28-07-2020, 11:34 AM
41
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by OldGreyFox
->
Good point Marciniak, however; What about off road cyclists? And most cyclists couldn't even ride at 20mph. And what good is insurance? If a cyclist hit anyone they would come of worst, and will probably avoid running into stuff based on that fact. Most of the accidents that I'm aware of are usually caused by the motorist/pedestrian....You should read Dex's link.....
28-07-2020, 11:34 AM
42
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by spitfire
->
it's like anything else, some folks get on a bike and dawdle along, ok, as far as fitness goes the joints are moving but, very few calories will be burnt and of light impact on the cardiovascular system, the you get the predominantly geezers who blast along head down, burning calories like there is no tomorrow but defeating one of the objectives of cycling like taking in the scenery and surroundings, that can't be pleasurable, probably, just like running, to have any physical benefit you should be somewhere in the middle, slightly physically uncomfortable but, fully aware of the freedom and surroundings, bit like foxy, on an eight miler.
28-07-2020, 11:37 AM
43
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by monkeypuzzle
->
It is more often than not the cyclists who put themselves in danger.
It explains it a lot better than I could....
28-07-2020, 11:39 AM
44
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by Roxy
->
In some places maybe BUT these are the roads I have to use daily. Not a place for bikes at all.
Awesome!
28-07-2020, 11:44 AM
45
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by Dextrous63
->
There is an argument for making all drivers ride a bike (perhaps even virtually) as part of their test so they are aware of what it "feels like" to cycle on a main road. They might then be less likely to endanger cyclists, in addition to understanding why a cyclist might have to swerve out due to an obstacle (such as a drain grid), and also deter them from parking in cycle lanes.
I agree with what you say.... But would add cyclists who drive cars, have a much better understanding of traffic than cyclists who don't drive...Well most Imo.
Experience of both is best (needed)
28-07-2020, 11:50 AM
46
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by OldGreyFox
->
You should read Dextrous's link Monkey Puzzle, it explains the reasons why Tests, Tax and licences are not a good idea...It explains it a lot better than I could....
28-07-2020, 12:05 PM
47
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by monkeypuzzle
->
The link is nonsense, imo.
28-07-2020, 12:11 PM
48
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by OldGreyFox
->
Good point Marciniak, however; What about off road cyclists? And most cyclists couldn't even ride at 20mph. And what good is insurance? If a cyclist hit anyone they would come of worst, and will probably avoid running into stuff based on that fact. Most of the accidents that I'm aware of are usually caused by the motorist/pedestrian....You should read Dex's link.....
No... a 20 mph speed limit for all traffic.
Mind here we get groups from clubs out early Sunday morning, they go a lot faster than 20 mph.
Insurance.. incase a cyclists hits a pedestrian, goes into the back of a car, granted damage would mostly be minimal... mind I can think of a few, if they were hit by an insured cyclist on a crossing.
They wouldn't be able to walk for 6 months, plus the psychological damage...
28-07-2020, 12:26 PM
49
Re: Anti Cyclists
Originally Posted by OldGreyFox
->
Fair enough MP, you're obviously not a cyclist then?
|
|
