Bournemouth council: we will make town safer for cyclists (From Bournemouth Echo)

Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

As a cyclist I find Traffic Calmed Zones to be the most dangerous places.A majority of motorists seem to be totally ignorant of the contents of sections 153 and 163 of the Highway Code.Most drivers try to overtake, beep their horn, hurl abuse etc when they should not overtake at all in a Zone.About once a week there is also Mr Clever who thinks it's a good idea to undertake!

Get rid of no cycling and pedestrians have priority signs.

Theses signs just demonise cyclists,and that bad attitude to bikes spreads to the roads.

A few signs saying share the road,and don't drive like a **** would help.

Signs down the beach saying keep left,and look out for bikes would be good too.

There is no reason pedestrians and cyclists can't share space,anywhere.

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

I agree with you - cyclists should be identifiable and be given the same penalties as car drivers who run red lights for example! I have to watch what I say some of my comments have been reported and aparently I am in danger of being sued! Whatever!

suzigirl wrote:

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

I agree with you - cyclists should be identifiable and be given the same penalties as car drivers who run red lights for example! I have to watch what I say some of my comments have been reported and aparently I am in danger of being sued! Whatever!

I completely agree, I think a lot of the ill feeling towards cyclists come from them knowing they are unlikely to be made to pay for their actions and car drivers witnessing this every day. Where possible all road users should be subject to and equaly punishable under the law

suzigirl wrote:

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

I agree with you - cyclists should be identifiable and be given the same penalties as car drivers who run red lights for example! I have to watch what I say some of my comments have been reported and aparently I am in danger of being sued! Whatever!

No doubt you would advocate the same for pedestrians in fact anyone who is not in a car?

jobsworthwatch wrote:

suzigirl wrote:

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

I agree with you - cyclists should be identifiable and be given the same penalties as car drivers who run red lights for example! I have to watch what I say some of my comments have been reported and aparently I am in danger of being sued! Whatever!

No doubt you would advocate the same for pedestrians in fact anyone who is not in a car?

When crossing a road pedestrians are subject to laws such as jaywalking although again this goes unpunished as you can witness every day

mmmmmmm says... 'Get rid of no cycling and pedestrians have priority signs' Why? So they can just carry on breaking the law? I walk down near Iford a lot and i see more bikes on the path than on the cycle lane so if they can not even be bothered to obey the law there why should more cycle lanes make a difference? Yesterday i went across a crossing and a cyclist decided they would not stop for the red light but went up onto the curb instead almost hitting a woman with a baby in a buggy but she managed to wrench her child out of the way,no the cyclist didnt not stop or say sorry but carried on down the path.

tangogran wrote:
As a cyclist I find Traffic Calmed Zones to be the most dangerous places.A majority of motorists seem to be totally ignorant of the contents of sections 153 and 163 of the Highway Code.Most drivers try to overtake, beep their horn, hurl abuse etc when they should not overtake at all in a Zone.About once a week there is also Mr Clever who thinks it's a good idea to undertake!

Always the car drivers fault then? Like a lot of cyclists, you feel the road belongs to you, and you alone. Therefore all car/van/lorry/bus drivers are the enemy.
I have seen some horrendous driving towards cyclists, but equally I have seen cyclists who have no regard to other road users weaving in and out of traffic, jumping off pavements, coming up oneway roads the wrong way etc etc. In your books i suppose these people are right, and the car drivers who do obey the laws are wrong. Waht about all the pedestrians who have to move out of the way (or get hit as many do) of idiotic cyclists who use the pavements like their own private road? Until the Police clamp down on cyclists who float the laws, just as they do with car drivers, then there will always be deaths and injuries of cyclists on our roads. There is enough blame to go round, don't dump it all on non cyclists. I know you won't agree with a word I have said, your sort never do. You are right, and everybody else is wrong.

Not another cyclist not crashing into someone.

Shouldn't be allowed

So,it looks like it's going to be tricky to make our roads safer for cyclists,as everyone seems to hate them.

The vast majority of this conurbation are not cyclists nor do they have any inclination to be one. The only reason that the tax payers money is spent on these schemes is to hit various targets which have no real benefit to the non cycling community but to give the council a politically correct image. Off topic but my street lights now go out at midnight. If these are not needed for safety reasons then why has the electricity been wasted over the past decades?

Cycling has many benefits for the non cycling community of fat retards.

I do not agree with anyone breaking the law, but I particularly do not agree when they are putting my life in danger as well!

Azphreal wrote:
mmmmmmm says... 'Get rid of no cycling and pedestrians have priority signs' Why? So they can just carry on breaking the law? I walk down near Iford a lot and i see more bikes on the path than on the cycle lane so if they can not even be bothered to obey the law there why should more cycle lanes make a difference? Yesterday i went across a crossing and a cyclist decided they would not stop for the red light but went up onto the curb instead almost hitting a woman with a baby in a buggy but she managed to wrench her child out of the way,no the cyclist didnt not stop or say sorry but carried on down the path.

So he did stop and apologise for not hitting the lady and the baby buggy?

We motorists pay for the roads, if cyclists want special routes they should pay for them and they should get insurance.But don't put them on our roads.

Bournemouth council: we will make town safer for cyclists.
.
How, by banning them from the roads would be a good start.

allmy life wrote:
We motorists pay for the roads, if cyclists want special routes they should pay for them and they should get insurance.But don't put them on our roads.

Some of us motorists are also cyclist so do you think we should have to pay double road tax? I would be ok with paying road tax for my bike as road tax is based on CO2 emmisions and like an electric car a bike has zero emmsions so therefore my Road Tax bill would be £0. So now "Allmy Life" presumabley you have a solution for changing the current Road Tax system so that it isnt based on emmisions rates?

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

Bikes don't cause congestion, they help relieve it. The more people cycle, the less cars will be on the road. I'm very please that Bournemouth is committing to making its roads safer for cyclists.

Incredible that Bournemouth is one of the few places in the country where there are miles of flat Tarmac along the seafront. Ideal for cycling, safe for families etc but being Bournemouth they do nothing about it and adopt a weird seasonal/timed access for cycling that a lot of people are not aware of. They put stupid cycle lanes in that start and stop in bizarre places (eg,lansdowne road) but not along the seafront. A cycle lane along the front would solve a lot of problems and people not sticking to them should be fined. Its a good commuter option too. There are only a handful of places to lock up bikes in town. The truth is, they would prefer people to drive to the beach and town so they can charge them. Bournemouth has a long way to go and their policy towards cycling will be decided by people who don't cycle

The annoying thing is about cyclists in town to a motorist is that you first pass them then come to a halt in traffic. They then pass you and 1 mile down the road you overtake them but the same thing occurs.
The driver is baffled as to why the cyclist is always in front.
Come on admit that what gripes drivers.

Bikes don't cause congestion? Say that when your on a bus crawling behind a cyclist along the Ashley Road and look at the tail back behind it! Bikes cause congestion as either there is no room to overtake safely or the idiot cyclist is weaving all over the road obliviousness what's behind them with ears plugged into an mp3

ssl1988 wrote:

allmy life wrote:
We motorists pay for the roads, if cyclists want special routes they should pay for them and they should get insurance.But don't put them on our roads.

Some of us motorists are also cyclist so do you think we should have to pay double road tax? I would be ok with paying road tax for my bike as road tax is based on CO2 emmisions and like an electric car a bike has zero emmsions so therefore my Road Tax bill would be £0. So now "Allmy Life" presumabley you have a solution for changing the current Road Tax system so that it isnt based on emmisions rates?

You pay double road tax if you have two cars, so what is your point?

Word of the day. Obliviousness

Lord Spring wrote:
The annoying thing is about cyclists in town to a motorist is that you first pass them then come to a halt in traffic. They then pass you and 1 mile down the road you overtake them but the same thing occurs.
The driver is baffled as to why the cyclist is always in front.
Come on admit that what gripes drivers.

It's not baffling. It usually means they ignored the red light the traffic had to stop at.

Azphreal wrote:
mmmmmmm says... 'Get rid of no cycling and pedestrians have priority signs' Why? So they can just carry on breaking the law? I walk down near Iford a lot and i see more bikes on the path than on the cycle lane so if they can not even be bothered to obey the law there why should more cycle lanes make a difference? Yesterday i went across a crossing and a cyclist decided they would not stop for the red light but went up onto the curb instead almost hitting a woman with a baby in a buggy but she managed to wrench her child out of the way,no the cyclist didnt not stop or say sorry but carried on down the path.

like I say - cyclists have no accountability because they are unidentifiable which gives them carte blanche to do anything they like!

No,it means bikes are the most sensible means of transport.

It would be nice if the council made the pavements a safer place for pedestrians considering the amount of cyclists that ride their bikes on them either on their phones or with Ipods shoved in their ears. I am sure that it used to say in the Highway Code that "the pavement is a safe refuge for pedestrians" or something very similar.

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

yes agreed, wallisdown road, castle lane,
christchurch road,wimbourne road moordown, alder road poole,ashley road poole,poole road and in the summer sandbanks road poole- all smoothflowing roads- ban the bike we need more cars

Baywolf wrote:
Bikes don't cause congestion? Say that when your on a bus crawling behind a cyclist along the Ashley Road and look at the tail back behind it! Bikes cause congestion as either there is no room to overtake safely or the idiot cyclist is weaving all over the road obliviousness what's behind them with ears plugged into an mp3

Ok, sometimes cars and buses have to slow down to avoid killing cyclists. But, if you drive a car, particularly in busy traffic you'll find your journey time is reduced because of the number of other cars on the road.
Also, if you're talking about a cyclist, you're talking about a person, so please don't use "it", use "he" or "she".

Behind it meaning the bus not the cyclist!

Just to pick up your point about cars and busses killing cyclists, cyclists have caused fatal crashes that kill passengers as well as drivers..so don't think cyclists are always the victims.

The Council could come up with some radical new ideas for cyclists.

Like, taking some of the largest and heaviest commercial motor vehicles weighing 10-15tons on Bournemouth's roads, carrying 70+ people and trying to maintain tight schedules under penalty and segregate these, along with hurrying commercial taxis, onto a dedicated car free traffic lane to speed them all up.

Then put the most vulnerable people on the road, by default slowly riding their unmotorised bikes around town, onto this very same seperated busy lane right in front of the commercial vehicles rushing about their business and.......

Carnage, sooner or later, but I see Bournemouth Council have already come up with this cracking idea!

Cyclists cause a lot less deaths and injuries, because they weigh less and don't travel so fast.
This is from the Department of transport:
Pedestrian casualties 2001-09
Killed by cycles: 18
Seriously injured by cycles: 434
Killed by cars: 3,495
Seriously injured by cars: 46,245

bluto999 wrote:
Cyclists cause a lot less deaths and injuries, because they weigh less and don't travel so fast. This is from the Department of transport: Pedestrian casualties 2001-09 Killed by cycles: 18 Seriously injured by cycles: 434 Killed by cars: 3,495 Seriously injured by cars: 46,245

It is not rocket science - why do cyclists put themselves unnecessarily in danger i.e. going through red traffic lights when they know if they meet a car lawfully going through a green traffic light that the person who will come off worst will be the cyclist - I call that suicide myself!

I have nothing against cyclists on our roads, in theory they have much right of use as car owners, although I would like to see more done towards cyclist training.
.
However, I do wish cyclists would stick to cyclist lanes when available. Yesterday whilst driving from Poole to Bournemouth we travelled on roads that had dedicated cycle lanes, yet some cyclists, more than not, chose to cycle outside the lane, or worse still, would veer out to avoid a manhole cover in the lane without any indication of such maneouver, thus forcing cars to break, or swerve to avoid contact..
.
Many of these cyclists were also wearing ear plugs listening to their Ipods and other gizmos. Therefore not adhering to traffic and its sounds.
.
Like wise, once again I saw many car and van drivers using mobile telephones whilst driving, in particular a van well marked with company details, a driver and mate, with the driver on the telephone, no seatbelsts, one hand steering, and not paying attention to the roundabout ruling, but shooting out and turning into Turbary Park Avenue, with out thought for others. Cowboy.

suzigirl, the more people that choose to cycle rather than drive, the less people will be killed or injured on the roads.

bluto999 wrote:
suzigirl, the more people that choose to cycle rather than drive, the less people will be killed or injured on the roads.

,,,,,and the more people that never leave their home, the less people will be killed on the roads.
Where are we going with this sort of logic?

TheDistrict wrote:
I have nothing against cyclists on our roads, in theory they have much right of use as car owners, although I would like to see more done towards cyclist training.
.
However, I do wish cyclists would stick to cyclist lanes when available. Yesterday whilst driving from Poole to Bournemouth we travelled on roads that had dedicated cycle lanes, yet some cyclists, more than not, chose to cycle outside the lane, or worse still, would veer out to avoid a manhole cover in the lane without any indication of such maneouver, thus forcing cars to break, or swerve to avoid contact..
.
Many of these cyclists were also wearing ear plugs listening to their Ipods and other gizmos. Therefore not adhering to traffic and its sounds.
.
Like wise, once again I saw many car and van drivers using mobile telephones whilst driving, in particular a van well marked with company details, a driver and mate, with the driver on the telephone, no seatbelsts, one hand steering, and not paying attention to the roundabout ruling, but shooting out and turning into Turbary Park Avenue, with out thought for others. Cowboy.

So by your own admission, it is safer to stay out of the cycle lane than be forced veer out to avoid obstacles.

This is why using badly thought out cycle lanes is more dangerous than cyclists exercising their legal right to use the road.

Dean Park wrote:
It would be nice if the council made the pavements a safer place for pedestrians considering the amount of cyclists that ride their bikes on them either on their phones or with Ipods shoved in their ears. I am sure that it used to say in the Highway Code that "the pavement is a safe refuge for pedestrians" or something very similar.

Number of pedestrians killed by motor vehicles on UK footpaths 2005-2009 was 226

Number of pedestrians killed by cyclists on UK footpaths 2005-2009 was 3

yes, lets spend all our time Demonising cyclists !!!

Baywolf wrote:
Just to pick up your point about cars and busses killing cyclists, cyclists have caused fatal crashes that kill passengers as well as drivers..so don't think cyclists are always the victims.

Really? and you can back this claim up how?

Fix the potholes first!!
This will make roads a lot safer for all users.

allmy life wrote:
We motorists pay for the roads, if cyclists want special routes they should pay for them and they should get insurance.But don't put them on our roads.

Cyclists don't want special routes, they just want to be able to get from A to B without being hit by a ton of metal.

I suspect you are just on the wind up as your opinion suggests you're a bit simple.

Sod cycling, haven't the council heard of progress? how about making Bournemouth more CAR friendly!!

muscliffman wrote:

bluto999 wrote:
suzigirl, the more people that choose to cycle rather than drive, the less people will be killed or injured on the roads.

,,,,,and the more people that never leave their home, the less people will be killed on the roads.
Where are we going with this sort of logic?

I'm not talking about not leaving your home. I'm talking about improving quality of life. The more people that choose to cycle rather than drive, the safer it is for everyone.
In 2005 I chose to cycle to work rather than drive. My health has improved. I've saved loads of money on fuel (which isn't getting any cheaper). I've never jumped a red light.
I've not caused caused any harm to anyone by riding a bike instead of driving a car. I'm rather upset by some of the bigotry that is being published here.

Dear council, before you spend a penny on improving infrastructure for cyclists, please take a long hard look at the comments in this thread and the article that this one is responding to.

If it is at all possible, you need to tackle the attitude towards people who cycle.

There seems to be a general disregard towards these people's legitimate rights and safety. This is coupled with an obvious unwillingness to accept the duty of care to those road users more vulnerable than themselves that surely must come with a motorised vehicle.

Altogether this a dangerous cocktail.

Good luck.

bluto999 wrote:

muscliffman wrote:

bluto999 wrote:
suzigirl, the more people that choose to cycle rather than drive, the less people will be killed or injured on the roads.

,,,,,and the more people that never leave their home, the less people will be killed on the roads.
Where are we going with this sort of logic?

I'm not talking about not leaving your home. I'm talking about improving quality of life. The more people that choose to cycle rather than drive, the safer it is for everyone.
In 2005 I chose to cycle to work rather than drive. My health has improved. I've saved loads of money on fuel (which isn't getting any cheaper). I've never jumped a red light.
I've not caused caused any harm to anyone by riding a bike instead of driving a car. I'm rather upset by some of the bigotry that is being published here.

I think you will find the 'bigotry' is going in both directions, which is indeed silly.

I am not anti-cycling (or pro-car), hence my other post about the way the Council have taken two types of commercial motorised vehicles, both working to hectic schedules, and put them onto a seperated road lane....... then unbelievably decided adding vulnerable cyclists to that lane would be a good move.

I hope future cycling safety initiatives are a little better thought through for all road users sake.

Call it transport snobbery, if you ride a
bike your'e regarded as a bit of a
hippy! Let's be honest our country is
not kind to cyclists, I mean have you
tried cycling in the rain and snow!
I have and experienced falling off
bike whilst skidding across an icy road!
I think its great to ride in spring, summer
especially Brockenhurst!

Professor Zaroff wrote:
Dear council, before you spend a penny on improving infrastructure for cyclists, please take a long hard look at the comments in this thread and the article that this one is responding to.

If it is at all possible, you need to tackle the attitude towards people who cycle.

There seems to be a general disregard towards these people's legitimate rights and safety. This is coupled with an obvious unwillingness to accept the duty of care to those road users more vulnerable than themselves that surely must come with a motorised vehicle.

Altogether this a dangerous cocktail.

Good luck.

It would help if cyclists respected pedestrians and other road users before attitudes to cyclists change. A test and a license first before even going on the roads should be compulsory, riding through red lights carving up traffic and riding on pavements through pedestrians does not make a safe environment or give respect to the cyclists themselves.

I'm confused.
I really want to cycle to work, and I seem to have heard, in the past two years, no end of accolades and announcements about Bournemouth and cycling. Yet, as I (still) drive to and from work every morning, the number of people cycling to work can be counted on one hand (my route takes me through Kinson, ALL the way along Wallisdown road, to Cemetery Junction, and to the Lansdowne). On average I see about 4 or 5 bikes.

A little about me. I have driven cars and vans, ridden cycles and motorcycles for 40 years. Bournemouth born, I have travelled through Europe, and lived in Germany for a time. One thing I, and most would-be cycling commuters are NEVER going to do is pedal along the ridiculous painted cycle lanes.

I'm going to say that again - because it needs someone to FINALLY AGREE that cycles are not made welcome here. To agree that UK motoring standards, vehicle sizes (people carriers, 4x4's et al) and the sheer NATURE of so many drivers in our conurbation makes it a COMPLETE NONSENSE to expect anyone to take to 2 wheels to go to work with our current transport framework.
Do not add painted cycle lanes, do not add further ridiculous 'traffic calming'.

I do not understand all the drivers saying that cyclists are making their life difficult. Before moving the Bournemouth I cycled everywhere but after moving to Bournemouth I drive more due to the nature of my work.

I have definitely seen (propotionally) more bad drivers than cyclists. You stay in traffic lights and everytime there is two or three cars speeding through when the lights are already turning red. As well, lots of drivers keep no safe distance from car front of them and ESPECIALLY don't use indicators. When you change lane or turn use the bloody indicator! It is also very frustrating that so many people don't remember to switch their lights on.

For cyclists I would say, side mirrors are very small and it is almost impossible to see there is a cyclist passing from the left hand side unless I just passed you earlier or I am directly looking at the mirror.

Also, I can't understand why cyclists are on the road on the route passing front of the Bournemouth airport. That part is very dangerous because of the long turn and number of motorcyclists jumping queues on the other lane. There is miles of shared path which is very narrow but there is never pedestrians. Miles of path completely free for few bikes where you don't have to be braking or getting on and off the cycling lane but still you want to risk yourself on the main road. Out of my understanding. When I am cycling I always use shared paths when I see that it is practicle (i.e. I know I don't need to brake all the time or getting on and off the path).

Good to see the usual arguments being rolled out!
So cyclists should pass a driving test? Yes thank you I have 2 in fact because most cyclists are car drivers too.
Motorists pay for the road's! No they do not road infrastructure is paid for through general taxation so we all pay for it. Road Tax was abolished in 1937 and replaced by Vehicle Excise Duty, which is based on the emissions of the vehicle so therefore cyclists would pay the same as tractors, disabled and green vehicles £0
Cyclists ride through red lights, studies have shown that this is an urban myth as the cyclist is more at risk, car drivers are more likely to run red lights.
There are bad cyclists who flout the law as there are bad car drivers and pedestrians.
The fact of the matter is the attitude of road users and the lack of knowledge/adherance to the Highway Code, as well as the lack of respect for other road users. This does not come dome down to Car and cyclists or cyclists and pedestrians but also cars and other cars.
The simple fact of the matter is a car can kill or seriously injure a cyclist or pedestrian and the person in control of it should be talking ALL measures possible to ensure that they do not injure or kill other road users, that means slowing down and giving plenty of room, as is embedded in law in the majority of other European Countries, it is a matter of common sense and attitude.
You have no more rights to the road than any other person using it, no matter what mode of transport you use, whether your working, picking the kid's up from school, running late or anything. If you were then you would have blue lights on your car and a siren

Hear is a short video of shot in Dorset of law obeying car drivers and another reason it appears why cyclists don't use cycle lanes -

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=_8v90rIzC

fg

My wife and I visited Bournemouth 2 weekends ago with our bikes.

Biking was the perfect way to see Christchurch, Bournemouth and Poole, although we would have liked to see more people cycling.

If we can get more people cycling in Britain and less people doing short journeys in cars, we will relieve congestion, accidents, noise and improve our air quality. So we will all be winners! Cycling is healthy, sociable, convenient and fun. And you won't get any parking or speeding fines when you are riding a bike!

We definitely do *not* need to make bicycle license plates and helmets mandatory as some people may suggest - this will only deter people from cycling more.

We *do* need wide, safe, separated, well-engineered cycle paths, arranged in a coherent network - a few lines of paint on the side of the road will not do. This can only come about with real investment.

I sometimes hear 'Cyclists do this...' or 'Cyclists do that....'. There is no such thing as 'cyclists' as a subset of the population. Cyclists are simply normal people who happen to be riding a bike at that time, they also walk, drive, take the bus...

Next time you overtake a someone on a bike, please remember that 80% of cyclists also drive, and one person more on a bike is one car less at the lights.

Finally, Britain has got a very low cycling rate compared to Europe, especially Holland and Germany, due to the large investment these countries have been putting in to creating totally safe cycle paths over many years. Cycling is mainstream transport in those countries. (27% of journeys are by bike in the Netherlands, only 3% in Bournemouth). We should take example on these countries.

GAHmusic wrote:

jobsworthwatch wrote:

suzigirl wrote:

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

I agree with you - cyclists should be identifiable and be given the same penalties as car drivers who run red lights for example! I have to watch what I say some of my comments have been reported and aparently I am in danger of being sued! Whatever!

No doubt you would advocate the same for pedestrians in fact anyone who is not in a car?

When crossing a road pedestrians are subject to laws such as jaywalking although again this goes unpunished as you can witness every day

Unfortunately, some pedestrians, mainly cocky lads, seem to think they have right of way when crossing the road. It's true that motorists need to watch out for pedestrians but when I was younger we had The Green Cross Code. Pedestrians had to check for cars before crossing not just step out on the assumption that the motorists can't afford to hit you.

tangogran wrote:
I do not agree with anyone breaking the law, but I particularly do not agree when they are putting my life in danger as well!

The law is out of date. Read up about it and you'll realise it dates back to the time of horses and carts.
The law needs to be revised and the public need to get used to cyclists being on pavements in certain areas.
There are vast stretches of pavement, lovingly cared for by the council and not a soul walking on them.

Lord Spring wrote:
The annoying thing is about cyclists in town to a motorist is that you first pass them then come to a halt in traffic. They then pass you and 1 mile down the road you overtake them but the same thing occurs.
The driver is baffled as to why the cyclist is always in front.
Come on admit that what gripes drivers.

So get on a bike.

Baywolf wrote:
Just to pick up your point about cars and busses killing cyclists, cyclists have caused fatal crashes that kill passengers as well as drivers..so don't think cyclists are always the victims.

I'd like to see some evidence of that.

suzigirl wrote:

Baywolf wrote:
Yet more cycle lanes adding to yet more traffic congestion, surely alternate routes using back streets rather than main roads would allow traffic to flow freely, personally I believe that every cyclist should be made to take a cyclist test and get a license to ride it as there are some scary riders out there who have complete disregard for motorists and pedestrians alike.

I agree with you - cyclists should be identifiable and be given the same penalties as car drivers who run red lights for example! I have to watch what I say some of my comments have been reported and aparently I am in danger of being sued! Whatever!

Apparently sue.

Cyclists cause congestion? Yes, many is the time I've got to work and people arrive 20 mins late and say:

"Sorry I'm late, but the traffic was terrible. All those bikes out there."

Or maybe not. If everyone able-bodied who drives to work less than 2 miles went by bike, then there would be 50% fewer cars on the road going to work. Now that might reduce congestion.

Also one massive thing we are overlooking here is the freedom that safe cycle routes would give to children. In Holland, almost all kids cycle to school, and from around the age of 8 they cycle without their parents. Imagine the freedom that this would give to both children and their parents. Kids can get some exercise. Parents don't have to ferry their kids around everywhere. And the rest of us don't have to suffer the school run traffic.

Super point, FNS-man, just imagine if every workday morning on the roads was like a half-term, the difference is astonishing.
Since when did we have to ferry them to school in these cat-walk vehicles we love to show off?

Things have gone so far out of 'true' we even forget to argue for the simple things.

Baywolf wrote:
Bikes don't cause congestion? Say that when your on a bus crawling behind a cyclist along the Ashley Road and look at the tail back behind it! Bikes cause congestion as either there is no room to overtake safely or the idiot cyclist is weaving all over the road obliviousness what's behind them with ears plugged into an mp3

I normally pass about 30 vehicles when cycling along Ashley road at 20-30, and none even catch me to pass, as they are traveling more slowly due to parking, turning and lights. I filter through to the front, accelerate quicker than the traffic, and it never catches me. Not that cyclists are not traffic, and have the same right to the road as you or anyone else. The fact the buses now treat cyclists with respect is fantastic, and a great change that's happened over the past 10 years.

TheDistrict wrote:
I have nothing against cyclists on our roads, in theory they have much right of use as car owners, although I would like to see more done towards cyclist training.
.
However, I do wish cyclists would stick to cyclist lanes when available. Yesterday whilst driving from Poole to Bournemouth we travelled on roads that had dedicated cycle lanes, yet some cyclists, more than not, chose to cycle outside the lane, or worse still, would veer out to avoid a manhole cover in the lane without any indication of such maneouver, thus forcing cars to break, or swerve to avoid contact..
.
Many of these cyclists were also wearing ear plugs listening to their Ipods and other gizmos. Therefore not adhering to traffic and its sounds.
.
Like wise, once again I saw many car and van drivers using mobile telephones whilst driving, in particular a van well marked with company details, a driver and mate, with the driver on the telephone, no seatbelsts, one hand steering, and not paying attention to the roundabout ruling, but shooting out and turning into Turbary Park Avenue, with out thought for others. Cowboy.

I'm one of the cyclists that doesn't use the path. I don't wear earphones, or use the phone. I don't use it or any, because the gutter is the least safe place to be on a bike. This is due to potholes, drains, broken glass and other debris. Also drivers don't give enough space when passing at the best of times, but less if you're on the path. I don't have to use it according to the highway code, so I will keep myself safe thanks.

not another cycle jam! if only the council could put in some car lanes to protect car drivers from all those dangerous cyclists that kill and injure some many each year- and don't get me started on all the air pollution and greenhouse gases they cause!

And now welcome back form that strange alternative and frankly bizarre reality that the anti-cyclist brigade on here seem to live in - all i can say to suzigirl, baywolf et al, is try visiting Planet Earth for a change and open your eyes to reality not your prejudiced and grossly distorted fantasy world- but please if you think i'm wrong feel free to back your bizarre anti-cyclist rants up with some facts for a change, otherwise that's all they are isn't it?

weevie wrote:
Super point, FNS-man, just imagine if every workday morning on the roads was like a half-term, the difference is astonishing.
Since when did we have to ferry them to school in these cat-walk vehicles we love to show off?

Things have gone so far out of 'true' we even forget to argue for the simple things.

I thank you, weevie. It appears people don't care about children, unfortunately.