Why cyclists get a bad name

[blythburgh]

These are from FB local group. A Tory Councillor has spent the last 6 years trying to get these signs put up:

The council have just reinstated the No Cycling signs between Cliftonville Road and All Saints road. I have seen many near misses with cyclists recently.

Good to see the new No Cycling signs have gone up along the cliff path but is anyone actually policing it, because from what I can see, no-one’s paying the slightest bit of attention to them!

(Councillor who got the signs put up): On Tuesday, a man said to be in his 50s with ear length blond hair has removed them telling a walker they were illegal.
This path is a Pedestrian Right of Way and the signs were put up by Suffolk County Council to protect people from those abusive cyclists who have caused injuries and fright to many pedestrians. The Definitive Map clearly shows this path as a Pedestrian Right of Way.

there’s only 3 left as of this morning !

No body is taking any notice..the area by the caravan park is our usual dog walk route and we've seen cyclists still going up and down there...might as well of saved the money for the signs! Waste of time..no one is policing it..it's a joke.

(Councillor) policing it is virtually impossible due to the cost. Can’t pay one person 8 hours a day to watch this one area even at minimum wage. If it’s early morning and evening the cost goes up.
It’s awful that people simply refuse to respect the law and abuse us all by disobeying a simple rule.
Either use a legal cycle path or get off and walk!
I’m so worn out by these aggressive cyclists upsetting walkers who simply want to use a quiet, safe pathway.

I went for a walk with my son in the pram and there were 4 we encountered on the stretch between all saints and the church. There was nowhere else for me to go and we had a stand off because they wouldn't go up the grass verge which would be easier for them to go up than me with the pram

Cyclists are allowed on the upper prom as far north as the pier but:

Cyclist are suppose to dismount at the Claremont Pier area.. Never seen anyone do that either

There is one white line along the upper prom and a mark down it near the cycle lane which was there when cycling was banned and is where the electricity runs to feed the lights along the length of the prom. Nobody knows where the cycle lane ends. But I do know that the seats overlooking the sea mean that a group of two people will probably end up walking in single file to get past the seats. If you want to walk more than two abreast then you have to stray into the cycle lane.

[macliam]

Yesterday, I had to travel through Woodbridge for an appointment. There was a group of cyclists on the road..... mainly coasting, travelling at less that 10 mph and often 2 abreast.... on typical rural roads this makes it virtually impossible to pass, with the result that there was a tailback of maybe a dozen cars.

Then we came to some roadworks controlled by lights. Of course, the cyclists decided it was their right to go to the head of the queue..... and when the lights changed they made their way slowly past the obstacle.... so only 4 cars managed to get through before the lights changed again.

How much do you think that was appreciated by those of us who pay road tax, insurance and fuel duty to subsidise their hobby?

[blythburgh]

And then there is the smelly bins problem. People say a lot of doggy bags are in the open bin but the closed doggy bag bin is fairly empty. One person posted they only use the open one as they do not want to touch the lid of the proper one. I replied that they could always put a doggy bag over their hand to open the lid. No reply to my FB post

[xrppzi]

And then there is the smelly bins problem. People say a lot of doggy bags are in the open bin but the closed doggy bag bin is fairly empty. One person posted they only use the open one as they do not want to touch the lid of the proper one. I replied that they could always put a doggy bag over their hand to open the lid. No reply to my FB post

And why does this give cyclists a bad name?

[pabenny]

...those of us who pay road tax, insurance and fuel duty to subsidise their hobby?

Leaving aside whether motor insurance subsidises cyclists, I would venture that the majority of cyclists are also car users.

[Richard Frost]

...those of us who pay road tax, insurance and fuel duty to subsidise their hobby?

Leaving aside whether motor insurance subsidises cyclists, I would venture that the majority of cyclists are also car users.

I am not sure where you get the majority from, but I would concede it is probably quite a few. However I am also confused about why it is relevant, as it is a fact that cyclists pay neither Road Fund licence fees, Insurance or fuel duty.

Whether they should do or not is a debateable point.

[pabenny]

It's relevant because those cyclists who do own a car do pay vehicle excise duty and fuel duty.

And according to this source https://www.cyclinguk.org/statistics (point 12, quoting a DoT report), it's "almost all" cyclists also drive. I've not checked this back to the original report.

[macliam]

Whatever; It is beyond dispute that whilst drivers are required to be trained and give due attention to the needs and safety of cyclists on the highway (and rightly so), but no such constraint is on anyone who decides to ride a bicycle. Even suggestions that cyclists should be subject to the same road traffic laws as drivers, have third-party insurance to cover damage, or be registered to ensure safety compliance draw complaints.

An individual cyclist on a country road is rarely an irritant, but a group of a dozen, jockeying for position, coasting or riding very slowly on roads where there are very limited chances to pass, is a PITA - and it is becoming more common these days. It is a rare trip out in my rural area where I don't end up following a gaggle of bicycles at some point.

On the trip I reported, I wondered how far the extra fuel burned inefficiently by cars caught in tailbacks behind cyclists actually offsets any savings by the rider..... certainly my own small-engined model required frequent gear changes to travel at 10mph for a protracted period...... plus it was not travelling efficiently enough to charge the battery to offset usage or to cool the engine. All in all, it encourages the more reckless to attempt overtaking where it might be best avoided.

So a little awareness would be beneficial......

[pabenny]

Cyclists are, of course, subject to the highway code and many laws of the road apply to all road-users.

Ultimately, though, the argument being made is that because cars are bigger and more powerful, they should have priority. I'm certainly not ok with 'might is right' in other areas of life and I'm not sure why it should be different on the road.

[macliam]

Cyclists are, of course, subject to the highway code and many laws of the road apply to all road-users.

Ultimately, though, the argument being made is that because cars are bigger and more powerful, they should have priority. I'm certainly not ok with 'might is right' in other areas of life and I'm not sure why it should be different on the road.

You will be aware that not all laws are applicable to cyclists - such as when deaths are caused, etc. Equally, laws being "applicable" and laws being obeyed are often different.... behaviour at traffic lights, behaviour on footpaths, respect for traffic signals, cycling whilst using headphones, etc. being examples.

As I said, I agree that drivers should be required to give due attention to cyclists, but I don't see that it means cyclists are absolved of responsibility for their actions. What do you think would happen to an unofficial convoy of a dozen cars driving at 10mph with no attention paid to other road users?