Media demonisation of cyclists, there's more.

dondare

spen666 wrote:

Risk? Cycling has less deaths per km traveleed than walking/ driving etc

Cycling has fewer deaths per km than walking but more than driving; all three are reasonably safe.
I wonder what we'd think of motorists who drove on the pavement because they found the behaviour of other motorists intimidating?

dondare

AndyManc wrote:

I'll just point out that there will be punters on forums like this that hate cyclists and have never ridden a bike in their life.

They will be here under false pretences .... try and see through their propaganda.

I don't see why there should be, but it sometimes occurs to me that if an anti-cyclist were to troll on this forum then they'd probably act as an agent provocateur, inciting and justifying bad behavior rather than condeming it.

biondino

AndyManc wrote:

I'll just point out that there will be punters on forums like this that hate cyclists and have never ridden a bike in their life.

They will be here under false pretences .... try and see through their propaganda.

Ah, so THAT'S the point of meanwhile....

zaynan

I can't beleive I've just read 9 pages of forum posts - it was the most tedious thing I've ever read! Thankfully we are all sat at our lecterns, sorry, computers - imagine the carnage of we were all in the pub!

It's really dissapointing that people seem to be at odds with each other and we are all cyclists on here (aren't we?) Just remember, the law is the law is the law. Cycling on pavements is illegal (yes that's where this all started!) I hope the girl in Gloucester makes a full recovery and I hope, for the reputation of cyclists at least, that the cyclist was not breaking the law.

dondare

zaynan wrote:

I can't beleive I've just read 9 pages of forum posts - it was the most tedious thing I've ever read!

I hope you don't include my posts in that blanket condemnation, I'm sure that I'm not at all tedious.

AndyManc

Cyclists flout law 'to stay safe'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7478823.stm


Nice to see the CTC agreeing with me .... not that I needed their affirmation.

If there was a 2 fingered smiley I would be using it to a number of individuals ,,, who are not cyclists in any way shape of form.

dondare

By describing your type of cycling as antisocial? Yes, I agree with that, too.

always_tyred

So what's the story on Meanwhile? i.e. on what are you basing the "not a cyclist in any way shape or form" comment? Surely he's not a white van man infiltrating the forum? But he asked me around to his house for cakes and to see his puppies!

AndyManc

Quote Dondare " By describing your type of cycling as antisocial? Yes, I agree with that, too. "

The CTC never said that ... thats a quote from the fascist BBC.

Always Tyred wrote:

So what's the story on Meanwhile? i.e. on what are you basing the "not a cyclist in any way shape or form" comment? Surely he's not a white van man infiltrating the forum? But he asked me around to his house for cakes and to see his puppies!

Who mentioned 'meanwhile' ..... not me :roll:

always_tyred

I see too many colourful ties on the BBC for them to be of that political persuasion.

I just think that their journalists are increasingly over paid and sloppy. I bet that guy earns £50k or something like that and he can't be arsed to read the Highway Code. And don't get me started on science and technology reports - get a good English or PPE graduate on that story!

Almost exclusively (on Breakfast anyway) they appear to be chubby Londoners also. I remember when there was a report on something or other, ending with, "And if you want to see XXX near where you live, it will be coming to London next weekend."

Eh? I live 300 miles away, and 5 out of 6 people in te UK do not live in greater London.

And they closed down the radiophonic workshop!

dondare

AndyManc wrote:

Quote Dondare " By describing your type of cycling as antisocial? Yes, I agree with that, too. "

The CTC never said that ... thats a quote from the fascist BBC.

It's the CTC policy co-ordinator, Chris Peck, that they're quoting.

Mr Peck said: "Most cyclists obey the rules of the road, there is only a minority that cycle anti-socially, like breaking red lights and cycle on pavements...."

Also Roger Geffen, CTC campaigns and policy manager, who admits that "Some people are just anti-social, and some drive cars and some ride bicycles."

dondare

Always Tyred wrote:

I see too many colourful ties on the BBC for them to be of that political persuasion.

I just think that their journalists are increasingly over paid and sloppy. I bet that guy earns £50k or something like that and he can't be arsed to read the Highway Code. And don't get me started on science and technology reports - get a good English or PPE graduate on that story!

Almost exclusively (on Breakfast anyway) they appear to be chubby Londoners also. I remember when there was a report on something or other, ending with, "And if you want to see XXX near where you live, it will be coming to London next weekend."

Eh? I live 300 miles away, and 5 out of 6 people in te UK do not live in greater London.

And they closed down the radiophonic workshop!

But; London Is Where It's At.

always_tyred

Ah, its an acronym.... Bliwia.... maybe it is not an acronym...

Well, its fair to say that London is not the worst place in the UK to live. Unfortunately the nearest spectacular scenery is in Wales, so it doesn't do it for me.

I just fundamentally object to smug overpaid chubby tossers on the BBC who's idea of the outdoors is a beer garden in Richmond and who use adjectives such as "spectacular" to describe the south downs (I mean, honestly, you must realise that its one of the most geographically unremarkable places on the planet?)

I object to loads of other things, but I'm fixating on this just now.

richardast

BBC news has developed a tendency over the last few years to attempt to try to entertain rather than report.
These kind of mini-debate/interviews that they largely conduct on Breakfast remind me of the occasions when I've had the misfortune to catch a few minutes of Trisha or Kilroy. Sort of like chav-baiting for broadsheet readers.

I think that because our ruling classes are a bit more careful with their misdemeanours these days, there's less to report in the way of juicy gossip to get people outraged. As a result, they make a big deal out of something which isn't really news in the first place.

We get all riled up because we're cyclists and a car driver is having a pop at us. In the real world, most people couldn't give a toss.

Surf-Matt

Anyone else notice that on the big BBC news stations, they were talking about cyclists wanting to be able to jump red lights and go the wrong way up one way streets?!

Suprise suprise, take the radical (and stupid) view of a tiny number of cyclists and "forget" all the perfectly reasonable suggestions like better cycle lanes.

dondare

DON'T get me started on cycle lanes.
We need roads that are safer for everyone, cycle lanes are a complete blind alley here.

Surf-Matt

We have ONE cycle lane in Truro. That ends very suddenly.

If you absolutely stick to the Highway Code in certain areas, you will be very lucky to survive for long.

dondare

You do mean the Highway Code rather than The Law? The HC is written by fools and deserves to be ignored. But the law should be obeyed, and I'd be interested to know if and why that could be fatal in Truro.

Surf-Matt

Don - Okay, the law.

There is a roundabout here - very very busy, very fast and fed by two single lane roads and two dual carriageway roads.

People hammer onto it, weave all over the place mid roundabout (not many seem to know the "official" lanes when approaching and leaving a roundabout) and don't look.
To take the correct route on a bike involves crossing two lanes twice, dodging 40 (but usually 50/60mph) traffic. My entry road is also very hard to exit onto the roundabout (often a 2+ minute wait in a car) and it straight into fast double lane traffic.

Or you can skip up onto the path and go under the subway safely, dinging your bell and riding slowly to make sure no one steps out in front of you.

I have cycled the road way in busy traffic several times and nearly come off. When it's quiet, it's just about rideable.
Yes you CAN ride it but it's very very dangerous and only the looniest of loonies attempt it in rush hour.

http://www.multimap.com/maps/?hloc=GB|t ... %20TR1%202

I come off Malpas Road (middle of map) and need to cross over to Quay Street - the subway ducks under the A390. Coming back is even worse.

dondare

A cycle lane on the footpath would keep you safe but ducks the real issue, that the road should be safe for cyclists. What is required is not a change in the law or a shared-use path but a redesign of dangerous features and sensible speed limits.

Surf-Matt

I have suggested a redesign to the council. No reply yet.

I'd much rather stick to the law. But my self preservation is even stronger.

iainment

spen666 wrote:

saveswalking wrote:

[....

Anything else we could do to appease the media ? We are after all 'guests' on the road are we not ?
RLJ/Pavement 'cycling/no helmets' = RED HERRING
Those who 'hate' cyclists will do so even if every single cyclist stopped at home and never set foot on the road ever again.

"you and your ilk ffs :roll:

sw

Who apart from you mentioned appeasing the media?

Why give your opponent ammunition to attack you with?

The "you and your ilk" refers specifically to AndyManc & his criminal ilk who want to break the law whilst lambasting others for breaking the law.

but you encourage law breaking yourselg, and I quote "You need to get your violence in first

Attack anyone in a vehicle- driver or passenger

Attack anyone who you (un)reasonably think may use motor transport at some time in their lives


Pre emptive action"

So what ilk are you?

spen666

iainment wrote:

spen666 wrote:

saveswalking wrote:

[....

Anything else we could do to appease the media ? We are after all 'guests' on the road are we not ?
RLJ/Pavement 'cycling/no helmets' = RED HERRING
Those who 'hate' cyclists will do so even if every single cyclist stopped at home and never set foot on the road ever again.

"you and your ilk ffs :roll:

sw

Who apart from you mentioned appeasing the media?

Why give your opponent ammunition to attack you with?

The "you and your ilk" refers specifically to AndyManc & his criminal ilk who want to break the law whilst lambasting others for breaking the law.

but you encourage law breaking yourselg, and I quote "You need to get your violence in first

Attack anyone in a vehicle- driver or passenger

Attack anyone who you (un)reasonably think may use motor transport at some time in their lives


Pre emptive action"

So what ilk are you?

Whooooosh

Watch yourself Andy - that irony nearly hit yuor head as it sailed over you

dondare

The people I speak to aren't influenced much by the media's anti-cycling bias because they don't take sufficient interest in cycling to pay attention to what the papers and the Beeb are saying about it, but they do have very strong opinions, based on thier own personal experiences, about Cyclists Who Ride On The Pavement (all of them, they think) as well as Cyclists Who Don't Stop At Pedestrian Crossings (also all of them).
The claim that those who hate cyclists will hate us however we behave is used by cyclists who wish to behave illegally and anti-socially and then pretend that it makes no difference. Of course it makes a difference, just try speaking to people.

Surf-Matt

I'm not influenced in this case either - but some people are.
It's my job to help influence the media to influence them

karl j

hi matt, several years ago i used to commute in from Trispen and come down Mitchell Hill onto that roundabout and try turning right. But i never got a reply to my redevelopment suggestion either

to put it simply, it was to make the roundabout smaller (it's the size of the thing that encourages speeding) hopefully that would slow the traffic down to an acceptable level, but also use the space gained to put a dutch style cycle track around the outside.

one of the principle problems is that there is no other way to cross the river apart from along Morlaix Avenue (unless you want to go through town and that takes forever) so everyone has to use it, hence it is so busy.

Good luck with getting a reply, but don't hold your breath waiting...

Surf-Matt

Karl - I'm not holding my breath - did you stick to the road or subway it?

I head for the middle of town (Burger King road!) then under the viaduct and up the valley towards Coosegarn, almost to Threemilestone and back- just for some morning exercise.

Leaving before 8 and school holiday make it SO much easier!

always_tyred

I though someone earlier on in the thread pointed out that where the footway does not run parallel to the road, it is NOT illegal to cycle on it?

Doesn't the underpass route fall into this category?

spen666

Always Tyred wrote:

I though someone earlier on in the thread pointed out that where the footway does not run parallel to the road, it is NOT illegal to cycle on it?

Doesn't the underpass route fall into this category?

What's the legal authority for this proposition?

always_tyred

I imagine the crown prosecution service, acting on behalf of her majesty's government.

Someone mentioned it on a thread. I thought this thread. However now that our resident lawyer has arrived, there's no point in discussing it.