Yes, cycling is a sustainable way to travel, which is an ethos I support, and I feel the government should support the notion that fewer cars + more cycling = a greener and healthier nation.
Originally posted by Skullcandy: Yes, cycling is a sustainable way to travel, which is an ethos I support, and I feel the government should support the notion that fewer cars + more cycling = a greener and healthier nation.
Fewer cars will mean less road tax and fewer victims of the camera partnerships. A government trying to raise revenue will hardly support that.
Originally posted by Skullcandy: Yes, cycling is a sustainable way to travel, which is an ethos I support, and I feel the government should support the notion that fewer cars + more cycling = a greener and healthier nation.
Fewer cars will mean less road tax and fewer victims of the camera partnerships. A government trying to raise revenue will hardly support that.
Governments should do what is necessary to protect their people...which includes stopping them from dying from health related diseases.
Originally posted by Bamford: Yes, if they are brave enough!
aye, some bravery is needed as far too many car drivers don't bother giving room -- that's why you see bicycles side by side or 3 wide .. to force the drivers to give proper consideration -- OR folks just don't bother checking their mirror when they get out of their car .. causing accidents with cyclists crashing into open doors what's needed is driver re-education
why is it when I stand on my head that sometimes, just sometimes ......?
They have every right to be on the road, just like pedestrians, horse riders etc. It has just become accepted that 'the roads are for cars'.
As for tax, how much tax should they pay? The light weight of a bike means they do no damage the roads, so don't add to the maintenance costs. They are banned from the motorways (and some dual carriageways), the most expensive roads to build and maintain.
The government should actually be encouraging cycle use by scrapping VAT on cycles and accessories.
Oh, and you don't see many caravans on the road without taxed/insured cars towing them.
Yes, cyclists have the right to use the roads, just like everyone else......HOWEVER, they must stop at Red lights and Pedestrian Crossings like decent, civilized people.
Most cyclists are good folks, just as most motorists are decent people. However, a few cyclist have a breathtaking arrogance on the roads that is just as bad as some of the mindless idiots who pull stupid stunts in cars.
---------------------------------------------------- "mad-g" is the display name of "mad-git"
Originally posted by Skullcandy: Yes, cycling is a sustainable way to travel, which is an ethos I support, and I feel the government should support the notion that fewer cars + more cycling = a greener and healthier nation.
No, cyclists should not be on the road and it is most certainly not a green or sustainable way to travel!
Cyclists, like horse riders, have absolutely no official training and do not have to pass any kind of a test to prove their proficiency to be on our roads. Should they be in an accident, even if it is their fault the motorist's insurance would have to pay out as the cyclists have none. They also pay no form of tax, either in the form of Vehicle Excise Duty (Road Tax) or the tax we pay on fuel, which accounts for around 80% of the pump price.
The green credentials of cycling are seriously flawed. They hold up other road users, causing queues of traffic to form behind them. Motor vehicles in this queue are being forced to travel in a lower gear which is less efficient and hence causing more pollution to the environment. Slower vehicle journey times m,eans each vehicle is on the road for longer and that road space is 'engaged' for a greater period.
Think you'll find that most cyclists have taken their cycling proffissioncy (sp!) test at some point in their lives and a riding stable would not dream of taking a novice rider out on the road!
Never been delayed by a cyclist myself - usually in built up areas they tend to be travelling faster than me!
Originally posted by b308: Think you'll find that most cyclists have taken their cycling proffissioncy (sp!) test at some point in their lives and a riding stable would not dream of taking a novice rider out on the road!
Never been delayed by a cyclist myself - usually in built up areas they tend to be travelling faster than me!
I get relentlessly held up by cyclists in the PSV. Sometimes there's no way past for miles and it causes huge tailbacks. They make no effort to move over for large vehicles knowing that they can't get by. Sometimes it will take me several minutes to get past a cyclist safely only for it to go through a red light and get past me and have to do it all over again! I had one cyclist the other day who was coming down the outside of traffic queing at the lights, the lights went green, started pulling away, he continued to try to overtake me even though the traffic was becoming faster than him. I didn't really want to let him in as I'd be stuck behind him for miles but had to concede for safety's sake, only to be met by a barrage of hand gestures and abuse! I've had cyclists deliberately squeeze past me instead of easily tucking in behind and letting me on my way, knowing full well they're going to hold me up.
I know not all cyclists are like this and they have every right to be on the road, just a little consideration for other road users wouldn't go amiss.
Air Medic - Mobile Automotive Air Conditioning Service
I ride a bit and I can categorically say that they do not cause huge jams. Overtaking a bike isn't like overtaking a car, you don't have to go on the wrong side as far or for long, and many cyclists, including myself, go onto the pavement briefly if I can foresee some sort of hold up because of me.
I know two people who go horse riding and like b308 said, they have a LOT of experience first and are always supervised. If you see a horse rider on their own chances are they've been riding for 10+ years.
Bikes are the greenest form of travel short of walking.
And again, like someone else said, if I hit a lamppost, it's me and my bike that get damaged. If a car hits a lamppost, it's bent and broken.
And I've 'undertaken' many cars who are going far too slow - and trust me, if a cyclist is going faster than a car on a straight empty road, that driver shouldn't be driving.
Originally posted by Bamford: Yes, if they are brave enough!
aye, some bravery is needed as far too many car drivers don't bother giving room -- that's why you see bicycles side by side or 3 wide .. to force the drivers to give proper consideration -- OR folks just don't bother checking their mirror when they get out of their car .. causing accidents with cyclists crashing into open doors what's needed is driver re-education
Originally posted by mad-g: Yes, cyclists have the right to use the roads, just like everyone else......HOWEVER, they must stop at Red lights and Pedestrian Crossings like decent, civilized people.
Most cyclists are good folks, just as most motorists are decent people. However, a few cyclist have a breathtaking arrogance on the roads that is just as bad as some of the mindless idiots who pull stupid stunts in cars.
Well said. They also tend to use pavements more than roads in our area which is very dangerous for all concerned. Dedicated cyclepaths at the side of roads is the way to go.
Reminds me of a joke - Two pieces of black tarmac are having a drink in a bar when a piece of red tarmac enters 'Don't look him in the eye' says one 'he's a cyclepath!'.
Originally posted by Skullcandy: Yes, cycling is a sustainable way to travel, which is an ethos I support, and I feel the government should support the notion that fewer cars + more cycling = a greener and healthier nation.
No, cyclists should not be on the road and it is most certainly not a green or sustainable way to travel!
Cyclists, like horse riders, have absolutely no official training and do not have to pass any kind of a test to prove their proficiency to be on our roads. Should they be in an accident, even if it is their fault the motorist's insurance would have to pay out as the cyclists have none. They also pay no form of tax, either in the form of Vehicle Excise Duty (Road Tax) or the tax we pay on fuel, which accounts for around 80% of the pump price.
The green credentials of cycling are seriously flawed. They hold up other road users, causing queues of traffic to form behind them. Motor vehicles in this queue are being forced to travel in a lower gear which is less efficient and hence causing more pollution to the environment. Slower vehicle journey times m,eans each vehicle is on the road for longer and that road space is 'engaged' for a greater period.
Andy.
What a load of rubbish.
Plenty of cyclists have had training to be on the road. It's pretty irrelevant point anyway, look how many drivers have passed the driving test but shouldn't be on the road.
Plenty of cyclists have insurance too. In the rare event of the cyclist being at fault, its not true to say that the motorist's insurance would have definitely have to pay out (even if they had any, how many uninsured motorists on the road, millions?)
Cyclists pay no tax on fuel because, erm, they don't use any, and they shouldn't pay road tax as they cause no damage to them and there is no investment in the roads specifically for cyclists.
I think you will find that journey times have become longer over the years due to the increasing number of cars on the road rather than the number of cyclists.
Originally posted by Matt Google: I ride a bit and I can categorically say that they do not cause huge jams.
Come out with me in th coach and I will prove otherwise. Yesterday I was stuck behind a cyclist for about 2 minutes and I couldn't see the end on the queue behind in my mirrors.
Air Medic - Mobile Automotive Air Conditioning Service
Originally posted by Matt Google: I ride a bit and I can categorically say that they do not cause huge jams.
Come out with me in th coach and I will prove otherwise. Yesterday I was stuck behind a cyclist for about 2 minutes and I couldn't see the end on the queue behind in my mirrors.
Is the real issue there not with the cyclist, who could easily have been passed by the cars, but with (depending on your pov) either the road being too small for the coach or the coach being to big for the road?
Getting rid of cyclists just isn't going to happen, so no real point debating it ... but then neither are skinny coaches or, in most cases now, wider roads. Can't really see a solution to it ... bit of soothing music?
_________________________ "Forward", he cried, from the rear, and the front rank died. And the General sat, and the lines on the map moved from side to side.
Plenty of cyclists have insurance. Quite a few motorists don't of course .
I'm one of those that has most forms of road transport - car, motor bike, bike.
Sure it's annoying when a cyclist hogs the middle of the road. But you see similar selfishness amongst car drivers and motor bike riders.
We don't rage against the "selfishness" of the person who didn't service their car and as a result blocks the motorway during rush hour when it breaks down.
It's hardly hard to overtake a cyclist, you don't have to go right over the road like a car, or go over for as long... and I go as far against the kerb as I can without coming off my bike.
Like drivers, some are considerate, some think they own the road.
Originally posted by Matt Google: It's hardly hard to overtake a cyclist, you don't have to go right over the road like a car, or go over for as long... and I go as far against the kerb as I can without coming off my bike.
Like drivers, some are considerate, some think they own the road.
Technically, you are correct, of course. However, I always treat cyclists like small cars and give them bags of room.
---------------------------------------------------- "mad-g" is the display name of "mad-git"
.