Careless cyclists.

monument

The Specialist wrote: »

Well considering every motor vehicle can stop at the red light...

Trolling like this won’t be tolerated.

— moderator

magicbastarder

jon1981 wrote: »

How many years would you have to go back?

it was 2002; a pedestrian died after a cycle courier collided with him. IIRC, the cyclist was going the wrong way up the street so it's possible the victim did not look in the direction the cyclist was coming from.

magicbastarder

another way of contextualising that number - nearly 4,000 people have died on the roads since then.

prinzeugen

What I find funny is that had this been a cyclist/motor vehicle incident, the usual suspects would be shouting about banning cars, phones, red light breaking..

Another motorist maiming a poor cyclist and the driver is automatically at fault and must have been on the phone etc..

Cyclist hits pedestrian.. Pedestrian must have been on the phone etc..

Some excuse to pass the blame onto someone other than the cyclist.

That folks is why cyclists are hated so much. The attitude of a few.

Canis Lupus

prinzeugen wrote: »

What I find funny is that had this been a cyclist/motor vehicle incident, the usual suspects would be shouting about banning cars, phones, red light breaking..

Another motorist maiming a poor cyclist and the driver is automatically at fault and must have been on the phone etc..

Cyclist hits pedestrian.. Pedestrian must have been on the phone etc..

Some excuse to pass the blame onto someone other than the cyclist.

That folks is why cyclists are hated so much. The attitude of a few.

Now that dash cams are so widespread we have entire youtube channels devoted to how sh*t road users are in general and you can often see a clip within of a cyclist doing something dumb or illegal and there are hundreds of comments hating on cyclists despite the users watching a 15+ minute video almost exclusively showing reckless and life endangering driving. I find that odd.

I think every type of road user has this weird us vs them mentality. Must be human nature. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, car drivers, van drivers truck drivers. It's always a different group who is at fault and doesn't know how to use the road. I assume motorists being the biggest percentage on the road is why cyclists get all the hate and whilst cyclists are no angels neither are any other group. The sooner people realise that the better.

Lumen

prinzeugen wrote: »

That folks is why cyclists are hated so much. The attitude of a few.

It's easy to hate. You just find a group of people who share a characteristic, identify a subset of them who annoy you or have wronged you in some way, and tar them all with the same brush.

Not a particularly satisfying way to live life though, holding on to all that hate.

dr.fuzzenstein

LeoB wrote: »

Was just an interesting point. Some of the serious cyclists fairly belt along.

Important to point out this is not an anti-cyclist post just a concern for health and well being of all roads users.

And this is not a large, pink elephant:



That was pretty much /thread right there:

Weepsie wrote: »

Drivers do this all the time too on roundabouts. Some people just don't know how to use them or try to cut ahead by purposely taking the wrong lane.



Some also think that cyclists don't have the same rights of way on them that cars do.

It's not a cyclists problem. It's a people problem
Some people are either idiots, or ignorant.

The rest is garnish. Shure they don't even pay road tax, Joe!

H3llR4iser

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Now that dash cams are so widespread we have entire youtube channels devoted to how sh*t road users are in general and you can often see a clip within of a cyclist doing something dumb or illegal and there are hundreds of comments hating on cyclists despite the users watching a 15+ minute video almost exclusively showing reckless and life endangering driving. I find that odd.

I think every type of road user has this weird us vs them mentality. Must be human nature. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, car drivers, van drivers truck drivers. It's always a different group who is at fault and doesn't know how to use the road. I assume motorists being the biggest percentage on the road is why cyclists get all the hate and whilst cyclists are no angels neither are any other group. The sooner people realise that the better.

I'd say it's for the victim and "holier than thou" mentality that quite a few cyclists show, more or less everywhere. As someone who drives, walks and cycles (at least in stints between bike thefts!!!), I can easily say that the vast majority of near misses I had was while I was crossing at a "green man" and some cyclist came barreling through the crossing with no regard whatsoever. The area around the Grand Canal and in general D2/D4 is particularly bad for this. The fact that most will reply "motorists do that as wel!!!" is exactly part of the problem - brushing the issue aside as "no big deal" when it's a cyclist doing something wrong.

Was in New York two weeks ago, and a similar scene happens on the Brooklyn bridge pedestrian walkway - cyclists bombing along screaming "out of my way!". Sure, there IS a cycling lane there and it DOES happen that pedestrians wander in it - but it's a freaking tourist spot, you need to take that into consideration. People WILL wander, nothing you can do. It's not a place to time your best run or win your personal Tour De France, but it seems lost to a lot of them.

Mind you, I have the same annoyance with runners deciding to do their training on the footpaths at rush hour, when everyone else is trying to go catch a train / bus to go home...it takes a particularly kind of "me first and f@ck everyone else!" kind of mentality. Wait 30 minutes ffs, and you'll have all the space you want

uck51js9zml2yt

masculinist wrote: »

helmets should be compulsory. Thats another thing. You can drone on about safety all you want but if you refuse compulsory helmets while whinging about the dangers of roads then Im just laughing at you

The time I got caught in the luas track with my bike , the only thing that saved me was the bus driver veering away from me.
My helmet and reflective cycle jacket wouldn't have stopped his wheel going over me.

What did possibly save me was my reflective jacket and bright light allowing him see me.

I also drive. At one time professionally.

P_1

masculinist wrote: »

It will work now . They can even put it on the back of compulsory cycle helmets.

Care to provide us with a diagram of said proposal?

beauf

prinzeugen wrote: »

What I find funny is that had this been a cyclist/motor vehicle incident, the usual suspects would be shouting about banning cars, phones, red light breaking..

Another motorist maiming a poor cyclist and the driver is automatically at fault and must have been on the phone etc..

Cyclist hits pedestrian.. Pedestrian must have been on the phone etc..

Some excuse to pass the blame onto someone other than the cyclist.

That folks is why cyclists are hated so much. The attitude of a few.

The original post was about cyclists who almost caused an accident, in fact most stories in this thread are about things that have almost happened.

Yet it's has spawned a 29+ thread lambasting cyclists.

Drive in Ireland and there's similar almost accidents every 5 mins and everyday there are actual accidents that close roads continuously throughout the day. Backed up by real stats.

Where's the 30 page threads for all those actual accidents.

If thread about driving does start usually about undertaking is ok and people driving too slow it isn't filled with non driving cyclists comments.

beauf

We don't have to invent daft laws that won't work. We can copy a country like Holland with a proven successful integration of bikes and cars.

AndrewJRenko

masculinist wrote: »

helmets should be compulsory. Thats another thing. You can drone on about safety all you want but if you refuse compulsory helmets while whinging about the dangers of roads then Im just laughing at you

Yeah, helmets should definitely be compulsory for motorists, given that about 50% of head injuries occur in cars vs about 2% on bikes, even with airbags and seatbelts and all the other safety measures.

The evidence of the value of cycling helmets is sketchy at best. In Australia, compulsory helmets has succeeded in deterring casual cycling, taking lots of teenagers, female cyclists and older cyclists off their bikes and back into there cars, adding significantly to traffic load and reducing population health. Be careful what you wish for.

masculinist wrote: »

It will work now . They can even put it on the back of compulsory cycle helmets.

The tone and attitude above in posts towards my legitimate opinion is appalling by the way. I have been hit by cyclists cycling the wrong way down the street. I have also had a few close calls while holding my daughters hand crossing the road. Cyclists take full advantage of the legal situation car drivers are in and they cycle right up to the limits of the patience and skills of drivers.
Theres a lot of arrogance and desire to dodge accountability from certain characters who cycle on this thread.

The real arrogance is among those who want to divert attention from their own crap driving to fix a cycling 'problem' that statistically doesn't exist. By the way, you still haven't answered my question about whether you ever break the speed limit. Ever?

masculinist wrote: »

He can hurl himself under my car and then sue me or get me blamed . I've had maniac cyclists taking left turns across my bonnet from my right side while I was creeping and peeping to merge from a minor to a major road. Theres no shortage of maniacs on bicycles. He can cause an accident and then flee the scene unidentified.

Indeed, that could happen. It has never happened in Ireland in my lifetime, but theoretically, yes, it could happen. It could also happen that a pedestrian could hurl himself under your car and then sue you and get you blamed, so presumably, you are equally enthusiastic about registration plates for pedestrians?

masculinist wrote: »

And I'm not reading the hysterical gibberish on this page which is designed to waste my time and energy and distract from my main point. You lot can deflect all you want. A cyclist who obeys the rules of the road has nothing to fear from a registration plate

Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant, eh? A cyclist who obeys the rules of the road has everything to fear from a measure that diverts attention from the real dangers on the road - the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week on the roads.

masculinist wrote: »

It would enable me to use dashcam footage to report reckless dangerous cyclists who risk my life and my families lives when I am driving them from A to B

And dont worry about not being held accountable - because the dashcams of the future will only get better as will the cctv.

All I see are a pile of excuses from cyclists for dodging accountability. And personal insults towards drivers such as myself who support accountability for everyone. You cant have it both ways.

If you are witnessing crimes on the road, you should definitely be reporting them to the Gardai and providing them with the relevant dashcam footage now. Leave the identification problem to them - they're pretty good at finding people. Please do post your dashcam footage up here too - given that it apparently happens to you every day, all the time, it should be very easy for you to post up a few examples of this dreadfully dangerous cycling that threatens your life over the next day or two. I'm really open to being convinced, so let's see the videos.

masculinist wrote: »

That was an extremely immature comment. And that's the attitude those people who have valid criticisms and opinions of cyclists have to deal with. I will not allow you to drag my part of the thread down to your level . I gave my opinion as a gentleman unlike you.

Unlike drivers who are easily identifiable by any cycling crank with a video recorder.

Assuming that you weren't referring to the part of the bike that the pedals attach to, this wasn't really very gentlemanly, was it?

masculinist wrote: »

Cyclists are opposing measures which make them more accountable .

Cyclists are opposing measures that distract attention from the drivers that kill and maim every day on the roads.

prinzeugen wrote: »

What I find funny is that had this been a cyclist/motor vehicle incident, the usual suspects would be shouting about banning cars, phones, red light breaking..

Another motorist maiming a poor cyclist and the driver is automatically at fault and must have been on the phone etc..

Can you link to any specific examples of 'the usual suspects shouting about banning cars' or 'driver is automatically at fault' posts? I don't recall seeing any such posts round here, so I'd be interested to see specifically what you've seen.

And are you actually condoning phone use and the endemic red light breaking by motorists?

H3llR4iser wrote: »

I'd say it's for the victim and "holier than thou" mentality that quite a few cyclists show, more or less everywhere. As someone who drives, walks and cycles (at least in stints between bike thefts!!!), I can easily say that the vast majority of near misses I had was while I was crossing at a "green man" and some cyclist came barreling through the crossing with no regard whatsoever. The area around the Grand Canal and in general D2/D4 is particularly bad for this. The fact that most will reply "motorists do that as wel!!!" is exactly part of the problem - brushing the issue aside as "no big deal" when it's a cyclist doing something wrong.

It's not so much that motorists do it 'as well' - they do it so much better than cyclists that they manage to kill one pedestrian each week on average, whereas it is more than 15 years since a cyclist killed a pedestrian. Would the 4,500:1 ratio of deaths over the last 15 years possibly indicate that you're looking in the wrong place for your big deals?

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I assume motorists being the biggest percentage on the road is why cyclists get all the hate and whilst cyclists are no angels neither are any other group. The sooner people realise that the better.

Yeah, certainly the outside thing is a factor - and I guess the frustration of being stuck for all those hours starting down the arse-end of the car in front while working on your Type II Diabetes while cyclists fly past, halving their cancer risk on the way must be a factor too. I think there is also something about the classic bully's fear of their target actually becoming assertive and standing up for themselves. As evidenced by the manly one in this thread, it is 'activist' cyclists that strike particular fear into hearts of these motorists. They got away for years of treating cyclists as 2nd class citizens, assuming that they are too poor to buy a car - but the reality of educated, assertive, eloquent cyclists who can bring facts to a policy debate is just a bit terrifying, apparently.

But beware of the 'sure they're all the same' false equivalence. Only one group of road users kills 3 or 4 people each week on the roads. Here's a hint: it's not cyclists or pedestrians.

H3llR4iser

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's not so much that motorists do it 'as well' - they do it so much better than cyclists that they manage to kill one pedestrian each week on average, whereas it is more than 15 years since a cyclist killed a pedestrian. Would the 4,500:1 ratio of deaths over the last 15 years possibly indicate that you're looking in the wrong place for your big deals?

This kind of comparison is EXACTLY part of the problem; The fact people don't die doesn't mean that the act (ignoring lights and pedestrian crossings) doesn't happen, nor makes it less problematic, nor less infuriating - especially when the violation is committed by someone who constantly points fingers at other categories. It's the same position of someone taking a different stance of other people speeding and himself doing it, because he "never killed anyone".

Being so aware of the danger of the road, you'd expect cyclists to lead by example, but it doesn't happen. Basically a number (the most, I'd say based on pure personal observation) do to pedestrians what they say drivers do to them; The result is different just because of the masses and energies involved.

TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.

uck51js9zml2yt

H3llR4iser wrote: »

This kind of comparison is EXACTLY part of the problem; The fact people don't die doesn't mean that the act (ignoring lights and pedestrian crossings) doesn't happen, nor makes it less problematic, nor less infuriating - especially when the violation is committed by someone who constantly points fingers at other categories. It's the same position of someone taking a different stance of other people speeding and himself doing it, because he "never killed anyone".

Being so aware of the danger of the road, you'd expect cyclists to lead by example, but it doesn't happen. Basically a number (the most, I'd say based on pure personal observation) do to pedestrians what they say drivers do to them; The result is different just because of the masses and energies involved.

TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.

I beeped a cyclist in Gardiner st recently who turned a corner into my path with him breaking the light.
Had another cyclist shout was I serious in beeping the first guy.
2nd cyclist then proceeded to break the next set of lights himself.

Saw an equal number of motorists doing the same thing along with using their phones.

We need enforcement. It's fine having the rules but if they're not enforced what's the point.

bebeman

If you drive a car get a dash cam, relax and dont worry.
DB would alway blame the driver when a bus was involved in a incident with a cyclist, then all the buses where fitted with CCTV, as soon as there is a incident they look at the video, most of the time the driver done nothing wrong and never hears of it again, CCTV is the best thing to ever happen.
Get a dash cam , and dont worry about cyclists, let them worry about themselves

amcalester

bebeman wrote: »

If you drive a car get a dash cam, relax and dont worry.
DB would alway blame the driver when a bus was involved in a incident with a cyclist, then all the buses where fitted with CCTV, as soon as there is a incident they look at the video, most of the time the driver done nothing wrong and never hears of it again, CCTV is the best thing to ever happen.
Get a dash cam , and dont worry about cyclists, let them worry about themselves

Don’t necessarily disagree with this but remember many cyclists also have cameras.

AndrewJRenko

H3llR4iser wrote: »

The fact people don't die doesn't mean that the act (ignoring lights and pedestrian crossings) doesn't happen, nor makes it less problematic, nor less infuriating - especially when the violation is committed by someone who constantly points fingers at other categories. It's the same position of someone taking a different stance of other people speeding and himself doing it, because he "never killed anyone".

You're right to say it doesn't mean that these acts don't happen. But it absolutely does make it less problematic. The problem on our roads is deaths and serious injuries, and cyclists breaking red lights is a negligible factor in this. As for 'infuriating' - your level of infuriation is your problem. I get infuriated by hipsters with beards and bare ankles, but I have no expectation that hipsters as a collective group have some responsibility to ease my infuriation.

And no, it's not the same as saying 'speeding never killed anyone' because speeding does kill people, every week on the roads. And all those people who kill people were absolutely certain that they weren't going to kill anyone, but they did.

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Being so aware of the danger of the road, you'd expect cyclists to lead by example, but it doesn't happen. Basically a number (the most, I'd say based on pure personal observation) do to pedestrians what they say drivers do to them; The result is different just because of the masses and energies involved.

TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.

The main problem here is that you're treating cyclists as a collective group. There is a very good chance that the cyclists who point the fingers (your words) are not the cyclists who are breaking lights. They're just people who happen to chose the same mode of transport on any given day. They have no collective responsibility to each other, and you have no legitimate expectation of any cyclist to influence others.

And as for the hatred disappearing, I don't believe you. If every cyclist magically started obeying red lights tomorrow, the hatred would not disappear. It would move on to the 'mythical' road tax, the maddening lycra (who knew that clothing could cause such infuriation, right?, the 'riding in the middle of the road' and all the other excuses.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

the maddening lycra (who knew that clothing could cause such infuriation, right?

this is the one part of the debate that i find hilarious. the 'dressed like they were in the tour de france' line.
people seem bizarrely focussed on the fact that many cyclists wear clothing which is specifically designed for the activity of cycling.

i have a lovely mental image of these same people standing at the touchline of some junior league football game shouting at the lads on the pitch "LOOK AT YOU, YOU'D SWEAR YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE IN THE FA CUP FINAL WITH YOUR 'BOOTS' AND YOUR 'SHORTS' AND YOUR 'SHINGUARDS'"

LeoB

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If swerving for a pothole causes a collision, that's a pretty good sign that the driver didn't leave anything near enough room to overtake safely. But regardless, why don't you answer your own question about how many cyclists have caused collisions (not accidents).

.

I dont know the answer to how many accidents have been caused. Does anyone have an accurate number? I doubt it.

Need to point out again sadly for the anti brigade, that is ant car or anti bike that this is about safety for people.

Stay safe this weekend folks.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

this is the one part of the debate that i find hilarious. the 'dressed like they were in the tour de france' line.
people seem bizarrely focussed on the fact that many cyclists wear clothing which is specifically designed for the activity of cycling.

It is indeed hilarious and bizarre, partly for the reasons you outline, and partly because no-one seems to have a problem with the mammies in lycra for the school run, or the Lidl run or all the other things they do that don't involve running and cycling. But one lycra-encased-arse on a bike, and all hell breaks lose.

LeoB wrote: »

I dont know the answer to how many accidents have been caused. Does anyone have an accurate number? I doubt it.

There's a reason why no-one has an accurate number - most likely because the number is zero, or if the number is a bit higher, it hasn't happened often enough to become noticed. I've followed these matters fairly closely for 5-ish years, and I've never come across a Court report or a Coroner's Inquest report or a Garda request for help/information relating to the circumstance that you outline. So it's a fair bet that this is a non-issue or at very worst, an insignificant issue.

LeoB wrote: »

Need to point out again sadly for the anti brigade, that is ant car or anti bike that this is about safety for people.

If you really are concerned about safety, you might like to focus on the real issues that we know about as priority - the motorists who kill 3 or 4 people each week on our roads. There's a great opportunity to solve this problem with some fairly straightforward changes in culture and societal attitudes - instead of going searching for problems that don't exist.

Lumen

H3llR4iser wrote: »

TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.

I've been riding by example for ten years and yet the number of stupid rants about cyclists has increased.

Why should I have to answer for the faults of others? Why do I get people accosting me at social functions to rant about cyclists because they've heard that I cycle a lot? I don't get that **** from cyclists when they hear that I drive a car. So who is being unreasonable?

beauf

LeoB wrote: »

I dont know the answer to how many accidents have been caused. Does anyone have an accurate number? I doubt it.

Need to point out again sadly for the anti brigade, that is ant car or anti bike that this is about safety for people.

Stay safe this weekend folks.

Helmets for drivers and pedestrians is also about safety for people.

So is safety shoes for walkers. I've no figures, but it must be true.

Tenzor07

Lumen wrote: »

I've been riding by example for ten years and yet the number of stupid rants about cyclists has increased.

Probably just down to the proliferation of social media type forums and the fact that you don't need to be able to operate a P.C to post comments online, just a phone, so much more simple to sprout a load of one sided carp on subjects a lot have very little if any experience of...

monument

H3llR4iser wrote: »

This kind of comparison is EXACTLY part of the problem; The fact people don't die doesn't mean that the act (ignoring lights and pedestrian crossings) doesn't happen, nor makes it less problematic, nor less infuriating - especially when the violation is committed by someone who constantly points fingers at other categories. It's the same position of someone taking a different stance of other people speeding and himself doing it, because he "never killed anyone".

Being so aware of the danger of the road, you'd expect cyclists to lead by example, but it doesn't happen. Basically a number (the most, I'd say based on pure personal observation) do to pedestrians what they say drivers do to them; The result is different just because of the masses and energies involved.

TL;DR - lead by example, or don't go around pointing fingers. You'll see that the perceived "hatred" for cyclists will magically disappear.

Given the masses and energies involved, I’d expect motorists to “lead by example” more than anybody else.

Not only would the "hatred" for motorists some people have would magically disappear, but thousands of lives would be saved.

kirving

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yeah, helmets should definitely be compulsory for motorists, given that about 50% of head injuries occur in cars vs about 2% on bikes, even with airbags and seatbelts and all the other safety measures.

The evidence of the value of cycling helmets is sketchy at best. In Australia, compulsory helmets has succeeded in deterring casual cycling, taking lots of teenagers, female cyclists and older cyclists off their bikes and back into there cars, adding significantly to traffic load and reducing population health. Be careful what you wish for.

How does that compare per km driven/cycled, or, per hour of use? In a thread about cyclists, how is that of relevance anyway?

Having been hospitalised with a cycling related head injury which would have been far worse without a helmet, I choose to wear one, and I can't see why you (anyone) wouldn't.

I would never make them compulsory however as I agree that it would discourage cycling. As for the macro public health benefits, that means very little when your own head meets the pavement.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But beware of the 'sure they're all the same' false equivalence. Only one group of road users kills 3 or 4 people each week on the roads. Here's a hint: it's not cyclists or pedestrians.

And in all cases of pedestrians and cyclists dying on the roads, none were even partially at fault, ever?

07Lapierre

Kevin Irving wrote: »

.

And in all cases of pedestrians and cyclists dying on the roads, none were even partially at fault, ever?

There were 15 cyclists killed on our roads last year. From what I read (and this is just my opinion), there were two fatalities where the cyclist's may have contributed to the accident due to their own inexperience. I didn't read anything about the other 13 incidents that would indicate who was at fault. IMO, it could also be argued that if the truck drivers involved were more experienced/cyclist aware, they would have exercised more caution when turning left. It could also be argued that the layout of the junctions were dangerous (for cyclists)

I also remender last year reading about a schoolboy that was killed while crossing the road. And i recall reading about a pedestrian that collapsed onto the road and was run over by a car, but that was a few years ago.

Not sure what can be deduced from such small numbers though. Our roads are dangerous places unless your surrounded by a metal box, airbags etc.?

AndrewJRenko

Kevin Irving wrote: »

How does that compare per km driven/cycled, or, per hour of use? In a thread about cyclists, how is that of relevance anyway?

What's that got to do with anything? If you want to reduce head injuries, surely starting where the vast majority of head injuries are happening is the obvious place to start?

07Lapierre wrote: »

There were 15 cyclists killed on our roads last year. From what I read (and this is just my opinion), there were two fatalities where the cyclist's may have contributed to the accident due to their own inexperience. I didn't read anything about the other 13 incidents that would indicate who was at fault. IMO, it could also be argued that if the truck drivers involved were more experienced/cyclist aware, they would have exercised more caution when turning left. It could also be argued that the layout of the junctions were dangerous (for cyclists)

I also remender last year reading about a schoolboy that was killed while crossing the road. And i recall reading about a pedestrian that collapsed onto the road and was run over by a car, but that was a few years ago.

So in summary;

• Cycling deaths/injuries are a small percentage of overall deaths on the roads (about 5% of deaths)
• Cycling deaths/injuries caused by cyclists are a tiny percentage of cycling deaths

So why the obsession with all the terrible things that cyclists do - when the real source of the real danger on the roads is very clear - crap drivers, speeding drivers, texting drivers (like the Porsche guy who passed me today with zero hands on the wheel, two hands on the phone), drinking drivers.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So why the obsession with all the terrible things that cyclists do

because most drivers (most people?) see cycling as closer to driving than to walking. which, to be fair, has some basis in logic - bikes use the road and are subject to many of the same laws.
whereas cyclists probably see themselves closer to pedestrians on that spectrum.

but a large part of it is the 'i'd do the same in that situation' blind eye many motorists turn to the behaviour of other motorists. running an amber or red light, doing 65 in a 50 zone - you're not going to criticise another driver for doing something you know that you do yourself. but for most motorists, there's no 'arrah, sure i do that myself and it's fine' reaction with the behaviour of cyclists, because they simply don't do that themselves. so when they see a cyclist breaking the ROTR, the reaction is consistently negative.

Carawaystick

07Lapierre wrote: »

Not sure what can be deduced from such small numbers though. Our roads are dangerous places unless your surrounded by a metal box, airbags etc.?

Or our roads are dangerous places because you're surrounded by metal boxes. Remove them and very few people would be killed on the roads.