What have people got against cyclists?

[mattc]

The owner(s) of Toyota owe their jobs (and millions of pounds) to motorised commutes - that will not persuade me that driving to work is a good thing!

As for "telling people what to do" - well tough. Sometimes its a necessary breech of politeness; to point out to some people that they are f**king over many other people.

I feel a Godwinism coming on (the sort that involves Adolf, not Tommy!)

[TimC]

Maybe one of the things people have against cyclists is cyclists telling them how to live? Just sayin'.

Apols if my post read as telling someone how to live. It wasn't intended that way - more as a boggle at the weirdness of the world these days.

I don't think "the answer" is to tell people how to live their lives. Asking people to stop driving is about as realistic as asking the the clouds to stop raining. Both cars and rain can infringe my cycling idyll - but I just need to gnash my teeth a bit and get on with it.

Equally, no point in hoping for the govt to spend money on minority infrastructure. They only do what will get them votes from a majority - and the majority drive cars. That's just the way it is.

"The answer" is simply to revel in all that's good about cycling (and/or being car-free). Tell people about it. Open their eyes to some of their odd habits and dependencies. Maybe some will follow your lead. Maybe none will. But, whatever, you'll have had the benefit of riding a bike - and also have a positive framework in which to hold the experience. Which is far better for you than the "cycling is Hell, let me tell you a scary horror story - and everyone hates us sob sob" mentality that I keep coming across in cycling circles.

No worries - and I totally agree with your last paragraph!

[TimC]

The owner(s) of Toyota owe their jobs (and millions of pounds) to motorised commutes - that will not persuade me that driving to work is a good thing!

As for "telling people what to do" - well tough. Sometimes its a necessary breech of politeness; to point out to some people that they are f**king over many other people.

I feel a Godwinism coming on (the sort that involves Adolf, not Tommy!)

Well, the thing is you're not in a position to tell people what to do, and they will resent it if you try. If you must have a Godwinism, it's really only in a dictatorship that a solution can be imposed - and, of course, what is imposed is a solution only in the eyes of the dictator, not those who have it imposed on them!

If you want change, you have to take people with you not harangue, chastise and badger them. And you have to be prepared to see your 'solution' be adapted and evolve and take a different direction than you'd envisaged as people with different opinions influence the outcome.

[P Walsh]

This whole debate on the role of cars and how much we do or don't need them depends largely on where you live and work. Like many who live in a village, and whose nearest towns are small, I would have real problems without access to a car

Indeed. Cheap, easy, and subsidised private motoring is what you enables to live in clean air of the countryside while depending on town for work, leisure, commerce, etc.

Most people living in the country these days are in exactly your position. Probably not realising how much the car both enables their lifestyle and also encourages it.

Today (Sunday) I could stand at the bus stop all day and see no buses go by. Tomorrow I have to get my teenage daughter to and from school (roughly 7 miles away) and she does not want to arrive sweaty.

Ahh, diddums.

Hey. Guess what? If you didn't have a car, you'd not need one. Either she'd learn to ride sedately, or you'd live somewhere which didn't require a tonne or two of resources and miles of bespoke concrete infrastructure to get from home to destination.

Avoiding the busy bits of road would add a mile or two and would make it more hilly. She won't do it. So I take her and a neighbour's boy in the car, and the neighbour brings them back. Public transport would turn a short trip into a long expedition as the buses go to the wrong town and a change would be involved. School buses are not provided because we chose (and would choose again) a school for which we are just outside the catchment and the County Council does not want to encourage others to do the same.

(My wife usually cycles to work and back, and she loves it. Mainly rural lanes and tolerable traffic.)

Another thing that is different is fuel efficiency, which is much better on rural roads. And the lower density of traffic means air quality is very good. I drive a diesel with no concerns. We try not to make too many trips in the car, and it is our only car.

Of course you have no concerns. Few people do. That's the bloody problem!

Calm down. We're singing from the same hymn sheet. Of course I realise that my lifestyle is dependent on a car, and that there are problems with that. I'm just telling it the way it is, warts and all.

My central point was that the choices available in a large metropolis are not the same as those in a rural area or a small town. The practicalities are different. The benefits of cars are greater outside cities, and the drawbacks are smaller.

And I suspect that anti-cycling sentiment is less outside cities, but I don't know that for a fact.

[hellymedic]

There is plenty of anti-cycling sentiment for mass cycling events.
Other expressions of anti-cycling sentiment are displayed in the way crashes are investigated and followed up.

[P Walsh]

There is plenty of anti-cycling sentiment for mass cycling events.
Other expressions of anti-cycling sentiment are displayed in the way crashes are investigated and followed up.

I watched Welsh TV coverage of the controversy over the recent Velothon Wales event (with subsequent tacks incident) and the reporting was not anti-cycling. The opposition to the event was also not openly anti-cycling. It was all about roads being closed for 8 hours or more. If it had been my local B-road I might have been a bit miffed too, so I can relate to those concerns. It can come over as outsiders taking over your community for a day and saying "keep off".

[mattc]

The owner(s) of Toyota owe their jobs (and millions of pounds) to motorised commutes - that will not persuade me that driving to work is a good thing!

As for "telling people what to do" - well tough. Sometimes its a necessary breech of politeness; to point out to some people that they are f**king over many other people.

I feel a Godwinism coming on (the sort that involves Adolf, not Tommy!)

Well, the thing is you're not in a position to tell people what to do, and they will resent it if you try. If you must have a Godwinism, it's really only in a dictatorship that a solution can be imposed - and, of course, what is imposed is a solution only in the eyes of the dictator, not those who have it imposed on them!

Nonsense!

Society operates around justice and fairness. We make laws to stop people doing selfish things - you know, like
theft,
racial discrimination
tax evasion,
rape.

We dont stop to get the rapists' permissions to pass such laws!

[ian]

I'm not absolutely against cars (as I have one, albeit rarely used), but I'm against the tyranny of motor vehicles, that we've become utterly dependent on them. I was sitting in the cinema yesterday and all the adverts were about smooth and sexy cars, sliding down empty roads through perfect countryside. Well groomed men extolling the virtues of their sports car, happy nuclear families bundling into their SUV on happy family adventures. Not one of them sitting in a wake of another argument in a fume belching BMW on Brighton Rd on a Saturday morning so they can go stare dully at consumer goods. Another day in the car that sucks up so much money, trapped in competition with peers for a slightly better marque, caught up in bills, and endless parking anxiety. Having to drive everywhere. To distant work, to distant shops, paying out of our own pockets to do so, while others accrue the benefits. The constant rumble of traffic. The breath of pollution. It does on and on. It's a con trick.

The future generation will boggle when they look back, if for no better reason, that we kill 30,000 people a year, and impair the lives of so many more through our obsession.

[De Sisti]

I was sitting in the cinema yesterday and all the adverts were about smooth and sexy cars, sliding down empty roads through perfect countryside. Well groomed men extolling the virtues of their sports car, happy nuclear families bundling into their SUV on happy family adventures. Not one of them sitting in a wake of another argument in a fume belching BMW on Brighton Rd on a Saturday morning so they can go stare dully at consumer goods. Another day in the car that sucks up so much money, trapped in competition with peers for a slightly better marque, caught up in bills, and endless parking anxiety. Having to drive everywhere. To distant work, to distant shops, paying out of our own pockets to do so, while others accrue the benefits. The constant rumble of traffic. The breath of pollution. It does on and on.


It's a con trick.

People fall for it. Especially those who want a different vehicle every 3 years or so.

[TimC]

The owner(s) of Toyota owe their jobs (and millions of pounds) to motorised commutes - that will not persuade me that driving to work is a good thing!

As for "telling people what to do" - well tough. Sometimes its a necessary breech of politeness; to point out to some people that they are f**king over many other people.

I feel a Godwinism coming on (the sort that involves Adolf, not Tommy!)

Well, the thing is you're not in a position to tell people what to do, and they will resent it if you try. If you must have a Godwinism, it's really only in a dictatorship that a solution can be imposed - and, of course, what is imposed is a solution only in the eyes of the dictator, not those who have it imposed on them!

Nonsense!

Society operates around justice and fairness. We make laws to stop people doing selfish things - you know, like
theft,
racial discrimination
tax evasion,
rape.

We dont stop to get the rapists' permissions to pass such laws!

Ok, try passing a law that we can't use cars and we must ride or walk! Any government that tried it - or anything that significantly moved in that direction - would soon find itself out of a job. Permanently.

[mattc]

Society and government take plenty of more subtle measures.

For one thing, we already ban the driving of cars in certain places. We ban driving cars that do not have the right emission controls. Or certified braking systems.

We have many many "sticks" to discourage anti-social behaviours e.g. parking fines, taxation in many non-transport areas.

These things have been around for centuries. There is no need to simply roll over and plead with the nasty selfish people to be nicer to the rest of us. Be a man and fucking stand for something, Tim!

[TimC]

You can hector me all you like, Matt. I'm not the target you seek, however. I already do my shopping by bike, drive the smallest car I can reasonably live with (a Fiesta), and agitate for greater cycling and pedestrian provision at every opportunity. I don't live in a city or town, so my direct experience of, and influence on, the problems of urban congestion are limited. But I'm also a realist, and I understand that people need to be persuaded, not told what to do. If you - and by 'you' I mean local or national politicians - attempt to impose major lifestyle changes on people without a mandate to do so, they will resist and you will have lost. If you convince, by the power of argument and example, people that a different behaviour is beneficial, they will - maybe reluctantly, and with some wailing - accept the changes and learn to live with them. In essence, that is happening now. No, it's not fast enough and the intermediate goals aren't sufficiently ambitious for those already convinced of the benefits, but that's because the argument has not yet been won. It won't be won by diktat, however much you wish otherwise.

[mattc]

Its interesting that you see me as "hectoring" and "targeting" you.

This strand blossomed mainly out of jo* pointing out all the harm motorists do. Then drivers started leaping up and down, wailing about their right to use these devices. We weren't telling you what to do - merely telling you all the harm you are doing.

But then you started wailing about being "harangued, chastised and badgered". Its a sort of reflexive - and rather guilty sounding - defence mechanism.


*A post good enough to be worth repeating:

The lives of millions of people are inconvenienced by people each thinking their own lives are made more convenient using a car.

Lack of access to clean air is inconvenient. Roadsides full of parked cars are inconvenient. Denying kids football in the street is inconvenient. Scaring children away from riding or walking to school is inconvenient. Preventing two people who see each other on opposite sides of a busy road having a friendly chat is inconvenient. Being kept awake by traffic noise is inconvenient. Taking two hours to cross a congested city is inconvenient. Potholes and broken kerbs are inconvenient. Being hit by an inattentive driver is inconvenient. Being scared off the road by speeding drivers is inconvenient. Having to clean the grime off shop fronts from thousands of exhausts is inconvenient. Forcing the police to deal with thousands of car-related crimes is inconvenient. Disposing of thousands of unwanted dumped vehicles is inconvenient.

Sometimes inconvenience is so normalised we forget we can do something about it.

[TimC]

Ok, so when does your revolution take place? Or are you all hot air?

[Riggers]

Boys, boys, boys!!

Last Thursday and Friday, I was working in London, and used m'bike to commute from West Hampstead to Tower Bridge and back, and I have to say everybody seemed to behave themselves. Mostly. From personal observation, what irked me about m'fellow road users, was mostly to do with other cyclists. I was still seeing people squeezing up the sides of buses, getting to the head of traffic lights and plonking themselves directly in front of vehicles to make some kind of 'point' I guess, though can't imagine what.

Oh well.

Friend treated me to a very nice pint on Thursday of Beavertown Sump Oil (or Snake Oil) or something like that at The Red Cow pub. Very nice too. And so it should be at £6.00 a pint!!

[caerau]

It's a pretty good idea to 'plonk yourself in front of a vehicle' at traffic lights surely?  Prevents the F1 start that seems to be favoured by some and also an immediate left hook.

[Kim]

It's a pretty good idea to 'plonk yourself in front of a vehicle' at traffic lights surely?  Prevents the F1 start that seems to be favoured by some and also an immediate left hook.

Ostensibly yes, but I prefer the 'plonk yourself behind a vehicle at traffic lights' manoeuvre.  If the fast vehicles are in front of you, then there's no overtaking to worry about.

Yes, I'm filtering averse, but when I do it it's because the traffic is jammed solid for some distance, rather than because a queue has formed at a light that will clear if I wait half a minute.

[Ruthie]

It's a pretty good idea to 'plonk yourself in front of a vehicle' at traffic lights surely?  Prevents the F1 start that seems to be favoured by some and also an immediate left hook.

Ostensibly yes, but I prefer the 'plonk yourself behind a vehicle at traffic lights' manoeuvre.

Yes, I'm filtering averse, but when I do it it's because the traffic is jammed solid for some distance, rather than because a queue has formed at a light that will clear if I wait half a minute.

Me too.

Filtering on the left:  horrible idea.  Nobody expects to see you there and their concentration is mostly in front waiting for the lights, not on their mirrors.

[Kim]

Filtering on the right isn't much fun either.

It isn't helped by the only bike I feel confident^[1] filtering on - the Brompton - having a cloak of invisibility effect.


_{[1] Due to various combinations of bar width, turning circle and ability to see over the top of cars.}

[mcshroom]

I'm not a fan of filtering either (don't get much practice out here), though I can see the appeal of being on the left. On the right if you don't time it right yu can get stranded a line of cars accelerating past you on either side.

[Riggers]

Been cycling now for 50 years boys and girls, and can pretty accurately discern when approaching sets of lights: when it's advantageous to be at the head of the queue, when to hold back ("they're gonna change soon!"), what the approach of a vehicle tells you about the driver and their attitude to moving off from the lights is going to be, taking a quick scan ahead, left and right beyond the lights, and I'm sure we all do these things. At junctions, and areas that engage the cyclist and other road users (include zebra crossings here) you have to adopt a more relaxed, less aggressive demeanour than one might have say, for the open sections of a road. Give and take I say.

My trust in other road users, which includes for the most part here, car drivers, has diminished hugely over the last 5-10 years, and I would say that is largely due to the increase in vehicle use. We pay for it of course, but what can you do? I'm prattling on as usual, as this particular subject matter has been covered infinitum elsewhere. So I'll stop.

And I'm not an old fart.

[Veloman]

... My trust in other road users, which includes for the most part here, car drivers, has diminished hugely over the last 5-10 years .....

My trust in other road users is zero and always treat them as completely irrational and likely to do the ridiculous.  That way, I hope to survive for a little longer when using the roads.

[P Walsh]

Relating the original question to this stuff, one thing British people tend to hate is queue jumpers. It's in our psyche. If you thread your way around standing traffic then plonk yourself in front of the centre of the bonnet of a car whose driver has been waiting for a while, you will not be greeted with warmth and affection. Brits, for better or worse, hate someone pushing in, regardless of vehicle type.

This reaction is (I hope) more muted where there is an advanced stop line for cyclists, since that is where we are supposed to be.

[Basil]

I'm not a fan of filtering either (don't get much practice out here), though I can see the appeal of being on the left. On the right if you don't time it right yu can get stranded a line of cars accelerating past you on either side.

You'd have to be pretty inattentive to get your timing wrong.  Lines of traffic are not like railway trains.  They don't all move off together.  I pay attention to what's going on ahead.  If a gap appears, either they're beginning to move/speed up and I pick my spot to move back into line, or someone is giving way to a vehicle from the side or a ped.

The moving to the front, no matter what, I just don't get.  Particularly with large vehicles.  I'd much rather follow a bus or truck through a crossing than have it follow me.

[Si_Co]

I'm not a fan of filtering either (don't get much practice out here), though I can see the appeal of being on the left. On the right if you don't time it right yu can get stranded a line of cars accelerating past you on either side.

I am a fan of filtering, tbh there's not much choice unless you want an 18k commute to take 2 hours. I always prefer filtering on the right, it just seems to work out better. It helps when you can out accelerate a lot of cars as they make that pause between first and second gear, but as others have said its really about picking your gap in advance, mobile phone users create plenty of them.