Bad Name

[apollo179]

You know it's not against the law for a cyclist to go faster than the speed limit on a public road !

Why didnt you tell me that during the rlj topic ?
That seems contrary to the principle that all traffic is equal.

 

[apollo179]

You best sit down, there's bad news about the tooth fairy and Santa as well.

Santa ? La La La im not listening La La La

 

[Noodley]

That seems contrary to the principle that all traffic is equal.

All traffic is not equal...that is why some laws apply to some traffic and not others...and some road users have priority over others.

 

[youngoldbloke]

Legality of phone use on a bike is irrelevant. It is stupid to use a phone while riding. Full stop. I am prepared to judge the rider referred to in the OP - he is an idiot. He was putting his own safety at risk. It is not illegal to ride into potholes either, or on wet draincovers, but both are best avoided ......

 

[Norm]

Sorry, Mickle, but I'm seeing some cyclist blinkers there. Specifically...

So indoctrinated have we become by the 'normalisation' of mass ownership motorised personal transport that we have turned into a nation of cyclist haters. Unfortunately this includes many people who think of themselves as cyclists.

This wasn't the point.

A person using x form of transport (this could be a car, tractor, lorry, 4x4, bus or bicycle) appeared to be acting selfishly by travelling slowly because their attention isn't on the road. Those who are unnecessarily held up, not by the person's presence in a slow moving vehicle but by their apparently selfish actions, will generalise and tar other users of the same form of transport with the same brush.

If the chosen vehicle of the apparently selfish person was a tractor, bus etc, then that wouldn't be too relevant, other than as an excuse for a rant. But the chosen vehicle was a bike, so it's us getting tarred here.

We've covered this ground before but lets consider for a moment how cyclists can 'give themselves a bad name' by running red lights or riding on the pavement but the same thing is never said about drivers.

It's because - even in the eyes of people who ride bikes - cars are normal and bikes are, somehow, 'other'.

I can think of at least one other CCer who frequently takes issue with people driving and parking on the pavement, and I can't imagine that anyone wouldn't say that a driver jumping a red is being anything less than dangerous.

To the point where ^ even when a cyclist is doing nothing wrong (but merely, possibly, slightly holding up another road user) they are vilified. By other cyclists!

Not vilified. The OP's point was, as I understand it, one of frustration rather than vilification.

What a crock. Get your heads on straight. If you want to change the conditions on the road for cyclists for the better lets educate and prosecute the people who pose the threat of injury and death. Cars which run red lights, pass too close etc etc.

The guy riding along on the phone poses zero danger to anyone. I on the other hand was passed too closely several times on my commute this morning and cut up twice. Get your priorities right. Jeez.

Comparing the incomparable? Murder is worse than robbing banks, so let's let all the bank robbers free as someone else has done something much worse.

Looking at the OP...

I was driving back home yesterday from picking up the eldest from Saturday job and saw a guy on a nice road bike, all the gear on ,he was riding one handed, on the drops,slowly, and dialing on his mobile phone ,behind him he had a queue of about 20 cars, that sort of behaviour just pees people off, why not just stop and make the call ?.

No vilification, just a comment that this sort of behaviour pees people off (which I think no-one has denied) and a question.

 

[gaz]

Why didnt you tell me that during the rlj topic ?
That seems contrary to the principle that all traffic is equal.

Why would i say that in a RLJing topic?
The law states that all road users must stop at the first stop line when the light is red.
The law states that speed limits only apply to motorised vehicles.

 

[boydj]

Must have been a very narrow road with a constant stream of traffic going in the other direction for twenty cars to be stuck behind a cyclist. Maybe it's because I ride in the thinly populated area known as Glasgow that I've never had more than a couple of cars stuck behind me for more than a few seconds.

Good posts from Mickle

 

[mickle]

Legality of phone use on a bike is irrelevant. It is stupid to use a phone while riding. Full stop. I am prepared to judge the rider referred to in the OP - he is an idiot. He was putting his own safety at risk. It is not illegal to ride into potholes either, or on wet draincovers, but both are best avoided ......

Legality of phone use on a bike is irrelevant because it's not illegal!

 

[roadrash]

illegal ...no dangerous YES

 

[apollo179]

All traffic is not equal...that is why some laws apply to some traffic and not others...and some road users have priority over others.

What road users have priority over others ?

 

[apollo179]

Why would i say that in a RLJing topic?
The law states that all road users must stop at the first stop line when the light is red.
The law states that speed limits only apply to motorised vehicles.

Not wishing to revisit the rlj debate but just for the record it would have been relevant in the context of wether all traffic are equal and your query "In what way do you think they are different? And in what way do those differences make you believe that bicycles should follow different road rules to everyone else?"
https://www.cyclechat.net/
Point being that clearly the law does differentiate between motorised and non-motorised traffic .

 

[apollo179]

Sorry, Mickle, but I'm seeing some cyclist blinkers there. Specifically...

This wasn't the point.

A person using x form of transport (this could be a car, tractor, lorry, 4x4, bus or bicycle) appeared to be acting selfishly by travelling slowly because their attention isn't on the road. Those who are unnecessarily held up, not by the person's presence in a slow moving vehicle but by their apparently selfish actions, will generalise and tar other users of the same form of transport with the same brush.

If the chosen vehicle of the apparently selfish person was a tractor, bus etc, then that wouldn't be too relevant, other than as an excuse for a rant. But the chosen vehicle was a bike, so it's us getting tarred here.

I can think of at least one other CCer who frequently takes issue with people driving and parking on the pavement, and I can't imagine that anyone wouldn't say that a driver jumping a red is being anything less than dangerous.

Not vilified. The OP's point was, as I understand it, one of frustration rather than vilification.

Comparing the incomparable? Murder is worse than robbing banks, so let's let all the bank robbers free as someone else has done something much worse.

Looking at the OP... No vilification, just a comment that this sort of behaviour pees people off (which I think no-one has denied) and a question.

+1
Get those cyclists blinkers off for a moment mickle.

 

[twobiker]

Legality of phone use on a bike is irrelevant because it's not illegal!

Its not illegal, but to use a phone you have to look at it , if you do so whilst riding on any road , never mind an A class road with a 60mph speed limit, then you are irresponsible, just because we are cyclists we do not have the right to behave as we like, we cannot complain about close passing and being cut up by drivers if we ride with no consideration to others, you only get back what you put in, I ride 200mls a week just for leisure and would rather it was as stress free as possible and not a war zone.

 

[youngoldbloke]

Its not illegal, but to use a phone you have to look at it , if you do so whilst riding on any road , never mind an A class road with a 60mph speed limit, then you are irresponsible,

+1

Here is a relevant article from the Guardian phone cycling law

 

[Noodley]

What road users have priority over others ?

The answer depends on the circumstances, it is easy to find these things out if you are interested rather than remaining ignorant and making assumptions that you know stuff.