# What happens when a cyclist breaks the speed limit?



## Darius_Jedburgh (18 May 2021)

Near here there is a long steep hill with a speed camera at the bottom. This is just after a bend where 30mph begins. 

Motorists are regularly caught, but cyclists have no trouble going past at over 30mph. 
ACPO are supposed to adhere to the 10% plus 2mph rule, but there are so many bent coppers out there that nobody really knows what is going on. 
So if, as is quite feasible, a cyclist gets caught what action will be taken against him? Identification is a problem, but the local club set out to get the camera flashing and do it wearing club kit. 

Points can't be added to non existent licences. What can our Police State do beyond endorsing your pump?

Anyone know how this operates in practice? (I not saying that I got the camera flashing this morning 🙄)


----------



## Arjimlad (18 May 2021)

Speed limits for motor vehicles don't apply to cyclists, but we can be charged with "cycling furiously".


----------



## C R (18 May 2021)

I think that points would be added to your driving licence if you have one, if the offence was one that incurred points. @Drago may be able to confirm either way.


----------



## ianrauk (18 May 2021)

There's no speed limit for cycles.

I was once stopped once by a copper. He asked if I new what speed I was doing (down a hill), I said yes. He said that it was above the speed limit for the road (I had triggered a speed notice light). I said I know but speed limits don't apply to cyclists. It threw him off guard a little and said he knew that and just wanted to ask me to take it a bit easier down the hill in future.


----------



## Smokin Joe (18 May 2021)

C R said:


> I think that points would be added to your driving licence if you have one, if the offence was one that incurred points. @Drago may be able to confirm either way.


Not so, it isn't a motoring offence.

As regards getting done for speeding on a bike, I'd refuse the fixed penalty and go to court having tipped off the local paper beforehand.

Then I'd keep the cutting and spend the rest of my life boasting about it.


----------



## matticus (18 May 2021)

C R said:


> I think that points would be added to your driving licence if you have one, if the offence was one that incurred points. @Drago may be able to confirm either way.


One vote here for yes: a driving licence _can _have endorsements placed on it without you driving a car! I can't remember the limitations of this option, I think I recall drunken cycling being in the case history?

But another vote for speed limits not applying to cycles, so no offence for simply triggering the speed camera.

(You can also get points on a provisional licence!)


----------



## Smokin Joe (18 May 2021)

matticus said:


> One vote here for yes: a driving licence _can _have endorsements placed on it without you driving a car! I can't remember the limitations of this option, I think I recall drunken cycling being in the case history?


You can get a driving licence penalty for _causing injury by wanton or furious cycling, or causing the same by racing on the public road._

For breaking the speed limit alone, you can't.


----------



## Boopop (18 May 2021)

Reminded me of the time I rode down Kop Hill near Princes Risborough. I didn't have the spedometer up on my Garmin and just we as fast as felt safe.







Suffice to say, what has felt safe down that descent since then has always been a bit slower! 

I have no idea if a cyclist has ever been prosecuted for furious cycling via a speed camera. Clearly they'd have difficulty identifying the rider, and chances are the only person they'd be endangering is themselves if they crashed.


----------



## shep (18 May 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> You can get a driving licence penalty for _causing injury by wanton or furious cycling, or causing the same by racing on the public road._
> 
> For breaking the speed limit alone, you can't.


How about a skateboard then or a shopping trolley?

Is it only something with 2 wheels?

How about a Horse?


----------



## Dan77 (18 May 2021)

When I break the speed limit, a big grin and sense of achievement is usually what happens.

Riding down the road towards my house, only slightly down hill (about 2% I think) I hit 32mph recently. I must have had a tailwind but was quite pleased with that.


----------



## ianrauk (18 May 2021)

It was always a good game on the Friday Night Ride to the Coast rides to Brighton. With a fair motley few trying to set off the speed signs on the drop into town.


----------



## JtB (18 May 2021)

For speed limits to apply to bikes then surely there would first need to be a legal requirement for bikes to be fitted with a speedometer.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (18 May 2021)

JtB said:


> For speed limits to apply to bikes then surely there would first need to be a legal requirement for bikes to be fitted with a speedometer.



Yet vehicles are not fitted with breathalisers.


----------



## shep (18 May 2021)

JtB said:


> For speed limits to apply to bikes then surely there would first need to be a legal requirement for bikes to be fitted with a speedometer.


Good call, even the most basic requirements for motorcycles are a speedo, stoplight and a horn.

You would think a pushbike would need a speedo at least?


----------



## shep (18 May 2021)

ClichéGuevara said:


> Yet vehicles are not fitted with breathalisers.


Or a device to tell you which side of the road to drive on but you should know?


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (18 May 2021)

shep said:


> Or a device to tell you which side of the road to drive on but you should know?


I was once told that there is no law in this country specifying that we drive on the left.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (18 May 2021)

Arjimlad said:


> but we can be charged with "cycling furiously".



My understanding is that is not a substantive charge by itself, the legislation specifies that bodily harm must result to complete the offence. (And it's furious driving, not cycling.)

*Drivers of carriages injuring persons by furious driving.*​_Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years_​


----------



## shep (18 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I was once told that there is no law in this country specifying that we drive on the left.


Be interesting to see if I got done driving up the M6 the wrong way, doubt I'd get very far mind.


----------



## DCLane (18 May 2021)

Speed limit = irrelevant unless furious cycling.

Son no. 2 likes setting speed cameras off.

Me? I got pulled when over-taking a police car in a 30 and had set off a camera going from Headingley into Leeds. I needed to get from a graduation into a lecture and was too tight for time - and yes, I was wearing a gown and had the hat tucked into it. 

Apparently they knew I couldn't be done but wanted a "discussion".


----------



## shep (18 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I was once told that there is no law in this country specifying that we drive on the left.


I guess there's no law against eating a bowl of porridge whilst driving but you'll probably get done for driving without due care if spotted.


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (18 May 2021)

shep said:


> Be interesting to see if I got done driving up the M6 the wrong way, doubt I'd get very far mind.


In summer 2019 I was almost wiped out by a guy in the outside lane of the M6 travelling the wrong way. He had come down from Glasgow and was being chasd by Polis. Still gives me shivers thinking about it. I rang 999 immediately and the guy on the other end didn't believe me and told me to stop wasting Police time. I jest not.


----------



## shep (18 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> In summer 2019 I was almost wiped out by a guy in the outside lane of the M6 travelling the wrong way. He had come down from Glasgow and was being chasd by Polis. Still gives me shivers thinking about it. I rang 999 immediately and the guy on the other end didn't believe me and told me to stop wasting Police time. I jest not.


Bl**dy hell!


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (18 May 2021)

Yeah. He was some sort of druggie in a hot BMW 7 series. All the way down the M6 to Tebay on the wrong side. Polis were on the southbound side with lights and everything. When he got near Borrowdale (the Eastern one) he ran out of petrol. Left the car in the outside lane and hotfooted it down the embankment. Plod took and age to get anywhere near him because they had to go to the next junction, by which time he had long gone.
Really scared the sh1t out of me.


----------



## a.twiddler (18 May 2021)

Lucky he wasn't on a bike. Would have been in real trouble then!


----------



## Rusty Nails (18 May 2021)

Now that 20mph limits are becoming widespread in towns and cities I suspect a lot more cyclists will break speed limits.


----------



## DCLane (18 May 2021)

@Rusty Nails On the flat I'm usually over 20mph, my son 25. Tickets galore


----------



## Rusty Nails (18 May 2021)

DCLane said:


> @Rusty Nails On the flat I'm usually over 20mph, my son 25. Tickets galore


It certainly makes keeping up with motor traffic easier and reduces the number of people overtaking me in city streets.


----------



## classic33 (18 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Reminded me of the time I rode down Kop Hill near Princes Risborough. I didn't have the spedometer up on my Garmin and just we as fast as felt safe.
> 
> View attachment 589425
> 
> ...


Set the two speed cameras off, 50mph, coming back down the A629 from Ainley Top to Elland*. Me in the nearside lane, police car in the outside lane, keeping pace with me. Leaving when I slowed near the bottom.
On four wheels at the time, but still on a cycle.

*The bit in the middle


----------



## DRM (18 May 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Now that 20mph limits are becoming widespread in towns and cities I suspect a lot more cyclists will break speed limits.


It’s 20mph on the roads round our estate, I can easily do 23/24 mph on bits of it, yet still get overtaken by cars, and managed to trigger the “Bend-Slow” sign at Newmillerdam heading back to Wakefield from Barnsley, that’s a 30 mph road


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (18 May 2021)

I enjoy passing cars on the 20mph roads round here. They are usually doing 15/18mph, so passing them is easy.


----------



## Jenkins (18 May 2021)

If you do set off the speed camera and they can identify you from the picture, do you get a copy of the picture for boasting purposes?


----------



## matticus (18 May 2021)

I work with a guy whose daughter works for local police, processing minor speeding offences and the like; he's been talking about it a lot this week. I DARE NOT ask him what they would do if their cameras caught me exceeding the (car) speed limit á velo.

It could be hilarious. He also might die of heart failure, after clubbing me to death with the nearest stapler.


----------



## DCLane (18 May 2021)

Jenkins said:


> If you do set off the speed camera and they can identify you from the picture, do you get a copy of the picture for boasting purposes?


My son's old club got sent a letter requesting they identify the rider who kept setting off a local speed camera near us with a photo. Erm ... "I recognise that child's bum" and their bike's sat in my shed 

It went up in their annual presentation on the big screen. Let's say the message_ may _have been interpreted differently by the riders


----------



## DCLane (18 May 2021)

DRM said:


> It’s 20mph on the roads round our estate, I can easily do 23/24 mph on bits of it, yet still get overtaken by cars, and managed to trigger the “Bend-Slow” sign at Newmillerdam heading back to Wakefield from Barnsley, that’s a 30 mph road



That one's OK to set off, providing no-one pulls out from the left junction or is turning right into the Newmillerdam car park.


----------



## houblon (18 May 2021)

glasgowcyclist said:


> My understanding is that is not a substantive charge by itself, the legislation specifies that bodily harm must result to complete the offence. (And it's furious driving, not cycling.)
> 
> *Drivers of carriages injuring persons by furious driving.*​_Whosoever, having the charge of any carriage or vehicle, shall by wanton or furious driving or racing, or other wilful misconduct, or by wilful neglect, do or cause to be done any bodily harm to any person whatsoever, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable, at the discretion of the court, to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years_​



This lad was convicted, though he hadn't been involved in any sort of incident.

He was convicted in his absence, however, as he didn't turn up in court.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/jul/25/can-cyclists-be-fined-for-speeding

"So has a cyclist ever been fined specifically for speed? That's hard to find. But in September 1997, the Cambridge Evening News and the Guardian reported that a cyclist was fined £120 for travelling through the city centre at 25mph in a 30mph zone. Quite extraordinarily, police used a law that was more than 150 years old for "riding furiously". The Town Police Clauses Act of 1847, section 28, F18, states that penalties will be given to "every person who rides or drives furiously any horse or carriage, or drives furiously any cattle". Furiously? Seriously? The Guardian story named the rider as one Tony Adams, a postal worker, 24, who was also in training to try and break Chris Boardman's pursuit record. Adams said: "I couldn't believe it. I wasn't even pedalling furiously." "


----------



## Trickedem (18 May 2021)

ianrauk said:


> It was always a good game on the Friday Night Ride to the Coast rides to Brighton. With a fair motley few trying to set off the speed signs on the drop into town.


Myself and Adrian triggered that speed camera. He was on a Brompton and wearing a top hat. I like to imagine someone from the Sussex Constabulary would have smiled at that.


----------



## KnittyNorah (18 May 2021)

shep said:


> How about a skateboard then or a shopping trolley?
> 
> Is it only something with 2 wheels?
> 
> How about a Horse?



A ridden or driven horse is _highly_ unlikely to break a speed limit on a road. An 'average' horse trots at around 8-12mph and canters at around 10 - 15mph or a bit more. Some horses can trot, pace, or do a similar two-beat gait, significantly faster, at canter speed - but they can't, or find it difficult to, canter. It's a genetic thing. I once used to ride a horse who trotted in front and cantered behind; logic said that he should have cut his legs to pieces but he tracked so wide in front and so narrow behind that there was plenty of room for his iron shod feet without him hitting himself!
Full gallop can be anything above canter speed, up to around 30mph, depending on the horse. A specialist sprinter on perfect surface (turf) over a short distance will go significantly faster, 50mph or a bit more.
However, on a normal road surface it would be foolish and risky to deliberately ride or drive a horse above a trot except in an emergency and for a short distance - a few yards in a canter - as it is all too easy for a horse to slip and fall on such a surface, never mind the damage it will do to its joints. 
Riding or driving 'furiously' is the crime, I believe.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (18 May 2021)

The furiously is about driving a carriage furiously. A bike is considered a carriage for purposes of the law. They’d have to prove you were “driving” furiously. Simply freewheeling under gravity or with a demonstrably non maximal heart rate would surely disprove the furious bit.


----------



## Dogtrousers (18 May 2021)

As has been said above, on the public roads governed by the regular road traffic laws the speed limits only apply to motor vehicles, not bicycles so if you can safely exceed them, go ahead. 

If, while exceeding them, your riding becomes dangerous then you may be contravening other laws.

But there are places where this isn't the case. The Royal Parks (and possibly other places) are governed by other laws . You can be done for speeding there. 

And whether or not you have a speedometer is neither here nor there. The important point is whether _they_ can prove you were speeding, not whether _you_ knew you were speeding.

Personally, I doubt I've ever bothered a speed camera, so it's not something that has ever really concerned me.


----------



## DRM (18 May 2021)

DCLane said:


> That one's OK to set off, providing no-one pulls out from the left junction or is turning right into the Newmillerdam car park.


I’ve had that one, idiot in guess what, yes a BMW, straight out from the left junction near the cafe, about 3 to 4 meters in front of a car that was in front of me, caused the car to emergency brake & swerve left, was an elderly gent in a little hatchback so how dare he impede a BMW, I went right and was actually alongside the BMW driver who got a right mouthful and an invite to pull over, he shot off and I sprinted after it , but the brave hero went round the left bend and turned right up the steep hill, nearly hitting another car heading towards Newmillerdam, knowing I couldn’t keep up, luckily I was going steady that day and not triggering flashing road signs, it could have been nasty and the idiot causing it all would have had no clue what he’d caused to happen


----------



## I like Skol (19 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I enjoy passing cars on the 20mph roads round here. They are usually doing 15/18mph, so passing them is easy.


And we wonder why cyclists are despised by so many motorists?......

It's 20 for a reason, twenty is plenty, it's a limit not a target! But don't worry about it, you just carry on as you are, being an ambassador for our activity and helping to cement driver/cyclist relations.


----------



## Cathryn (19 May 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> _wanton or furious cycling,_
> For breaking the speed limit alone, you can't.



That sounds EPIC


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (19 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> And we wonder why cyclists are despised by so many motorists?......
> 
> It's 20 for a reason, twenty is plenty, it's a limit not a target! But don't worry about it, you just carry on as you are, being an ambassador for our activity and helping to cement driver/cyclist relations.


Who said I went above the limit?
You should read what was written not what you want to see. 
Inside the limit overtaking is allowed or do you not know that.?
Keep off the Skol, your brain can't take it.


----------



## C R (19 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> Who said I went above the limit?
> You should read what was written not what you want to see.
> Inside the limit overtaking is allowed or do you not know that.?
> Keep off the Skol, your brain can't take it.


Your original post is ambiguous, and a few others have told stories about purposeful going faster than the advertised limit. I agree with @I like Skol, the limits are there for a reason.


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

C R said:


> Your original post is ambiguous, and a few others have told stories about purposeful going faster than the advertised limit. I agree with @I like Skol, the limits are there for a reason.


Correct: the speed limits for motor vehicles are there to keep us safe(r) from those motor vehicles.

It's a shame that drivers so often ignore these limits ... do they hate each-other for it??


----------



## Solocle (19 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Reminded me of the time I rode down Kop Hill near Princes Risborough. I didn't have the spedometer up on my Garmin and just we as fast as felt safe.
> 
> View attachment 589425
> 
> ...


Kop Hill is a goodie!









But my favourite has to be East Chevin into Otley, Yorkshire. Fairly near the top, the speed limit drops to 30.




The other side of Otley, Nidderdale.




A road bike would almost certainly be faster...


----------



## nickyboy (19 May 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Now that 20mph limits are becoming widespread in towns and cities I suspect a lot more cyclists will break speed limits.


And that raises what is actually the important issue with speed limits. They are there, primarily, to keep speed down to safe levels for other road users. 
If you're cycling past a primary school (so a 20mph zone) and you're doing 30mph do you think that is a safe speed? I'd say that was reckless and dangerous. Hit a child on your bike at 30mph (and protecting children is the reason for the 20 zone near schools) and you're going to do some serious injury

So whilst it's all good fun to be talking about setting off speed warning signs, recounting stories of police not being able to prosecute you etc etc, there is a serious side to this. Speed limits are there for a reason. Whilst speeding bikes aren't as dangerous as speeding cars they are not without danger. Or should cyclists go whatever speed, including 30mph in a 20mph school zone?

Here is a good example. 20 zone (primary school), downhill...very easy to do more than 30. Cycle with impunity at 30 or stick to the 20 limit?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 May 2021)

While road speed limits do not apply to cyclists, I take the view that they should be obeyed.

I'll quote myself here from a 20mph thread of a few years back:



glasgowcyclist said:


> I look at it from the pedestrians' perspective. In a 20mph zone, they are entitled to expect that the limit is there to prioritise their safety and that it should be respected by all vehicle operators. The elderly, and others who are less mobile, should be able to cross streets in these zones without the worry and apprehension that comes with doing the same in a 30mph, or higher, area. Crossing those roads is stressful, worrying and tiring, as they hurry as best they can to get to the other side.
> 
> And I don't expect the average pedestrian to know that speed limits can't be enforced against cyclists.
> 
> As infrequent as the opportunity to exceed it may be, I will always comply with the posted speed limit while cycling. While it might not be my legal obligation, I feel it is my moral/societal obligation.


----------



## winjim (19 May 2021)

102kph breaks NSL on a single carriageway. This is not my Garmin.


----------



## C R (19 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Correct: the speed limits for motor vehicles are there to keep us safe(r) from those motor vehicles.
> 
> It's a shame that drivers so often ignore these limits ... do they hate each-other for it??



Do you think that there's a great deal of difference on the potential injury if a child is hit by a car at 20mph or by a bike at 30mph?

On the perception side skolly's point is that many drivers already hate cyclists, flaunting a disdain for the speed limit allowed by a legal loophole is not going to do us any favours.


----------



## battered (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> And that raises what is actually the important issue with speed limits. They are there, primarily, to keep speed down to safe levels for other road users.
> If you're cycling past a primary school (so a 20mph zone) and you're doing 30mph do you think that is a safe speed? I'd say that was reckless and dangerous. Hit a child on your bike at 30mph (and protecting children is the reason for the 20 zone near schools) and you're going to do some serious injury
> 
> So whilst it's all good fun to be talking about setting off speed warning signs, recounting stories of police not being able to prosecute you etc etc, there is a serious side to this. Speed limits are there for a reason. Whilst speeding bikes aren't as dangerous as speeding cars they are not without danger. Or should cyclists go whatever speed, including 30mph in a 20mph school zone?
> ...


Cycle there, just as anywhere else, at a safe speed. 3pm in the week, when the school tips out, be very careful. Maybe 20 is too fast. Middle of Sunday afternoon, pin your ears back, get spinning in the big dog, and see how many car scalps you can claim.


----------



## C R (19 May 2021)

battered said:


> Cycle there, just as anywhere else, at a safe speed. 3pm in the week, when the school tips out, be very careful. Maybe 20 is too fast. Middle of Sunday afternoon, pin your ears back, get spinning in the big dog, and see how many car scalps you can claim.


You do realise that is the excuse many drivers use for exceeding the speed limits.


----------



## Solocle (19 May 2021)

battered said:


> Cycle there, just as anywhere else, at a safe speed. 3pm in the week, when the school tips out, be very careful. Maybe 20 is too fast. Middle of Sunday afternoon, pin your ears back, get spinning in the big dog, and see how many car scalps you can claim.


48 mph in a 40 and hit the 20 limit at 35...

But always maintaining an ability to stop in the distance that I could see to be clear.

View: https://youtu.be/mIU73aYneS8


C R said:


> You do realise that is the excuse many drivers use for exceeding the speed limits.


The difference is that exceeding the speed limit in a motor vehicle is illegal, "no excuse". It is not illegal to exceed the speed limit on a bicycle, you just have to ride safely.

Riding safely will include factoring in that any pedestrians are possibly not looking for a cyclist exceeding the speed limit. Then again, the number of pedestrians who see a cyclist and then assume we're doing 5 mph, sod _them_!


----------



## battered (19 May 2021)

Solocle said:


> Kop Hill is a goodie!
> View attachment 589537
> 
> View attachment 589538
> ...


East Chevin is VERY fast. You just have to be careful as you approach the bottom, it's easy to be a long way the top side of 40mph and someone coming out of the road to the left does a SMIDSY or, more likely, thinks "it's only a bike" and pulls out.


----------



## battered (19 May 2021)

C R said:


> You do realise that is the excuse many drivers use for exceeding the speed limits.


You do realise I have my tongue in my cheek.


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Whilst speeding bikes aren't as dangerous as speeding cars they are not without danger. Or should cyclists go whatever speed, including 30mph in a 20mph school zone?
> 
> Here is a good example. 20 zone (primary school), downhill...very easy to do more than 30. Cycle with impunity at 30 or stick to the 20 limit?


What's so special about 30? I try to ride at an appropriate speed; that would take into account the road conditions (including gradient!), people, and any warning signs. A school at ingress/egress time would be a very major factor. I expect the more kids I could actually see close to the road, the slower I'd go (and that is true in the absence of a school)
I almost never check my speed (as measured by an onboard device) during such an assessment. I often ride with no such device, and rarely display speed when I do!


----------



## Solocle (19 May 2021)

battered said:


> East Chevin is VERY fast. You just have to be careful as you approach the bottom, it's easy to be a long way the top side of 40mph and someone coming out of the road to the left does a SMIDSY or, more likely, thinks "it's only a bike" and pulls out.


Yep, I remember vividly airbraking to about 40 mph quite quickly by sitting up, as it wouldn't be prudent to approach that corner with a junction just beyond, nor those driveways, faster. The other mitigation technique was riding close to the centreline like a motorbike, because that gives you more reaction time to anything at the side of the road - significantly more than a car doing the same speed.


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

C R said:


> Do you think that there's a great deal of difference on the potential injury if a child is hit by a car at 20mph or by a bike at 30mph?
> 
> On the perception side skolly's point is that many drivers already hate cyclists, flaunting a disdain for the speed limit allowed by a legal loophole is not going to do us any favours.


1: Yes I do, based on the math. But both are quite dangerous to a small person (see my reply about the school for more detail)
2: I really don't care. The "favours" you mention will make no difference whatsoever. Show me how speeding _drivers _are influencing motorists' opinion, then we'll work from there ...


----------



## Dan77 (19 May 2021)

It would be extremely rare that I would be able to break the speed limit other than on a steep 30mph section.

I don't subscribe to this blanket 'speed limits are there for a reason' when applied to cyclists. Yes, you could seriously injure or even kill somebody. That's where judgement comes in. I doubt any of us would be absolutely gunning it through a town centre or past a school at kicking out time. Cyclists have to be aware of their surroundings. Moreso than drivers. If there are pedestrians around then take the appropriate care and always be prepared for them to step out on you. If it's a quiet road with nobody around then why not have some fun and just be prepared to slow it down when circumstances change.


----------



## T4tomo (19 May 2021)

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian

Not just outside schools, anywhere littered with pedestrians, excess speed isn't safe (accepting our friend above mixed speed with being an utter tool). That said with good visibility clear road etc. 

Completely unrelated, your speed readings from strava / garmin etc aren't at all accurate for the max reading / instant readings. I've had the odd glitch that said i'd gone at some crazy speed, which i know I haven't.

Like the time I almost hit 60mph thru central London on my Brompton, past Spitalfields? Also on that ride I set a KOM that last several years on a short segment on High Holborn, again complete crap.


----------



## Arjimlad (19 May 2021)

My descents of the Kirkstone Pass have involved more braking than I would like, due chiefly to my doubts about the ability of sheep to judge my speed before stepping out. 

It's fun going fast downhill, but drivers and pedestrians probably won't be expecting a cyclist to go all that fast, so it's safer to ride to the conditions. I wouldn't want to hit a person or vehicle at speed, after all, regardless of whose fault it might be in law.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (19 May 2021)

Speed limits are odd things anyway. They must be wrong more often than they're right, as they're set for a certain type of situation, with generalisations for drivers and vehicles. You can be within the speed limit and still be driving too fast, fog and ice being two examples.

People seem fixated on taking some paint on a bit of tin as an instruction, rather than as information to gauge potential hazards by.


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

Arjimlad said:


> It's fun going fast downhill, but drivers and pedestrians probably won't be expecting a cyclist to go all that fast, so it's safer to ride to the conditions. I wouldn't want to hit a person or vehicle at speed, after all, regardless of whose fault it might be in law.


Yes exactly. 👍


----------



## nickyboy (19 May 2021)

Dan77 said:


> It would be extremely rare that I would be able to break the speed limit other than on a steep 30mph section.
> 
> I don't subscribe to this blanket 'speed limits are there for a reason' when applied to cyclists. Yes, you could seriously injure or even kill somebody. That's where judgement comes in. I doubt any of us would be absolutely gunning it through a town centre or past a school at kicking out time. Cyclists have to be aware of their surroundings. Moreso than drivers. If there are pedestrians around then take the appropriate care and always be prepared for them to step out on you. If it's a quiet road with nobody around then why not have some fun and just be prepared to slow it down when circumstances change.


So to test this theory I looked at the cyclist GPS data for the 20mph downhill I screenshotted above

50 cyclists this month. I picked out a random sample (plus the fastest and slowest). Guess what? Every cyclist exceeded 20mph. The slowest was 23mph. The 10th fastest in the month was 32mph

It seems fair to say that cyclists consistently go past the 20mph limited school faster than 20mph, often more than 50% more than the speed limit.

The question is, do you think that's OK? And if you don't, what should we do about it?


----------



## Solocle (19 May 2021)

Dan77 said:


> It would be extremely rare that I would be able to break the speed limit other than on a steep 30mph section.
> 
> I don't subscribe to this blanket 'speed limits are there for a reason' when applied to cyclists. Yes, you could seriously injure or even kill somebody. That's where judgement comes in. I doubt any of us would be absolutely gunning it through a town centre or past a school at kicking out time. Cyclists have to be aware of their surroundings. Moreso than drivers. If there are pedestrians around then take the appropriate care and always be prepared for them to step out on you. If it's a quiet road with nobody around then why not have some fun and just be prepared to slow it down when circumstances change.


Yep - speed limits are there for a reason, to keep idiot motons at some semblance of a prudent speed, instead of dealing with the root cause, idiot motons.

Equally, there's a reason that the legislators went out of their way to specify *motor *vehicle.



RTRA 1984 § 81 said:


> It shall not be lawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle on a restricted road at a speed exceeding 30 miles per hour.


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I looked at the cyclist GPS data
> <snip...>
> It seems fair to say that cyclists [Matt added:]*logged on cyclist GPS data *consistently go past the 20mph limited school faster than 20mph, often more than 50% more than the speed limit.
> 
> The question is, do you think that's OK? And if you don't, what should we do about it?


[Added the* bold *to stress there _may _be sampling bias here.]
Do you have equivalent data for drivers? Not on a "two wrongs making a right" basis, but so that I have all relevant info before i comment.

(and is either data-set broken down by time-of-day?)


----------



## nickyboy (19 May 2021)

matticus said:


> [Added the* bold *to stress there _may _be sampling bias here.]
> Do you have equivalent data for drivers? Not on a "two wrongs making a right" basis, but so that I have all relevant info before i comment.
> 
> (and is either data-set broken down by time-of-day?)


I haven't got time as I have a job

The reality is all 50 cyclists this month who log GPS data exceeded the 20mph speed limit past the school and a lot went more than 50% faster than the limit. Any reasonable person would draw the conclusion from this that a lot of cyclists exceed the 20mph limit past the school, a significant portion of which exceed it by a lot

So the question remains...is that a problem and, if so, what should be done?


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> So the question remains...is that a problem and, if so, what should be done?


Fair question: I'd still say I want to know if the high speeds coincide with kids being around.

Other evidence you could submit: injuries that occurred with (adult!) cyclists. Injuries from impacts with cars.

It COULD be that the few speedsters either do it during Double Maths, or at 7pm. Or ride down the middle of the road, and slow down if they see any kids. I, for one, do not know.

(but I _do _know that people die every day from car impacts in all sorts of speed limits)


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 May 2021)

*What happens when a cyclist breaks the speed limit?*

I think I know the answer to this.

If you consider that a cyclist will always appear to have the same speed to any observers, it follows from basic relativity that their mass must increase as the limit is reached, and time dilates to accommodate this.

Should the limit be _exceeded_, the event horizon is passed, whereby anecdotes of the event cannot escape and we are doomed to relive them forever.

I submit this thread in evidence.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (19 May 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> *What happens when a cyclist breaks the speed limit?*
> 
> I think I know the answer to this.
> 
> ...



Ah, but with just a couple of notable exceptions, there are no limits for cyclists to exceed.


----------



## nickyboy (19 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Fair question: I'd still say I want to know if the high speeds coincide with kids being around.
> 
> Other evidence you could submit: injuries that occurred with (adult!) cyclists. Injuries from impacts with cars.
> 
> ...


I'm not arguing one way or another so I suggest you get whatever additional information you feel you need

All I'm doing is refuting the assertion that "cyclists don't generally exceed the speed limit and ride to the conditions". That clearly isn't the case as EVERY cyclist in the 50 person sample broke the speed limit, a significant portion of which did so by more than 50%. Your idea it's a "few speedsters" ain't right..it was 100% of all the cyclists on that road which loaded up a GPS file

As I keep saying...the issue is whether this is a problem and, if so, what should be done about it.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> EVERY cyclist in the 50 person sample broke the speed limit, a significant portion of which did so by more than 50%.
> As I keep saying...*the issue is whether this is a problem and, if so, what should be done about it.*




Training and advice for the slower ones?


----------



## Phaeton (19 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I enjoy passing cars on the 20mph roads round here. They are usually doing 15/18mph, so passing them is easy.


We have quite a short steep hill near us, I like to go down it on the MTB dinging my bell trying to get cars to get out of my way


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I'm not arguing one way or another so I suggest you get whatever additional information you feel you need
> 
> All I'm doing is refuting the assertion that "cyclists don't generally exceed the speed limit and ride to the conditions". That clearly isn't the case as EVERY cyclist in the 50 person sample broke the speed limit, a significant portion of which did so by more than 50%. Your idea it's a "few speedsters" ain't right..it was 100% of all the cyclists on that road which loaded up a GPS file
> 
> As I keep saying...the issue is whether this is a problem and, if so, what should be done about it.


20mph speed limits are not "generally" the case on our road network. So you haven't disproved that statement. It's quite possible that riders DO ride to the conditions past that school.

"problem"? "issue"? It feels like many people are saying there isn't a problem, while you're highlighting (selective) data to suggest there IS a problem in this location. It was yourself that highlighted this location IIRC? For people that are unaware of a problem, i'd say there is no issue 

Do YOU think there is a problem there, or are you just doing your best Jeremy Vine impression?? :P


----------



## mustang1 (19 May 2021)

instead of speed limits, they should introduce momentum limits. Multiply your speed by the mass and you get your momentum. Here are some examples:
1.5 ton car at 30mph has same momentum as 100kg rider at 500mph.
So I guess that would be the bike's speed limit.


----------



## Bonefish Blues (19 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> Yeah. He was some sort of druggie in a hot BMW 7 series. All the way down the M6 to Tebay on the wrong side. Polis were on the southbound side with lights and everything. When he got near Borrowdale (the Eastern one) he ran out of petrol. Left the car in the outside lane and hotfooted it down the embankment. Plod took and age to get anywhere near him because they had to go to the next junction, by which time he had long gone.
> Really scared the sh1t out of me.


What no helicopter?

Anyway, the answer to the original question is shirley this:


----------



## ClichéGuevara (19 May 2021)

Bonefish Blues said:


> What no helicopter?
> 
> Anyway, the answer to the original question is shirley this:
> 
> View attachment 589564



They turn into an 80's Ready Brek commercial?


----------



## Bonefish Blues (19 May 2021)

ClichéGuevara said:


> They turn into an 80's Ready Brek commercial?


It could happen, deffo Guv


----------



## Rusty Nails (19 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I'm not arguing one way or another so I suggest you get whatever additional information you feel you need
> 
> All I'm doing is refuting the assertion that "cyclists don't generally exceed the speed limit and ride to the conditions". That clearly isn't the case as EVERY cyclist in the 50 person sample broke the speed limit, a significant portion of which did so by more than 50%. Your idea it's a "few speedsters" ain't right..it was 100% of all the cyclists on that road which loaded up a GPS file
> 
> As I keep saying...the issue is whether this is a problem and, if so, what should be done about it.


It was 100% of that subset of cyclists who are interested in recording stats from their rides, and who possibly like to record, compare and show others how fast they ride.

That may be a small % of cyclists.

It's only a problem when the need for speed is more important than possible harm to others, and when that speed becomes the norm rather than the exception.


----------



## Solocle (19 May 2021)

mustang1 said:


> instead of speed limits, they should introduce momentum limits. Multiply your speed by the mass and you get your momentum. Here are some examples:
> 1.5 ton car at 30mph has same momentum as 100kg rider at 500mph.
> So I guess that would be the bike's speed limit.


No, I'd go with kinetic energy. 1 tonne car @ 30 mph = 180 kJ = 100 kg cyclist @ 95 mph.


----------



## a.twiddler (19 May 2021)

Perhaps it only suggests that the more performance oriented cyclists who upload (possibly inaccurate) gps data are the ones who are more likely to see a speed limit sign as a challenge. So 50 people on bikes per month exceed a speed limit which does not apply to them anyway. How many motor vehicles pass that way in excess of the limit which _does _apply to them? And what about the more typical cyclists who must massively outnumber the performance cyclists, who don't record their data? Has anything happened to any of the above, even allowing for the ones who self incriminate on gps? It's a mystery, and some may say, a red herring as far as cyclists are concerned.


----------



## byegad (19 May 2021)

Jenkins said:


> If you do set off the speed camera and they can identify you from the picture, do you get a copy of the picture for boasting purposes?


That reminds me off the Jasper Carrot joke about Reliant Robin Owners.

'They charge down hill in a 30mph limit where the police are parked up with the windows down shouting VRMM! VRMM! as they pass the coppers hoping to get a ticket, which they then will post in their windscreens.'


----------



## nickyboy (19 May 2021)

Seems a few oversensitive sorts here. The general thrust of the thread was that (a) Speed limits don't apply to cyclists (b) It is good fun to exceed the speed limit

All I've done is produce some (admittedly self selecting) data that shows that cyclists in certain circumstances, ride at a speed which is (a) a long way over the speed limit (b) probably at a speed inadvisable to the conditions) and asked whether the CC massive think this is a problem or not. Y'know, just to provide a counter position to the idea that breaking the speed limit on a bike is in all cases about just having harmless fun

Maybe it's just harmless fun doing 30mph past a 20mph limited primary school on a normal school day, maybe it isn't. Opinions may vary


----------



## Dan77 (19 May 2021)

20mph speed limits are of course massively more likely to be exceeded by cyclists than 30mph ones.

Again it comes down to judgement and circumstances. If it's a clear stretch when riding it and you're able to take a primary position then I wouldn't be concerned about exceeding 20mph in the slightest. If it's packed at school kicking out time and plenty of vehicles around meaning I'm closer to the kerb then I'm just going to take it easy and err on the side of caution. I don't want to crash into anyone any more than they want to be crashed into.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (19 May 2021)

As they tend to impose 20 mph limits in accident hot spots, they're best avoided if possible, and if you have to use them, spending as little time as possible in the danger area is the safest option, therefore going fast is a safety measure.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 May 2021)

20mph speed limits are not just about safety.

They're also about helping to enable all road users to use our communal space equitably without fear or intimidation, including unpredictable children and those with physical or visual impairment.

Cyclists exceeding them can be as intimidating as motorised vehicles. Perhaps moreso in some circumstances, as there's no warning of approach.


----------



## matticus (19 May 2021)

roubaixtuesday said:


> Cyclists exceeding them *can be* as intimidating as motorised vehicles.


I think "can be" is doing a lot of work in that sentence.

If you compare like-for-like, it's pretty clear which is the more intimidating. And it's by a considerable margin.


----------



## roubaixtuesday (19 May 2021)

matticus said:


> If you compare like-for-like, it's pretty clear which is the more intimidating. And it's by a considerable margin.



In general I agree, largely due to the speed of motor vehicles. But specifically, at low speeds by motorist standards, and in close proximity, I think a cyclist can be just as intimidating. Of course, this is purely personal opinion!


----------



## Solocle (19 May 2021)

Dan77 said:


> 20mph speed limits are of course massively more likely to be exceeded by cyclists than 30mph ones.
> 
> Again it comes down to judgement and circumstances. If it's a clear stretch when riding it and you're able to take a primary position then I wouldn't be concerned about exceeding 20mph in the slightest. If it's packed at school kicking out time and plenty of vehicles around meaning I'm closer to the kerb then I'm just going to take it easy and err on the side of caution. I don't want to crash into anyone any more than they want to be crashed into.


If you're at or above the speed limit, why should the weight of traffic move you out of primary position? Unless there's a significant number of motor vehicles going fater than you are...


----------



## Ming the Merciless (19 May 2021)

It’s America but still amusing 


View: https://youtu.be/ONNv1gZmnRg


----------



## Dan77 (19 May 2021)

Solocle said:


> If you're at or above the speed limit, why should the weight of traffic move you out of primary position? Unless there's a significant number of motor vehicles going fater than you are...



In that given scenario I'm not at or above the speed limit because I am being cautious due to all the pedestrians around.


----------



## Rusty Nails (19 May 2021)

ClichéGuevara said:


> As they tend to impose 20 mph limits in accident hot spots, they're best avoided if possible, and if you have to use them, spending as little time as possible in the danger area is the safest option, therefore going fast is a safety measure.


In Cardiff there is a drive to replace 30mph limits to 20mph in many city centre areas. It is not about accident hotspots.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 May 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> In Cardiff there is a drive to replace 30mph limits to 20mph in many city centre areas. It is not about accident hotspots.




All of Glasgow's city centre is a 20mph zone. In the rare event that I'm there with my car, I seem to be the only driver respecting that limit.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (19 May 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> In Cardiff there is a drive to replace 30mph limits to 20mph in many city centre areas. It is not about accident hotspots.



It was a joke.

We've got the most 20 mph zones in the Country according to some reports. They were going to add others, until they realised nobody ever got over 20mph on them anyway, and that's not meant as a joke.


----------



## Ridgeway (19 May 2021)

In the spirit of national speed limit zones and cycling speeds i have a nice local decent that i now know quite well:







You'd need a high speed group to top out much higher or some huge gears.

I can't see the rozzers minding too much here to that, probably they'd clap as you passed.


----------



## ebikeerwidnes (19 May 2021)

Speeds are OK if the road is OK - your brakes are good enough (!!) and there is no-one about

There is a hill heading into Moore (near Warrington) - I think it is called Delph Lane - and if I go down it exceeding 30 is normal - 40 as well. On a road bike even faster.
Problem is that at the end is a bridge
Turns out that it is a canal bridge - a very humped bridge
followed by a sharp right on a much narrower road.
If you took that bridge at any serious speed you would leave the ground and land just before you hit the hedge or a tree

Speed limit 60

so the speed limits are one thing - sensible speed for the circumstances is another.

First time I went down that hill I braked hard at the bottom and still was scared stiff when I saw what came next!


----------



## hatler (19 May 2021)

Trickedem said:


> Myself and Adrian triggered that speed camera. He was on a Brompton and wearing a top hat. I like to imagine someone from the Sussex Constabulary would have smiled at that.


And I managed that too with mini on the trailer-bike. I recall we had just overtaken a car.


----------



## Dogtrousers (19 May 2021)

Having got a bit bored with this thread I thought I'd see what it's like in other countries.

In Germany, as in the UK, signed speed limits only apply to motor vehicles. But there seem to be quite a few other regulations relating to excessive speed that do apply to bikes. And you can get points on your licence for cycling offences. https://translate.google.com/transl....bussgeldkatalog.org/fahrrad-geschwindigkeit/

In Finland road speed limits _do_ apply to cycles. If there is a bike path alongside the road the speed limit is the same as the road, but there have been moves to make it 25km/h https://translate.google.com/transl...oraile-turvallisesti/tunnetko-pyorailysaannot

I then got bored again.


----------



## tyred (19 May 2021)

What's the rush?


----------



## classic33 (19 May 2021)

tyred said:


> What's the rush?


Get to the bottom of the hill. You've put the effort in getting up there, enjoy the benefit.


----------



## mjr (20 May 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I was once told that there is no law in this country specifying that we drive on the left.


Never take legal advice from them!

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/5-6/50/section/78


----------



## mjr (20 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Correct: the speed limits for motor vehicles are there to keep us safe(r) from those motor vehicles.


Speed limits were first introduced to keep the roads safe, but not in the way you might think: they were intended to stop motorists cornering too fast and damaging the road surface, resulting in walkers and, more importantly to lawmakers, horses falling.

Other reasons have been added since, leading to the list of 7 reasons in https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/1


----------



## andrew_s (20 May 2021)

I've a mate who got told off by the police for 56 mph in a 30 limit (bottom of Leckhampton hill in Cheltenham).
A police car pulled alongside after he'd turned left, and he was told through the window "Do you know how fast you were going? Fifty beeping six; if you'd been in a car, I'd have nicked you".
The more serious telling off was from the tandem stoker (wife).


----------



## classic33 (20 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Speed limits were first introduced to keep the roads safe, but not in the way you might think: they were intended to stop motorists cornering too fast and damaging the road surface, resulting in walkers and, more importantly to lawmakers, horses falling.
> 
> Other reasons have been added since, leading to the list of 7 reasons in https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/1


Corner too fast at 4mph!


----------



## Baldy (20 May 2021)

What happens when a cyclist breaks the speed limit?

The bike vibrates itself to bits and the rider goes splat in the middle of the road. Simple.


----------



## nickyboy (20 May 2021)

andrew_s said:


> I've a mate who got told off by the police for 56 mph in a 30 limit (bottom of Leckhampton hill in Cheltenham).
> A police car pulled alongside after he'd turned left, and he was told through the window "Do you know how fast you were going? Fifty beeping six; if you'd been in a car, I'd have nicked you".
> The more serious telling off was from the tandem stoker (wife).


56 in a 30 zone on a bike is seriously bad form. No pedestrian is going to be anticipating a cyclist doing almost twice the speed limit and presumably the 30 zone is due to junctions etc etc. Stupid

I like a fast descent and there are a number of roads around my way I've done 50mph on. But to do that in a 30mph zone? No way, accident waiting to happen


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 May 2021)

A man walking with a red flag needs to be reintroduced in front of all cars.


----------



## matticus (20 May 2021)

Tandems doing 50mph are quite a lot more dangerous than a 30mph solo, all other things being equal :-/


----------



## matticus (20 May 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> A man walking with a red flag needs to be reintroduced in front of all cars.


🤣 
(Did a red flag help on the Giro last week??)


----------



## Solocle (20 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> 56 in a 30 zone on a bike is seriously bad form. No pedestrian is going to be anticipating a cyclist doing almost twice the speed limit and presumably the 30 zone is due to junctions etc etc. Stupid
> 
> I like a fast descent and there are a number of roads around my way I've done 50mph on. But to do that in a 30mph zone? No way, accident waiting to happen


"Presumably" is doing a lot of lifting there. Now, Leckhampton Hill's 30 limit (a location was provided, so all you had to do was streetview the thing) doesn't look like the place I'd contemplate 50 mph. 40, perhaps.

This is the 30 limit where I hit 53 mph.





In fact, I did that hill a good number of times, and only once did I not break 50 mph - I had to wait to overtake a car, and only got up to 45.




And I was always careful to make my speed far more decent on reaching the corner with a junction just beyond it.


----------



## Mr Celine (20 May 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> A ridden or driven horse is _highly_ unlikely to break a speed limit on a road. An 'average' horse trots at around 8-12mph and canters at around 10 - 15mph or a bit more. Some horses can trot, pace, or do a similar two-beat gait, significantly faster, at canter speed - but they can't, or find it difficult to, canter. It's a genetic thing. I once used to ride a horse who trotted in front and cantered behind; logic said that he should have cut his legs to pieces but he tracked so wide in front and so narrow behind that there was plenty of room for his iron shod feet without him hitting himself!
> Full gallop can be anything above canter speed, up to around 30mph, depending on the horse. A specialist sprinter on perfect surface (turf) over a short distance will go significantly faster, 50mph or a bit more.
> However, on a normal road surface it would be foolish and risky to deliberately ride or drive a horse above a trot except in an emergency and for a short distance - a few yards in a canter - as it is all too easy for a horse to slip and fall on such a surface, never mind the damage it will do to its joints.
> Riding or driving 'furiously' is the crime, I believe.


I take it you've never watched a Border common riding. 



These are the 'principals', who take it easy as dropping the flag will cause some unspeakable catastrophe to befall the town. 

They are then followed by another 350 or so mounted supporters who don't hang back. 

The only precautions are the removal of traffic islands and the cooncil gritter going up and down the street before hand to lay a bit of sand. 
The crowd barriers are a fairly recent innovation!


----------



## KnittyNorah (20 May 2021)

Mr Celine said:


> I take it you've never watched a Border common riding.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I've not only seen them, I've been there staying with a friend who was participating. 
Sure enough, it doesn't do the horse's legs any good at all. Two of us took turns in hosing down my pal's horses legs for a full 48 hours after the event to minimise swelling and inflammation. Then the horses went out onto soft pasture for a couple of weeks, with daily close examinations and ultrasounds of the tendons. BTW my friend is (was - he's retired) a vet. He was always busy busy busy answering call outs to lame horses for a full ten days or more after any commons riding. Lots of issues with horse's legs are incurable, require constant time consuming care and attention and cause the animal a great deal of stress. Leg problems often result in a horse being euthnased 

Hammering round the roads certainly isn't the sort of thing you could do on a regular basis with any expectation that the horse would stay 'sound' in the long term - "'ammer 'ammer 'ammer on the 'ard 'igh road" has long been recognised, since the advent of hard high roads, as a contributor to, and often a direct cause of, damage to a horse's legs. Lengthy, time-consuming aftercare can reduce, but not eliminate, problems and of course sometimes the horse is just lucky. Sometimes it isn't.


----------



## Dogtrousers (20 May 2021)

I must say I find your horsey info fascinating @KnittyNorah 

I don't know anything about hosses and have always been a bit nervous of them.


----------



## mjr (20 May 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> I don't know anything about hosses and have always been a bit nervous of them.


That's better than being too cavalier!


----------



## mjr (20 May 2021)

Solocle said:


> "Presumably" is doing a lot of lifting there.


Yes, many 30s are because it is the default for roads with street lighting and there hasn't been enough reason found to justify the expense of overriding it.

In rural areas, we have the opposite problem of unlit gravel/grass roads that have 60mph limits and the police won't act on unsafe inappropriate speed below that, unless there's injury. Holthouse Lane, Leziate is one I rode recently. Even the narrow tarmac bit of it is 40 limit, which is both too fast to be safe and a third lower than the limit on the gravel part!

I feel we should have a saner method for setting the default than presence of lighting. Probably based on road width, surface and presence of buildings.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 May 2021)

All rural non A and B roads outside villages should be dropped to 40 and villages dropped to 20.


----------



## KnittyNorah (20 May 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> I must say I find your horsey info fascinating @KnittyNorah
> 
> I don't know anything about hosses and have always been a bit nervous of them.


They sense the nervousness - and since they are so strongly attuned to their surroundings, being the ultimate prey animal, can start to 'worry' what there is to be nervous about and should they, therefore, be nervous, too? 
Well, I'm anthropomorphising something shocking there, but I'm sure you get the gist. 
I come from a long line of farriers and, if I had been a boy, or had been younger, would have likely apprenticed to my uncle. As it was, the Worshipful Company of Farriers was one of the very last to accept women as apprentices. My grandfather had 'a gift' with horses, and it seems I have it, too. It's not a gift; it's more of an awareness of their thought processes and an almost subconscious understanding of their body language, and how they see ours.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 May 2021)

Priest beating roadies down a long hill.


View: https://youtu.be/RsWwgp8slmY


----------



## Rusty Nails (20 May 2021)

Ming the Merciless said:


> Priest beating roadies down a long hill.
> 
> 
> View: https://youtu.be/RsWwgp8slmY



Nice video . That priest has got a twin sister, who's a nun, complete with beard who also beats roadies downhill.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (20 May 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> They sense the nervousness - and since they are so strongly attuned to their surroundings, being the ultimate prey animal, can start to 'worry' what there is to be nervous about and should they, therefore, be nervous, too?
> Well, I'm anthropomorphising something shocking there, but I'm sure you get the gist.
> I come from a long line of farriers and, if I had been a boy, or had been younger, would have likely apprenticed to my uncle. As it was, the Worshipful Company of Farriers was one of the very last to accept women as apprentices. My grandfather had 'a gift' with horses, and it seems I have it, too. It's not a gift; it's more of an awareness of their thought processes and an almost subconscious understanding of their body language, and how they see ours.



Horses are unreliable...well the ones I bet on are. 

On that subject, as someone with an understanding of horses, what's your view of horse racing in general? I would say show jumping, but it seems to avoid the controversy. 

I'm a fan, but I did see a talk that claimed the horse was in survival mode, as it's programmed to assume anything on it's back is trying to eat it, and the race is to avoid being the weaker one in the herd that the predator is trying to catch.


----------



## KnittyNorah (20 May 2021)

ClichéGuevara said:


> Horses are unreliable...well the ones I bet on are.
> 
> On that subject, as someone with an understanding of horses, what's your view of horse racing in general? I would say show jumping, but it seems to avoid the controversy.
> 
> I'm a fan, but I did see a talk that claimed the horse was in survival mode, as it's programmed to assume anything on it's back is trying to eat it, and the race is to avoid being the weaker one in the herd that the predator is trying to catch.



I have mixed feelings about horseracing. There is no doubt that horses love to run. They are - I think - exceptionally beautiful when they run. Movement is part of them; they _need _to move. They run by instinct; they are the ultimate prey animal who have adapted over millennia to co-operate with mankind - originally the hunter! - in a whole host of ways - but not to be mere pets, and it is often when they are treated as a pet, that trouble can and does ensue. 

Horses are not running from a person on their back AT ALL - you only have to watch any horse with a rider on its back to see that. They are totally accustomed to carrying a person on their back, and are attentive to the cues that person give them. If that cue is to run fast, then they are usually more than happy to obey, be they racehorse or riding school pony! 
Horses are very good at disguising any physical issues once the adrenalin/endorphin is flowing - it's age-old self-preservation coming to the fore - only when the excitement is over will they show lameness etc - but even in the excitement and adrenalin of a race, a good jockey can often feel if something is 'not quite right' and that is when you will see the jockey pull the horse up in the middle of the race. Unfortunately the horse's system is so very good at this that it will often 'run through' a minor injury undetected, resulting in making the minor injury much, much worse … sometimes euthanasia-worse. Green screens on the racecourse and all that. HOWEVER what no-one tells you in the aftermath of the enquiry and the condemnation of 'cruel sports' and so on, is that this sort of thing can, and sometimes does, happen to horses in their own fields, minding their own business, being ridden with the utmost care by loving owners etc etc. 

A bunch of doddery old horses in a field will have a run - you can almost hear their joints creaking when they set off! They are running in response to an instinct to flee which is usually buried but which sometimes emerges, who knows why … sometimes it is started off by - literally - a gust of wind blowing the tail of one of the horses between its legs. It makes you laugh to see it - and worry, because it only takes an awkward clod of turf or a badly-placed molehill, for one of these oldsters to twist or break something, or slip into barbed wire or a protruding branch or stake. You can't wrap them in cotton-wool … and a minute after it started the whirlwind ends and they stand there, sides heaving, heads hanging, easing their old joints and pretending it never happened!

HOWEVER that said I believe that racehorses are trained and raced far too young, and some of the physical attributes bred for - especially for success at a young age, which is where the MASSIVE money lies - can be (although aren't always) to the detriment of the wellbeing of the horse as it matures. In addition, the mental health of a long-term, fully-stabled horse is rarely the best, although there are many ways to mitigate this which are increasingly better understood and more widely accepted nowadays than they were until about 40 or so years ago, and most racing stables, at least in this country, are pretty on-the-ball about that sort of thing. 

Certainly the racing industry isn't perfect - is any industry? - but on the whole the horse, and veterinary medicine in particular, would be much the poorer without it. From what I understand, too, much of the early impetus in both drug use/detection wrt human sports, and in human fertilisation studies, was carried along on the back of racing-industry-funded research into the two subjects of 'horse doping' and issues with infertility in top racehorses. 
Anyway, that's far too much off-topic already, better take this to a private convo if you want to expand on it!


----------



## ClichéGuevara (20 May 2021)

KnittyNorah said:


> I have mixed feelings about horseracing. There is no doubt that horses love to run. They are - I think - exceptionally beautiful when they run. Movement is part of them; they _need _to move. They run by instinct; they are the ultimate prey animal who have adapted over millennia to co-operate with mankind - originally the hunter! - in a whole host of ways - but not to be mere pets, and it is often when they are treated as a pet, that trouble can and does ensue.
> 
> Horses are not running from a person on their back AT ALL - you only have to watch any horse with a rider on its back to see that. They are totally accustomed to carrying a person on their back, and are attentive to the cues that person give them. If that cue is to run fast, then they are usually more than happy to obey, be they racehorse or riding school pony!
> Horses are very good at disguising any physical issues once the adrenalin/endorphin is flowing - it's age-old self-preservation coming to the fore - only when the excitement is over will they show lameness etc - but even in the excitement and adrenalin of a race, a good jockey can often feel if something is 'not quite right' and that is when you will see the jockey pull the horse up in the middle of the race. Unfortunately the horse's system is so very good at this that it will often 'run through' a minor injury undetected, resulting in making the minor injury much, much worse … sometimes euthanasia-worse. Green screens on the racecourse and all that. HOWEVER what no-one tells you in the aftermath of the enquiry and the condemnation of 'cruel sports' and so on, is that this sort of thing can, and sometimes does, happen to horses in their own fields, minding their own business, being ridden with the utmost care by loving owners etc etc.
> ...



Your response is much appreciated, and I take your additional point about diverting the thread further, so that saves me some typing. 

Thanks for the offer of a discussion off the board, but I was only going to make a related observation, and I'm sure it will pop up another time, where others can add their view. 

Thanks again.


----------



## DRM (20 May 2021)

https://www.eurosport.co.uk/cycling...iro-ditalia-on-stage-9_vid1475871/video.shtml
Well I suppose Matej Mohoric found out the hard way what happens when a cyclist breaks the speed limit


----------



## dodgy (20 May 2021)

DCLane said:


> Apparently they knew I couldn't be done but wanted a "discussion".


"Am I being detained"? Is what I was told to say by a copper friend if held up for something frivolous. The answer will usually be no, so you're free to leave even if he's still speaking.


----------



## Boopop (20 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> And we wonder why cyclists are despised by so many motorists?......
> 
> It's 20 for a reason, twenty is plenty, it's a limit not a target! But don't worry about it, you just carry on as you are, being an ambassador for our activity and helping to cement driver/cyclist relations.



Collective responsibility is a load of bull s*#£. Do you drive well partly because you want to be an "ambassador" for other drivers? Give me a break. People who see one cyclist behaving in a way they don't appreciate and then tar all of them with the same brush are simpletons and can't be helped anyway.


----------



## dodgy (20 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> And we wonder why cyclists are despised by so many motorists?......
> 
> It's 20 for a reason, twenty is plenty, it's a limit not a target! But don't worry about it, you just carry on as you are, being an ambassador for our activity and helping to cement driver/cyclist relations.


The speed limits are set for a number of reasons. Kinetic energy mainly.


----------



## Johnsco (20 May 2021)

In the 1930s, when my dad ran the local cycling club, his mate Harry Bolton was prosecuted and fined for "riding a bicycle furiously and recklessly".
Amazing, as he was the most inoffensive and lovely guy imaginable.
I knew him when he was an old man.
He ran the local bike shop and my first bike came from there.


----------



## nickyboy (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Collective responsibility is a load of bull s*#£. Do you drive well partly because you want to be an "ambassador" for other drivers? Give me a break. People who see one cyclist behaving in a way they don't appreciate and then tar all of them with the same brush are simpletons and can't be helped anyway.


Completely disagree. The number of conversations I've had with non cyclists along the lines of "all red light jumpers" (I'm not), "blocking the narrow roads two abreast" (I don't) show that other road users regard cyclists as a homogenous group. All cyclists are impacted by the behaviour of other cyclists

Don't you see the parallels with the common trope here in CC that all BMW drivers are inconsiderate idiots?


----------



## Brandane (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Don't you see the parallels with the common trope here in CC that all BMW drivers are inconsiderate idiots?


On the same theme though, do you really think BMW drivers care what anyone thinks of them? I doubt if there are people on a BMW drivers forum saying "listen chaps, we really must start using our indicators, and not tailgating, and do you know there are actually 3 lanes we can use on most motorways?"
As a cyclist, I will do what I consider to be right. I can't and won't carry the can for the "yoofs with stunt bikes on pavement" or "all the gear and no idea" types of cyclist.
There are nobs on bikes just the same as there are nobs in cars - of all makes. We are not a special breed or an exclusive club, which is actually a good thing.


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Completely disagree. The number of conversations I've had with non cyclists along the lines of "all red light jumpers" (I'm not), "blocking the narrow roads two abreast" (I don't) show that other road users regard cyclists as a homogenous group. All cyclists are impacted by the behaviour of other cyclists


1. There will always be red light jumpers, wheeliers and so on, as cameras and number plates and more police have not stopped drivers misbehaving, so we might as well ride safely and legally but without bowing to bad drivers who want us to gutter-hug and stuff.

2. Those drivers are simpletons, like they said. Nothing we will do will change their opinion.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> Completely disagree. The number of conversations I've had with non cyclists along the lines of "all red light jumpers" (I'm not), "blocking the narrow roads two abreast" (I don't) show that other road users regard cyclists as a homogenous group. All cyclists are impacted by the behaviour of other cyclists
> 
> Don't you see the parallels with the common trope here in CC that all BMW drivers are inconsiderate idiots?



I know some drivers view cyclists as a homogenous group. My point is that I don't decide my behaviour based on what those people might think of the whole group. If they're dumb enough to think that because they saw one person on a bike do something they don't like, that they're all the same, I don't think it's worth trying to behave in a certain way just to appease them. No-one treats all drivers as a big homogenous group like that, so I don't see why I should be expected to be judged in that way. It's double standards, mainly because some corners of the media like to "other" cyclists. Changing your behaviour to try and specifically change a stereotype just helps reinforce the stereotype.

At least that view on BMW drivers is partially backed up by evidence (https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/26/world/expensive-car-drivers-study-scli-scn-intl/index.html), while the evidence for cyclists shows on average we break fewer road laws (https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlto...orists-finds-new-video-study/?sh=25b71aad4bfa).


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

... and BMW drivers aren't routinely put in danger (often injured) by cyclists.

It's a totally flawed comparison.


----------



## Dogtrousers (21 May 2021)

Do people actually believe that different makes of car are driven by entirely different, separate, tribes of drivers? BMW drivers do this, Audi drivers do that.

I suppose it could be true. "Ferrari drivers go very fast" I imagine might have a ring of truth to it. If it is true is it going to me more than a slight statistical tendency? "BMW drivers are 3% more likely to do this; Audi drivers are 2% less likely to do that".

Maybe it is true, and the fact that I don't know enough about cars to recognise the different brands means I can't discern the patterns.


----------



## nickyboy (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> ... and BMW drivers aren't routinely put in danger (often injured) by cyclists.
> 
> It's a totally flawed comparison.


No it isn't

Some BMW drivers drive in a rubbish way...ergo all BMW drivers are rubbish drivers (at least here on Cyclechat) ie a homogenous group

Some cyclists cycle in a rubbish way...ergo only those that cycle in a rubbish way are rubbish cyclists (at least here on Cyclechat) ie not a homogenous group

You see the double standards being applied here? This is why, like @I like Skol I make damn sure I stick to the rules of the road because cyclists _*are *_viewed as a homogenous group by some and if I can do just a little bit to show that cyclists don't cycle in a rubbish way that has to be a positive thing


----------



## nickyboy (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> No-one treats all drivers as a big homogenous group like that


That's exactly what happens on Cyclechat!!!

You want to look at all the threads that castigate BMW drivers, Audi drivers etc? Cyclechat posters treat drivers of specific brands of cars as a big homogenous group


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> That's exactly what happens on Cyclechat!!!
> 
> You want to look at all the threads that castigate BMW drivers, Audi drivers etc? Cyclechat posters treat drivers of specific brands of cars as a big homogenous group



I'm not talking about a specific brand of car, I said *all* drivers. Also cycle chat does not represent society at large. If you see a smart car go through a red, do you throw your hands in the air and lament "ugh, drivers"? I doubt it.

I really don't understand why anyone would change their behaviour based on a perceived stereotype. Some cyclists go through red lights. I do not. What does their behaviour have to do with me? I'm not an ambassador for everyone who rides bikes and it's asinine to expect me to be. By claiming that I am, you're implying that you agree we're all one big group with a shared culture. We're not. How much do you think I, a 31 y/o male have in common with this woman cycling on her town bike?







Hint - not a lot, or at least not so much that her actions should reflect upon me, or vice versa. Do you apply the same logic to pedestrians? No, because everyone's a pedestrian. Perhaps I should start telling pedestrians not to commit crimes as it gives all us pedestrians a bad name


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> That's exactly what happens on Cyclechat!!!


Well, we could say that it is simply revenge for the comments made on forums dominated by motorists that generalise about all cyclists, except...



> You want to look at all the threads that castigate BMW drivers, Audi drivers etc? Cyclechat posters treat drivers of specific brands of cars as a big homogenous group


...I did some searches and it's actually usually qualified:


T4tomo said:


> Its no worse that many a clueless BMW driver has done to a country lane in the snow.





Mr Celine said:


> a close passing Audi driver.



or it's people reporting that most of their problem motorists drive BMWs/Audis, not that all BMW/Audi drivers are problematic:


Fintious said:


> Nearly got swiped by a woman in a BMW who was checking herself in the rear view mirror whilst overtaking me.





chris-suffolk said:


> It's still the same vehicle types that I nearly always have issues with though - Audi, BMW or 4x4 - 95%+ of the time.



Looking at search results, I think there are more BMW owners or ex-owners posting on here (the search results have quite a lot of discussion of particular vehicles people have used) than people who tar all BMW drivers in the way you suggest. It seems like even the old joke/fake-abbreviation of AUDI hasn't been posted here since 2014 and even then it was by someone complaining about cyclechatters being mean to Audi drivers, based on rather thin evidence but at least they offered some, unlike this thread.

There are two posters who popped up repeatedly making comments about all BMW drivers, but recently, the numbers of all of the above are dwarfed by posts whining that cyclechatters are being beastly to all BMW/Audi/... owners!

So I fact-checked "Cyclechat posters treat drivers of specific brands of cars as a big homogenous group" and it seems to be false, at least recently.


----------



## nickyboy (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> I'm not talking about a specific brand of car, I said *all* drivers. Also cycle chat does not represent society at large. If you see a smart car go through a red, do you throw your hands in the air and lament "ugh, drivers"? I doubt it.
> 
> I really don't understand why anyone would change their behaviour based on a perceived stereotype. Some cyclists go through red lights. I do not. What does their behaviour have to do with me? I'm not an ambassador for everyone who rides bikes and it's asinine to expect me to be. By claiming that I am, you're implying that you agree we're all one big group with a shared culture. We're not. How much do you think I, a 31 y/o male have in common with this woman cycling on her town bike?
> 
> ...


If you want to nit pick down to the minutae of whether we are talking about car drivers as a group or bmw drivers as a group we are at the ad absurdium point of the discussion

I'll leave it with one thought...I do indeed regard my actions as a cyclist having an impact on other cyclists on the road as a common member of a minority group which car drivers do indeed regard with homogeneity. So I do what I can to be polite, friendly and considerate to all other road users because (a) I'm a friendly, polite and considerate person (b) I hope that if I can be like this, some car drivers will adopt a more considerate approach with all cyclists


----------



## winjim (21 May 2021)

You don't have to not ride or drive like a nobber out of some sense of collective responsibility. You can also choose to not ride or drive like a nobber just so you are not individually being a nobber.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I hope that if I can be like this, some car drivers will adopt a more considerate approach with all cyclists



Then I'm sorry but I think you're naive. Drivers should be considerate regardless of the actions of other road users. Those that are inconsiderate are very unlikley to think "Oh well @nickyboy behaved well five minutes ago when I passed him, so I won't run this cyclist off the road today".

If I wear my local club's jersey, I've made a conscious decision to represent the club on the road. I have not made any such decision to represent "all cyclists" by merely riding a bike.


----------



## winjim (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Then I'm sorry but I think you're naive. Drivers should be considerate regardless of the actions of other road users. Those that are inconsiderate are very unlikley to think "Oh well @nickyboy behaved well five minutes ago when I passed him, so I won't run this cyclist off the road today".


Do we have any behavioural psychologists on the forum? I for one think it perfectly plausible that a frustrated driver could take their frustrations out on the next cyclist they see.

Remember that a lot of cyclists are to an extent dehumanised. Funny clothes, helmets, sunglasses. We kind of look like robots. It's similar to the way we might anthropomorphise a car rather than acknowledge the actions of the driver.


----------



## Pale Rider (21 May 2021)

ianrauk said:


> It was always a good game on the Friday Night Ride to the Coast rides to Brighton. With a fair motley few trying to set off the speed signs on the drop into town.



As a newbie, I was encouraged to do that on the day ride to Brighton we did.

The thinking was a big lumpy ebike might have more chance of tripping the camera.

Too many parked cars, moving cars, junctions, pedestrians etc for my liking.

I might have had a dig if it was the early hours of the morning.


----------



## Milkfloat (21 May 2021)

As a BMW driver and a cyclist I must cause a rift in the space-time continuum. I just simply try and live by my life long rule 'try not to be a nobber'.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

winjim said:


> plausible that a frustrated driver could take their frustrations out on the next cyclist they see.



Oh it's certainly plausible, however if some psychopath decides to make judgements like that, that's on them, not me. Telling someone their behaviour while riding a bike is responsible for how other road users treat other cyclists is ridiculous. Again, such responsibilities aren't placed upon drivers, pedestrians, bus users and so on.


----------



## winjim (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Oh it's certainly plausible, however if some psychopath decides to make judgements like that, that's on them, not me. Telling someone their behaviour while riding a bike is responsible for how other road users treat other cyclists is ridiculous. Again, such responsibilities aren't placed upon drivers, pedestrians, bus users and so on.


I'm trying not to suggest that anybody does or does not have responsibility as such, but your post seemed to suggest that you didn't even think it plausible.

If we're talking in terms of psychology, which I kind of think we ought to be although I am no expert, then I think that 'psychopath' has a very specific meaning...


----------



## HMS_Dave (21 May 2021)

I wonder if motorists would see me as a good ambassador for the cycling community if I display a HUGE tax disc and have a flag on the back with my Insurance certificate waving and wear a helmet with my printed MOT certificate on it?


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

winjim said:


> I'm trying not to suggest that anybody does or does not have responsibility as such, but your post seemed to suggest that you didn't even think it plausible.



Fair enough. I think what I was trying to get at was good behaviour isn't going to make a bad driver drive better. Bad behaviour may make them drive worse, sure...but like I say, that's on the driver rather than the person riding the bike.


----------



## Dogtrousers (21 May 2021)

In Australia ...

_Bicycle riders must obey the same speed limits as drivers of motor vehicles. _ https://www.mylicence.sa.gov.au/road-rules/the-drivers-handbook/road-rules-for-cyclists


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> As a BMW driver and a cyclist I must cause a rift in the space-time continuum. I just simply try and live by my life long rule '*try not to be a nobber*'.


So why did you buy a BMW??


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> That's exactly what happens on Cyclechat!!!
> 
> You want to look at all the threads that castigate BMW drivers, Audi drivers etc? Cyclechat posters treat drivers of specific brands of cars as a big homogenous group


It doesnt take long on social media to see something like this:
- "_Flipping idiot ran me off the road this morning! "
- "There was a young girl killed last month, cycling on the High Street. Driver didn't even stop  "_
- "_Well if they didn't always jump lights they might get more respect. And why don't they have number plates? Insurance?_"

Show me the equivalent against BMW/Audi drivers; show me a justification of violence against a group by referring to misdeeds by other members of that group. 
Show me threats to their lives.
https://road.cc/content/news/3069-w...ed”-matthew-parris-gets-most-press-complaints


----------



## I like Skol (21 May 2021)

As usual, topic is being dragged off on a tangent for the sake of arguing.... Thank god I don't actually have to cycle with some of you people in reality!



I like Skol said:


> And we wonder why cyclists are despised by so many motorists?......
> 
> It's 20 for a reason, twenty is plenty, it's a limit not a target! But don't worry about it, you just carry on as you are, being an ambassador for our activity and helping to cement driver/cyclist relations.





Boopop said:


> Collective responsibility is a load of bull s*#£. Do you drive well partly because you want to be an "ambassador" for other drivers? Give me a break. People who see one cyclist behaving in a way they don't appreciate and then tar all of them with the same brush are simpletons and can't be helped anyway.


Collective judgement is not 'a load of bull s*#£'. It always has and always will be an actual issue and subsets of user groups will continue to be singled out as problematic (white van man, 4x4s, boy racers, etc). I fall into one of those categories and have spent decades driving responsibly to try and ensure that as a niche user group 'WE' do not lose many of the access rights that are being threatened by the behaviour of the irresponsible.


dodgy said:


> The speed limits are set for a number of reasons. Kinetic energy mainly.


In the case of 20 limits there are far more considerations than simply kinetic energy and impact speeds. It's usually far more related to the local environment and conditions such as narrow roads, multiple side entrances and junctions, pedestrianisation and high levels of pedestrians and vulnerable users (the young and the elderly etc), and a high concentration of similar hazards. The risk of a collision is high so a lowered speed has the double pay-off of reducing the likelihood of a collision AND reducing the severity IF there is a collision.
My response above to the poster's comment about (regularly?) overtaking cars with in a 20 zone;


Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I enjoy passing cars on the 20mph roads round here. They are usually doing 15/18mph, so passing them is easy.


Despite the posters defence that they may/may not have surpassed the 'limit' they entirely missed the reason for such actions being considered stupid behaviour. The act of (regularly?) overtaking other road users who are already travelling at or close to the speed limit in a high risk environment is irresponsible and will be rightly judged so by all spectators. Such behaviour does, rightly or wrongly, enhance group prejudices against many categories of cyclists and as such is bad form.


Boopop said:


> I know some drivers view cyclists as a homogenous group.





Boopop said:


> We're not. How much do you think I, a 31 y/o male have in common with this woman cycling on her town bike?


It's more complicated than a single homogenous entity and even the 'All cyclists jump red lights' group appreciate that there are subsets within the collective. Your facile attempt to undermine the 'collective responsibility' argument by posting a picture of 84yr old Doris going to the butchers is rather lame. Like it or not, you and your actions are representative of, and judged as being typical of, the young-middle aged male leisure/enthusiast cyclist group.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> It's more complicated than a single homogenous entity and even the 'All cyclists jump red lights' group appreciate that there are subsets within the collective. Your facile attempt to undermine the 'collective responsibility' argument by posting a picture of 84yr old Doris going to the butchers is rather lame.



Have you seen the discourse online about cyclists? Rarely do the haters discern by age or gender. It's usually just "I hate cyclists". When they do, they use awful terms like "lycra louts", implying the only cyclists that exist are those riding road bikes. I'm aware it's more complicated, clearly, that's my whole point if you had not noticed.

Collective responsibility is a load of tosh because it's the same argument that gets bandied around by people who are against safe cycling infrastructure. They'll say "We should only build safe cycling infra. once cyclists behave"...you don't get that kind of rhetoric about building roads, do you? Do we have some sort of cyclist-behaviour-o-meter to determine when we're allowed safe cycle infrastructure, or when we should expect all drivers rather than most to treat us with respect?



I like Skol said:


> Collective judgement is not 'a load of bull s*#£'. It always has and always will be an actual issue and subsets of user groups will continue to be singled out as problematic (*white van man, 4x4s, boy racers*, etc).



Have you ever seen white van men banned from certain roads like cyclists are from pedestrianised high streets (while it's allowed without issue in Utrecht). A ban on 4x4s? Restrictions to boy racers? Nope.

Clearly some people, such as yourself, believe collective responsibility is a thing and we should all behave in a certain way to not damage the collective reputation. It's the same with stereotypes. I wouldn't for a second claim that no-one believes it. What I am saying is that those that do are thinking in overly simple terms, and I'm not going to change the way I live my life specifically to attempt to appease people who aren't capable of thinking with any nuance*.

*I'm not saying that of you by the way @I like Skol, I just think that you're trying to appease people who don't give a toss what you do anyway.

As for the topic, the answer's pretty simple - speed limits don't apply to cyclists, so nothing is done, however you can get fined for furious riding. What sort of discussion had you been expecting after eleven pages? There's not much else to say.


----------



## winjim (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> It doesnt take long on social media to see something like this:
> - "_Flipping idiot ran me off the road this morning! "
> - "There was a young girl killed last month, cycling on the High Street. Driver didn't even stop  "_
> - "_Well if they didn't always jump lights they might get more respect. And why don't they have number plates? Insurance?_"
> ...


I don't know about threats to life, that applies to cyclists because we happen to be vulnerable, but you only need to Google 'BMW drivers' to see a general attitude towards them, and certainly some tales of amusement from times when they have come a cropper.


----------



## Dogtrousers (21 May 2021)

In Japan, I was unable to find out how speed limits affect cyclists but I did discover ...

_You aren’t allowed to hold an umbrella in one hand as you ride._ But you can ... _save yourself the trouble and danger by getting a handy umbrella clamp for bicycles. _

https://en.japantravel.com/guide/cycling-rules/58088


----------



## T4tomo (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Have you ever seen white van men banned from certain roads like cyclists are from pedestrianised high streets (while it's allowed without issue in Utrecht). A ban on 4x4s? Restrictions to boy racers? Nope.


why should cyclists be allowed in pedestrianised high streets? We should be banned - along with white van man - to make it safer for pedestrians. 
It would be painful to cycle through one anyway, with pedestrians walking a random on their phone and @Darius_Jedburgh attempting to get up to 30mph on his Raleigh Chopper.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

T4tomo said:


> why should cyclists be allowed in pedestrianised high streets? We should be banned.



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkB8LMtYPec


Utrecht allows it, and they're one of the best cycling cities in the world. Surely we should copy them - or do you think British bike riders are inherently more dangerous than the Dutch? Are you suggesting a cyclist at 5-10mph is as dangerous to the surrounding pedestrians as a 2+ ton van? Also...what about cargo bikes visiting the market? If we discourage them by banning them from town centres (they're difficult to walk with especially when loaded), they're more likely to drive, and thus make the whole urban environment more dangerous, not just the high street, due to increased traffic.

Then there's those that use their tricycles as mobility aids when they're not legally classed as such.





Back to cargo bikes - I've delivered food parcels to the needy on my cargo bike. If I go to a pedestrianised area where someone needs a delivery, do you want me to try and walk with it? I can't with that much cargo. So what's the alternative? Invite a car or a van in to the pedestrianised zone instead? Ah yes, I'm sure that is safer.


----------



## I like Skol (21 May 2021)

I think there is something being lost in translation here @Boopop 
That is clearly a motorised-vehicle free zone, not a pedestrianised area. It would be interesting to see what has been allowed/banned when the area was restricted to it's current status.


----------



## I like Skol (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> I'm aware it's more complicated, clearly, that's my whole point if you had not noticed.


So you accept that collective responsibility and group stereotyping is a thing and it's complex?


Boopop said:


> Have you ever seen white van men banned from certain roads like cyclists are from pedestrianised high streets (while it's allowed without issue in Utrecht). A ban on 4x4s? Restrictions to boy racers? Nope.


Many roads are being closed across the country purely to prevent use by 4x4s and while the closure removes the access for all vehicles, it is purely done to prevent illegal and irresponsible 4x4 use.

@Boopop you seem to be suggesting that as long as we are not breaking the 'rules' then we are free to behave as we please, with impunity and there are no consequences to promoting that belief?
Are you saying that Darius should continue repeatedly overtaking cars in that 20mph safety zone, that we should be patting him on the back and congratulating him for his stupidity because 'That shzit is cool man, who cares if it is winding up all the other road users and causing tension between user groups, they are wrong anyway'? That's what it sounds like. And let's not get side tracked by that old red herring about mass/momentum and KE. If you hit someone on your bicycle while acting recklessly or dangerously then you are just as in the wrong as a car driver who does the same. It is the consequences that differ.


----------



## Dogtrousers (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> And let's not get side tracked by that old red herring about mass/momentum and KE. If you hit someone on your bicycle while acting recklessly or dangerously then you are just as in the wrong as a car driver who does the same. It is the consequences that differ.


And under the wrong circs the victim could be just as dead. It is possible for a collision with a cyclist to be fatal to a pedestrian. Far less likely than with a car, but still possible. 

Once you are over a certain threshold of Kinetic Energy sufficient to cause serious harm or to kill, the extra joules that the car has are just overkill.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> So you accept that collective responsibility and group stereotyping is a thing and it's complex?



I accept that some people believe that collective responsibility is legitimate and it should be respected, and that stereotypes are somehow accurate. That much is as plain as day, otherwise we'd both be in agreement. Where we differ is just because I recognise that some people think collective responsibility is useful, that does not mean I have to agree with them, to my mind it is not. What useful actions are going to be taken based on anedote based collective responsibility? I don't deal in anecdotes, I deal in hard evidence. Collective responsibility tends to be all about anecdotes and whataboutery.



I like Skol said:


> @Boopop you seem to be suggesting that as long as we are not breaking the 'rules' then we are free to behave as we please, with impunity and there are no consequences to promoting that belief?



I'm saying that my individual behaviour should not be used to make judgements about all members of a certain group of people who share that characteristic. To do so is simplistic and quite honestly is offensive. If there's an uptick in crimes comitted on a bicycle, is that supposed to reflect badly on everyone on this forum? Trying my very best to not draw parallels to more destructive forms of stereotyping and discrimination.


----------



## I like Skol (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> I'm saying that my individual behaviour should not be used to make judgements about all members of a certain *group of people who share that characteristic.*


Yes it should. I wouldn't think twice about stepping onto a pedestrian crossing when 84yr old Doris was approaching as I know she is unlikely to intentionally maintain her speed and sweep through regardless of the requirement for her to stop. If you on your fancy carbon bike and a group of cycling friends were approaching then I would rightly think there was a much higher chance that you would not stop. That is not about stereotyping or anecdotes, that is reality and you can't argue with that. You *are* part of a group that shares that characteristic.


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> If you on your fancy carbon bike and a group of cycling friends were approaching then I would rightly think there was a much higher chance that you would not stop. That is not about stereotyping or anecdotes, that is reality and you can't argue with that. You *are* part of a group that shares that characteristic.


Materials profiling?


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> That is not about stereotyping or anecdotes, that is reality and you can't argue with that. You *are* part of a group that shares that characteristic.



What a load of nonsense, that's absolutely stereotyping and anecdotes, and I'd gladly argue with that. Where's your evidence? I don't mean "one time I saw" whataboutery, I mean bona fide hard empircial evidence. Honestly feels like I'm talking to someone from the Daily Mail.


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> And under the wrong circs the victim could be just as dead. It is possible for a collision with a cyclist to be fatal to a pedestrian. Far less likely than with a car, but still possible.
> 
> Once you are over a certain threshold of Kinetic Energy sufficient to cause serious harm or to kill, the extra joules that the car has are just overkill.


That's not the case until you reach a pretty massive amount of KE. Remember the adverts about cars doing 30mph hitting kids, -vs- hitting them at 20mph?

It's ENORMOUSLY difficult to kill people with bikes, and we know that cyclists come off pretty badly in collisions too, so unlike drivers they try very hard to avoid such impacts.


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> Collective judgement is not 'a load of bull s*#£'. It always has and always will be an actual issue [...]


Those are not opposites. It can be both. It's an actual bull shoot issue. We should point it out as such, not pander to it.



I like Skol said:


> Many roads are being closed across the country purely to prevent use by 4x4s and while the closure removes the access for all vehicles, it is purely done to prevent illegal and irresponsible 4x4 use.


Is that true? How many roads? The ones I know locally on the fens and around the Norfolk coast are being closed to prevent legal but irresponsible use by all sorts of motor vehicles. Some of the closures are temporary to let the surface recover and the grass grow back.

If irresponsible 4x4 use was already illegal, what use is the closure? That sounds the same sort of bull shoot as not allowing bikes into suitably quiet/wide pedestrian zones because illegal riders were crashing into people or things: the irresponsible ones are doing it anyway and the vast majority of riders fined made a mistake (didn't spot the signs, didn't know the area, whatever) and wouldn't have harmed a fly, but they're the only ones who stop for police and they take up all police time so no-one ever catches the dangerous ones!



> Are you saying that Darius should continue repeatedly overtaking cars in that 20mph safety zone,


Yes as long as the overtake is safe. The speed limit is almost irrelevant to bikes and how do you know it is a "safety zone" rather than the limit having been introduced for one of the other six legal reasons?



> If you hit someone on your bicycle while acting recklessly or dangerously then you are just as in the wrong as a car driver who does the same. It is the consequences that differ.


Not exactly "just as in the wrong" IMO (this is not binary) but still wrong.


----------



## I like Skol (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Honestly feels like I'm talking to someone from the Daily Mail


That's funny, I was just feeling the same way when faced with your astounding sense of entitlement and refusal to accept that your actions may affect others detrimentally.
It's like listening to a parent complaining about all the school run cars preventing them driving their little darling to the school gates.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> That's funny, I was just feeling the same way when faced with your astounding sense of entitlement and refusal to accept that your actions may affect others detrimentally.



Sod it, I'm going there. What do you think when people of ethnic minorities, or minority sexualities, or any other characteristic that's uncommon in this country do stuff you don't like - does that affect your opinion of people that belong to that whole cohort too?



mjr said:


> It's an actual bull shoot issue. We should point it out as such, *not pander to it*.



Boldened for emphasis, bingo!


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> It's ENORMOUSLY difficult to kill people with bikes, and we know that cyclists come off pretty badly in collisions too, so unlike drivers they try very hard to avoid such impacts.


Easier with some bikes than others.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_bwKW6V1lw


----------



## Dogtrousers (21 May 2021)

mjr said:


> Easier with some bikes than others.


----------



## Solocle (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> This is why, like @I like Skol I make damn sure I stick to the rules of the road because cyclists _*are *_viewed as a homogenous group by some and if I can do just a little bit to show that cyclists don't cycle in a rubbish way that has to be a positive thing


But exceeding the speed limit on a bike *is still sticking to the rules of the road*. Now, I've been known to jump the odd traffic light when I've come to the conclusion that they're not going to change, but by its very nature that's unlikely to be seen (a car behind will change them, for instance).

So it's fair to say that I'm not a stickler for the rules - equally, just because you're allowed to do something, doesn't make it prudent. But, like overtaking, if it's safe, legal, and makes progress, then go for it.

If doing 40 mph in a 30 limit rather than 30 mph means that you aren't being squashed against the kerb by motorists obsessed with overtaking you, because bike, thus allowing you to ride in primary++ and therefore giving far more reaction time and space to any pedestrians walking out, it may well even end up being safer than keeping to the limit. Again, not necessarily, but that comes down to reading the road, not the number on a sign.

For instance, coming down Cumnor Hill into Oxford, the speed limit drops from 40 to 30 mph, and I'd generally stay doing closer to 40. The biggest hazard was the junction with Eynsham Road, where drivers would inevitably decide that bike=slow, so pull out on you.

By doing 40 mph, you could easily pull into the right hand lane and overtake any dozy twit, comfortable in the knowledge that you yourself were not being overtaken, particularly given the speed camera at that location 

Sadly I never saw the blasted thing flash me. 🤬




I would put money on you being in more danger if you were doing 30 rather than 40 there.


----------



## Rusty Nails (21 May 2021)

Whenever I see videos of cycling in The Netherlands I am struck by the different types of bike used by the majority of city riders there compared to the UK and the different types of rider. It appears that utilitarian bikes are much more popular there than the UK, perhaps demonstrating a totally different, possibly more mature, attitude to cycling by riders and the authorities.

Hardly an mtb or road bike in sight. Perhaps those are kept for off-road and open roads.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

Rusty Nails said:


> Whenever I see videos of cycling in The Netherlands I am struck by the different types of bike used by the majority of city riders there compared to the UK and the different types of rider. It appears that utilitarian bikes are much more popular there than the UK, perhaps demonstrating a totally different, possibly more mature, attitude to cycling by riders and the authorities.
> 
> Hardly an mtb or road bike in sight. Perhaps those are kept for off-road and open roads.



I think that's a consequence of it being seen as a legitimate form of transport more than anything else. I suspect there's a pretty tight correlation between utility cycles and safe cycling infrastructure provision. I certainly see more town bikes and cargo bikes in London and Cambridge than most other towns and cities in the UK.

Places where you have to share the road with motor vehicles, you're far less likely to see cargo bikes, and much more likely to see hybrids and road bikes that stand a chance at going at a speed that won't piss off drivers. That and dangerous roads tend to be self selecting for the most confident road users...generally young to middle aged men.

Also you have to look pretty hard in the UK to find a town bike to begin with. Certainly as a kid/teenager I suspect they're viewed as "uncool", whereas in NL they're probably just seen in the same way as say a Ford Focus is here - a utility vehicle.


----------



## HMS_Dave (21 May 2021)

What about that mikey fella on youtube who makes sure all the motorists he comes across are following the rules, often stepping out in front of motorists to confront them? On the one hand, he is an exemplary cyclist, following the rules and ensuring others do (including cyclists). On the other hand he p1sses pretty much every motorist off when he confronts them, sometimes leading to court action and convictions... Would you argue his actions are improving driver/cyclist relations or harming them?


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Sod it, I'm going there. What do you think when people of ethnic minorities, or minority sexualities, or any other characteristic that's uncommon in this country do stuff you don't like - does that affect your opinion of people that belong to that whole cohort too?


Had to be done. Well played.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

HMS_Dave said:


> What about that mikey fella on youtube who makes sure all the motorists he comes across are following the rules, often stepping out in front of motorists to confront them? On the one hand, he is an exemplary cyclist, following the rules and ensuring others do (including cyclists). On the other hand he p1sses pretty much every motorist off when he confronts them, sometimes leading to court action and convictions... Would you argue his actions are improving driver/cyclist relations or harming them?



The drivers he's pissing off are the ones who are already driving dangerously. Fine with me.

EDIT: Mind, I do think he gets a bit too involved on twitter. Twitter's a black hole of social media, I don't think spending hours on there arguing with people does anyone any favours.


----------



## HMS_Dave (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> The drivers he's pissing off are the ones who are already driving dangerously. Fine with me.


Which leads me to suspect that you would say they are harming them, despite operating in a positive capacity to ensure the roads are used within the parameters of the law for the benefit of everybody?
He isn't the police, but is doing nothing illegal at least in my limited understanding of it...

My point being, even positive or perceived positive actions can lead to negative ones whether we like it or not...

I agree with Skol about riding within road and traffic laws but i question the validity of a cyclist leaving a positive enough impression that they no longer hate the cyclist or see reason with the insurance and tax arguments because there is more to it than that...


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

HMS_Dave said:


> My point being, even positive or perceived positive actions can lead to negative ones whether we like it or not...



Well, I would hope that at least in the cases where the police do get involved and fine the driver, they would get some sort of education regarding why what they did was wrong. Admittedly optimistic, but what's the alternative? Cross our fingers and hope the police up their game? I run cameras on my bike as I'd rather at least try to help penalise dangerous drivers with the help of the police. I know the chances are infintesimally small, but the thought of me not reporting a dangerous driver and then weeks later that same driver killing a friend in the cycling club makes my stomach churn. I suspect that's the same line of thinking he goes through. Admittedly he goes out with the express purpose of finding such drivers.



HMS_Dave said:


> i question the validity of a cyclist leaving a positive enough impression that they no longer hate the cyclist or see reason with the insurance and tax arguments because there is more to it than that...



People notice those that affect their lives in a negative way, not those that are behaving as expected. The idea that me cycling considerately (which I do) improves a driver's opinion of all cyclists seems very unlikely to me. I cycle considerately because it's the right thing to do, not some nebulous group responsibility and reputation.


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> The drivers he's pissing off are the ones who are already driving dangerously. Fine with me.
> 
> EDIT: Mind, I do think he gets a bit too involved on twitter. Twitter's a black hole of social media, I don't think spending hours on there arguing with people does anyone any favours.


Agreed. But I'm sure he thinks his twitter posts are the right thing to say. Not everyone has supreme PR skills - he is doing more of use than most keyboard warriors, and that includes all us distinguished gentlemen of CycleChat.


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Agreed. But I'm sure he thinks his twitter posts are the right thing to say. Not everyone has supreme PR skills - he is doing more of use than most keyboard warriors, and that includes all us distinguished gentlemen of CycleChat.



Personally I got involved in the local cycling campaign group, that tends to feel more productive than both social media rants _and_ telling the police about dangerous drivers 😊


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Does your Dad own a brewery?


----------



## Boopop (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Does your Dad own a brewery?



Uhh, nope, I assume you're mistaking me for someone else


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Uhh, nope,


Shame, you were sounding like marriage material.

[It's a line from an old drinking song BTW. But never mind ...]


----------



## Ming the Merciless (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Does your Dad own a brewery?



Do we assume you are arranging a piss up? 😆


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Apparently not. But I'm still looking ...


----------



## Ian H (21 May 2021)

Solocle said:


> ...Then again, the number of pedestrians who see a cyclist and then assume we're doing 5 mph, sod _them_!



Pedestrians, just like cyclists, should be entitled to make mistakes without being flattened.


----------



## BoldonLad (21 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> That's exactly what happens on Cyclechat!!!
> 
> You want to look at all the threads that castigate *BMW drivers,* Audi drivers etc? Cyclechat posters treat drivers of specific brands of cars as a big homogenous group



Oh dear! I used to be a BMW driver.... but... I have seen the error of my ways (I think)... I drive a Renault or a Fiat now (when not cycling)


----------



## matticus (21 May 2021)

Re: reasons for doing The Right Thing, I just saw this:


----------



## mjr (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Re: reasons for doing The Right Thing, I just saw this:
> View attachment 589917


Also bull shoot. It is not easy and convenient. The trolley pen is never anywhere near the parking spaces, so do you leave your shopping unattended on the bike or try to balance both bike and trolley halfway across the site? Or leave the trolley by the bike bay for another shopper?


----------



## HMS_Dave (21 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Re: reasons for doing The Right Thing, I just saw this:
> View attachment 589917


I suppose on the flip side of that, councils see giving your parking ticket with time left on it to another parked motorist as fraud and have installed parking machines that require you type in part or in full your registration number. What others see as the right thing, others see as criminal. You can't win...


----------



## tyred (21 May 2021)

I've found a speed limit that I can break.


----------



## classic33 (22 May 2021)

matticus said:


> Re: reasons for doing The Right Thing, I just saw this:
> View attachment 589917


There's the £1 deposit on them to get back.


----------



## PaulSB (22 May 2021)

nickyboy said:


> I'll leave it with one thought...I do indeed regard my actions as a cyclist having an impact on other cyclists on the road as a common member of a minority group which car drivers do indeed regard with homogeneity. So I do what I can to be polite, friendly and considerate to all other road users because (a) I'm a friendly, polite and considerate person (b) I hope that if I can be like this, some car drivers will adopt a more considerate approach with all cyclists



You are to be applauded. 👏👏

Every cyclist I know and ride with tries to do the same. We wave, smile, nod, thumbs-up, speak as appropriate which is always received positively and a positive response received back. Whether it makes a difference and a contribution to a more positive view of cyclists I cannot prove or disprove. However it costs nothing and makes us feel we are contributing positively to the cycling community of which we are a part.

There will always be selfish, inconsiderate and self-entitled individuals using the road. Some of them drive BMWs, Audis and white Vans - others ride bikes which to my disappointment but not surprise is clearly demonstrated by posters in this thread.

@I like Skol - some great posts. Thank you. 👏


----------



## DRM (22 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Uhh, nope, I assume you're mistaking me for someone else


Matticus thinks you're the Aussie poet laureate, Kevin "Bloody" Wilson !, don't google him if easily offended


----------



## Boopop (22 May 2021)

PaulSB said:


> Every cyclist I know and ride with tries to do the same. We wave, smile, nod, thumbs-up, speak as appropriate which is always received positively and a positive response received back.



You appear to be under the impression that based on what I've said I don't do any of those things...there you would be wrong.



PaulSB said:


> cycling community of which we are a part



Are you a part of the "driving community" too? What about the "pedestrian community"? Do you have weekly meetings with your local members?



PaulSB said:


> There will always be selfish, inconsiderate and self-entitled individuals using the road...others ride bikes which to my disappointment but not surprise is clearly demonstrated by posters in this thread.



I assume that was aimed at me. I'll remember how "selfish, inconsiderate and self-entitled" I am next time I volunteer to deliver food or help run the local Dr Bike sessions.


----------



## PaulSB (22 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> You appear to be under the impression that based on what I've said I don't do any of those things...there you would be wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are incorrect. If I had wanted to aim my post at anyone individual I would mention that person.


----------



## Boopop (22 May 2021)

PaulSB said:


> You are incorrect. If I had wanted to aim my post at anyone individual I would mention that person.



Ah OK, so you'd rather just stick to ambiguous insults to other members so that no-one can call you out on it. Gotcha


----------



## PaulSB (22 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> Ah OK, so you'd rather just stick to ambiguous insults to other members so that no-one can call you out on it. Gotcha


No, you'd be wrong about this as well. As I see no point in becoming involved in "arguments", for want of a better word, I prefer only to quote posts which I agree with. If I disagree with points in a thread I try to post in a general manner. I most certainly do not insult people.

Without looking back there are two specific points I can recall you made; you ride a yellow cargo bike pulling a trailer and you use a camera.

Any opinion you may have posted I couldn't identify specifically with yourself. That's not to be disparaging or unpleasant but simply how I chose to post.


----------



## Boopop (22 May 2021)

PaulSB said:


> I most certainly do not insult people.



So what would call implying people who have posted here are selfish, self-entitled and inconsiderate? Banter? Light hearted japes?


----------



## PaulSB (22 May 2021)

Boopop said:


> So what would call implying people who have posted here are selfish, self-entitled and inconsiderate? Banter? Light hearted japes?


No. It would in my opinion be an accurate description of the approach some choose to take. Just as it would be for the attitude of some drivers.

As I've already said I don't like to get involved in these discussions on a personal level. This is the direction this is headed so I won't be responding further.


----------



## Boopop (22 May 2021)

PaulSB said:


> It would in my opinion be an accurate description of the approach some choose to take.



According to Wikipedia " An *insult* is an expression or statement (or sometimes behavior) which is disrespectful or scornful. ". I suspect calling others self-entitled, inconsiderate and selfish would be considered disrespectful, but perhaps that is just me.



PaulSB said:


> As I've already said I don't like to get involved in these discussions on a personal level. This is the direction this is headed so I won't be responding further.



No, you just like to vaguely imply insults towards people yet despite the obvious definition of the word claim they're not insults. Anyway, have a good day I guess.


----------



## I like Skol (22 May 2021)

FFS


----------



## Hacienda71 (22 May 2021)

I like Skol said:


> FFS



He will not stop.  He is the terminator of Cyclechat. Although I don't think Arnie relied upon Wikipedia.


----------



## Dogtrousers (22 May 2021)

Hacienda71 said:


> He will not stop.  He is the terminator of Cyclechat. Although I don't think Arnie relied upon Wikipedia.


Back when Arnie worked in B&Q I asked him where they kept the paintbrushes.

He said: Aisle B. Back.


----------



## Solocle (22 May 2021)

Ian H said:


> Pedestrians, just like cyclists, should be entitled to make mistakes without being flattened.


Well, if I flatten them when they assume I'm doing 5 mph and walk out in front of me, at least they're not going to carry on to their car oblivious, assume that I am doing 5 mph, and flatten me.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (22 May 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> Back when Arnie worked in B&Q I asked him where they kept the paintbrushes.
> 
> He said: Aisle B. Back.



Very good 😟 Did he then work in Dominos and say “Hasta la pizza” to let you know to wait till it was ready?


----------



## nickyboy (22 May 2021)

I think that any thread where someone quotes a definition of a word from a dictionary or wikipedia should be automatically locked as it indicates the thread has entered the final level of Dante's seven circles of hell.. Surely it's a simple bit of code to write


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (22 May 2021)

And on that note I think that time is up for this thread since it has become more about personal disagreements than the question in the OP.

That's all folks. Move along.


----------

