rather than hold up traffic due to my own self importance.

Depending on the speed of impact I might agree with you. Except for one point. If a cyclist swerves to avoid a car door they're likely to end up in the path of traffic anyway (this has resulted in at least one death in recent times). Much better for all concerned to get out there in a controlled manner.

Given that an opening car door occurs on a stationary vehicle, the cyclist is responsible for the speed in which it could happen, you want us to slow down when it suits you, why can't you slow down if you suspect this may happen to you.

This I agree with. Let's be clear though that the daily cycle commuter or the open road solo rider cannot be tarred with the same brush.

Note that I have stated a few times that kids commuting to school don't seem to be a problem, even the groups of lycra fags aren't the root of the problem (they just compound it) it's the cyclists sense of entitlement that is the real problem and it only serves to put them in danger. Perhaps anyone with a drivers license should be banned from riding a push bike.

[pritch]

Given that an opening car door occurs on a stationary vehicle, the cyclist is responsible for the speed in which it could happen, you want us to slow down when it suits you, why can't you slow down if you suspect this may happen to you.


Note that I have stated a few times that kids commuting to school don't seem to be a problem, even the groups of lycra fags aren't the root of the problem (they just compound it) it's the cyclists sense of entitlement that is the real problem and it only serves to put them in danger. Perhaps anyone with a drivers license should be banned from riding a push bike.

I'm not sure that you have a sufficient grip on reality to be in control of a motor vehicle?

A driver opened a car door in front of a cyclist who was injured in the resulting crash. The Judge ordered that the driver pay $10,000 to the cyclist. He didn't do that because it was the cyclist at fault.

More recently in Auckland a driver opened a car door without looking, the cyclist swerved to miss the door and she was hit and killed by a truck.

I still think you're hallucinating about all these kids you keep mentioning.

[Twentypercent]

it's the cyclists sense of entitlement that is the real problem and it only serves to put them in danger.

Sooooo, do you ever lane split? How fast?

Ever go right to the front of the queue at the traffic lights?

Or maybe get a knee down on a public road? Or blow the lid off the speed limit?

Just saying...

[Mushu]

I'm not sure that you have a sufficient grip on reality to be in control of a motor vehicle?

A driver opened a car door in front of a cyclist who was injured in the resulting crash. The Judge ordered that the driver pay $10,000 to the cyclist. He didn't do that because it was the cyclist at fault.

More recently in Auckland a driver opened a car door without looking, the cyclist swerved to miss the door and she was hit and killed by a truck.

I still think you're hallucinating about all these kids you keep mentioning.

If it's worth 10k I'd happily ride into a car door, I've crashed plenty of pushbikes over the years, never been paid for it and often into things harder than car doors.

I never said people don't throw open car doors without looking but in that situation the hazard is in front of you and likely not fatal, on the other hand a car that doesn't see you is behind giving you far less of a chance to escape.

So what's your point.

As far as the kids, thousands of them ride to and from school every day, yet it always seems to be adults that get killed on bikes on the road.

Top three results of a Google search on the subject
37 years old
22 years old
50 years old
Kids do get knocked off their bikes just not nearly as often as adults.

[Mushu]

Sooooo, do you ever lane split? How fast?

Ever go right to the front of the queue at the traffic lights?

Or maybe get a knee down on a public road? Or blow the lid off the speed limit?

Just saying...

Nope, don't lane split I don't think the danger is acceptable for the rewards, unless traffic is at a complete standstill.

I do filter to the front in traffic but I keep the bike as slow as practical, been doing it for a long time and have yet to do much as scratch a mirror and never hold anyone up doing it.

Won't say I've never had my knee down on the road, but I can say I have never put anyone else in danger doing it.

I've got nothing against doing something dangerous but I don't put others at risk doing it or put others in a position where they could be seen as at fault for my risk taking behavior and I don't bitch about it if it goes wrong.

[swbarnett]

it's the cyclists sense of entitlement that is the real problem

And therein lies the crux of the matter. Cyclists aren't unique in this. You posts prove that.

[swbarnett]

Nope, don't lane split I don't think the danger is acceptable for the rewards

Well that explains a lot.

[Mike.Gayner]

it's the cyclists sense of entitlement that is the real problem and it only serves to put them in danger.

The irony is delicious.

[Mushu]

And therein lies the crux of the matter. Cyclists aren't unique in this. You posts prove that.

Why do my posts prove anything. As I have said no matter what form of transport I choose, I do whatever is necessary to make my way without impeding or endangering any one else. there are cyclists out there that do the same but unfortunately they seem to be the minority.

Actually there are things I think I should expect on the road such as being able to make my way without unnecessary delay (if one cyclist holds you up for 1 minute and it happens 20 times on the way to work....)

What if one of these lycra fags doesn't look behind before crossing my path and I hit him I would also likely be injured, my bike would be damaged and I could face charges relating to it, all because these pricks don't give a fuck about other road users or their own safety