Is it finally time to tax our Lycra clad cyclists ?

[Taylor]

Motorists are held accountable for their actions when caught and there are speed cameras, traffic stops, bus lane cameras, cars with cameras to track if someone went into a bus lane etc etc etc.

Cyclists arent held accountable for anything and dont give two shites about anyone

[oisinog]

At the end of the day there are dicks who drive cars and dicks who ride bikes.

For info I do both I cycle to work a couple of days a week and I drive a couple of days a week.

For every youtube video of a bad cyclist I can show you a bad one of a driver so it works both ways.

The biggest problem both North and South are our roads are not designed for modren cars never mind modren cars and cyclists.

We need a bit of give and take from all road users

[Tony Baloney]

At the end of the day there are dicks who drive cars and dicks who ride bikes.

For info I do both I cycle to work a couple of days a week and I drive a couple of days a week.

For every youtube video of a bad cyclist I can show you a bad one of a driver so it works both ways.

The biggest problem both North and South are our roads are not designed for modren cars never mind modren cars and cyclists.

We need a bit of give and take from all road users

Four day week must be nice.

[Puckoon]

Regardless of the debate - anyone who wants to classify the cyclists on the basis of what they're wearing is showing themselves up to be the traditional bog hopping, begrudging curmudgeon fool that's been berating anyone who stepped outside of the norm for years. Probably complained back in the day about the lads that wore white boots, the lads that had a fancy haircut, the lads who were too tan, the lads who had tattoos or ear rings, the lads who own a nice car or the first guy to wear under armour on a cold league day. Those lads are all winning medals with clubs and counties and it doesn't matter a shite what they wore or how they did it.

Got no interest in cycling - but some of you should cop yourself on with the lycra nonsense around here. Bunchawankers

[dclane]

Regardless of the debate - anyone who wants to classify the cyclists on the basis of what they're wearing is showing themselves up to be the traditional bog hopping, begrudging curmudgeon fool that's been berating anyone who stepped outside of the norm for years. Probably complained back in the day about the lads that wore white boots, the lads that had a fancy haircut, the lads who were too tan, the lads who had tattoos or ear rings, the lads who own a nice car or the first guy to wear under armour on a cold league day. Those lads are all winning medals with clubs and counties and it doesn't matter a shite what they wore or how they did it.

All of them? What kind of nonsense are you talking.

[Eamonnca1]

Oh dear so everyone who doesn't ride 80 miles is a fat clown, bet you are on of the pricks skip red lights and weave between cars when traffic is slow, be some out cry if a motorist weaved between a slow moving group of cyclists - one rule for one set of road user and none for thw arrogant fuckwits on bikes.

Oh please! If cyclists ran red lights at the rate we're accused of we'd be extinct within a week. I obey all red lights because I want to get there alive, which is more than I can say for the drivers who think that red means "stop after three seconds, but it's okay for about three more cars to go through in the meantime." And as for weaving through traffic, lane-splitting is perfectly legal where I live. Motorbikes can do it and so can I. So suck it up.

[Eamonnca1]

Jesus! A lot of anger on this thread.... get a bit of perspective, nearly 70 people died on the roads last year, bad driving, drunk driving, texting or on phone.... drivers would need to get their act together

exactly - start with the morons on phones before worrying about cyclists i'd suggest.

Hear hear. About 50 pedestrians get killed by drivers in San Francisco every year. But once, a few years ago, one pedestrian was killed by a cyclist. Guess which case got wall-to-wall media coverage?

[Eamonnca1]

See here's the thing. There's literally a thousand active pastimes people can engage in. But cycling is the one that inconveniences other people going about their lives, more than any other leisure pursuit.

You and other cyclists believe you have the right to take "ownership" of roads.... yet these roads which cost thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of pounds per yard  to build and maintain, were not actually built for cyclists.

That said I'm more than happy that they have a multi purpose function and I'd even go so far as to encourage cycling. But, only when they're cognisant of their status; so if they're holding up normal traffic flows they pull over until it's restored, if they are behaving in a way that makes the road less safe for its other users, they are penalised and then banned for multiple infractions.

Is that really too much to ask?

Oh get over yourself, you self-important twerp. You expect me to move over an encourage an unsafe pass just so you can shave a few milliseconds off your trip to the off-license for a six-pack of beer and tube of Pringles? What makes your journey so important? Chances are you're going to be sitting behind me at the next red light anyway, so you might as well listen to the radio, relax, and stop thinking you're in such a hurry.

BTW, roads in the US were initially paved because cyclists lobbied for it. So roads were not "built for cars." Oh and cyclists pay more than their fair share of taxes to fund them, so don't give me any of your "motorists own the road" guff. It's a shared resource. Get over it.

[Eamonnca1]

Do cyclists in any way contribute to the upkeep of the roads that they use?

If runners are out on the road do they run 3, 4 or even 5 abreast?

If runners were able to cruise at 20MPH and get up to 40MPH then you might have some sort of point. But you don't. So put a sock in it.

[Eamonnca1]

And another thing. What's up with the title of this thread? We don't give out about soccer players wearing soccer shorts, or runners wearing running gear when out for a run, or swimmers wearing swimming gear in the pool. Anybody who gives out about cyclists wearing cycling gear when cycling needs their head examined. Try riding a bike 80 miles in a pair of denim jeans and let me know how comfortable that is, you depressingly fat clowns.

Its because the Lyrca brigade are the worst culprits. Can you not just get a bike machine attachment and plonk yourself in the back garden for 80 miles instead?

No thanks. I'll just let you stay off the road and order your groceries online since you hate sharing the road so much.

[dclane]

Have you anger issues Eamonn?

[Eamonnca1]

Plenty of cyclists use their phone to text and whatever whilst cycling.

Bumkum. I've seen it about twice in my life ever. I wish I could say the same about motorists.

[Eamonnca1]

Lol. It's funny how no cyclist has ever done it when you ask them yet 99% of the ones I see do it when I'm out driving.

Well put the phone down and you'll see plenty of cyclists waiting patiently for the light to turn green.

[dclane]

Have you anger issues Eamonn?

[Eamonnca1]

2 abreast vs. single file - the guideline is very clear, as pointed out by Tony Baloney. But the lycra troop overwhelmingly insist on riding 2 abreast in all circumstances, including on very narrow roads and on bends. It seems to have become a dogma for them and from their rhetoric it's clear that it's a militant claiming of equality with motorised traffic.

That's just very stupid, as wobbler pointed out, not to mention the basic good manners argument. You don't see pedestrians walking two-or-more abreast on roads where there is no footpath, militantly claiming their right to hold up traffic whose normal pace is much higher than theirs. There's a practical reason beyond good manners for that. Pedestrians understand a simple logic that seems to evade cyclists as an organised group.

Another basic example of good manners that I've never seen cyclists use - when they're out in large groups, why do they insist on forming a continuous line, be it single file or two-or-more abreast? A basic courtesy would be to travel in pairs with gaps of 50 metres or so. But I suppose that wouldn't look like a peloton.

Oh and to the argument that there are arseholes behind the wheels of many cars - who has ever denied that? This thread, though, is about arsehole cyclists.

I'm going to explain this nice and slowly because it's clear that you're a simpleton. Riding in a single group, two abreast, makes it quicker, safer, and easier to overtake. Riding in a single line makes the group twice as long and hence almost impossible to get past on winding roads with short overtaking opportunities. Breaking the group up into small sections would make it even harder for you to get past because you'd have to repeat the process several times. You're welcome.

And shut up about runners. They can't cruise at 20MPH or get up to 40MPH, plus they have to go against traffic where there's no footpath. Stop opening your mouth and revealing to the world how stupid you are.