Annoyed a cyclist today-didn't take much.

AidanR

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Aidy

Rattled a motorist last night - didn't take much.

Headhuunter

Clever Pun wrote:

El Gordo wrote:

I'm with Sturmey on this, sure he made a small mistake by driving into the ASL a bit but everyone makes mistakes (apart from Spen I believe) and this one is hardly a big deal.

The cyclist could have filtered up to the front and stopped in what remained of the ASL then rode off when the lights changed. The sanctamonious finger waggling was pointless antagonism which will at the very least reinforce the commonly held view that all cyclists are arrogant c##ks and at the worst will get him beaten up one day.

the sitting in the middle of the lane is an attempt to teach the asl drifters a lesson, I've done the same myself.. finger wagging meh hardly a problem you messed and you get a finger wagging big deal.

I really don't see the point in this thread

I agree. Personally I would have noted that both cars (whether inhabited by cycle friendly drivers or not) had taken up a chunk of the ASL and positioned myself right in front of them. I'm afraid I couldn't care less that 2 drivers add 4-5 seconds to their journey time. Saying you didn't notice the big green box at the front of the junction is hardly a defence - just like the driver who upon hitting a cyclist jumps out of his car and says "sorry mate I didn't see you"... You're in control of 2 tonnes of sheet metal and glass, you NEED to TAKE notice!

Kieran_Burns

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Nicely put.

tomb353

of the two bits of bad behaviour (stopping in asl & remonstrating with someone for taking primary) I take a dim view of both but the second is far more alarming. How dare you have a go at someone on the basis of their road position? For all you know after years of being buzzed by careless motorists adopting primary is the only solution to that stretch of road. Leave'em alone, pulling up and yelling out of your car window is thuggish behaviour.

always_tyred

Kieran_Burns wrote:

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Nicely put.

I find that being told to keep a zen like calm to be condescending finger wagging and, frankly, against human nature. I personally reserve the right to show irritation when I'm irritated, since I do not cycle whilst meditating.

Aidy

I will pretty much always position myself in the centre of the cycle box.

Doubly so if they've encroached the ASL - if they're inobservant enough to have not noticed it and stopped for it, I don't trust them to have the awareness to check around them before moving off.

I tend not to remonstrate motorists for doing so though, unless they've either tried to nudge me out of it whilst I'm in it, or I've witnessed them doing it for a whole series of red lights.

AidanR

Always Tyred wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Nicely put.

I find that being told to keep a zen like calm to be condescending finger wagging and, frankly, against human nature. I personally reserve the right to show irritation when I'm irritated, since I do not cycle whilst meditating.

Don't get me wrong, it's fecking hard to stay calm in a lot of situations, and though I've gotten better at it I am often still way too aggressive. But it never actually does me any good.

MonkeyMonster

Kieran_Burns wrote:

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Nicely put.

I'll second that.

Aguila

Always Tyred wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Nicely put.

I find that being told to keep a zen like calm to be condescending finger wagging and, frankly, against human nature. I personally reserve the right to show irritation when I'm irritated, since I do not cycle whilst meditating.

It is easy to get riled. This scenario is rather like the one last week with the cam footage of the guy on the recumbent who told somone off for being on the phone. The fact is that some drivers will react aggressively to this, some are capable of reacting so badly as to deliberately knock you off.

IMO it isn't worth the risk and having ranted for a long time in the past I'm convinced it doesn't do any good.

AndyManc

choirboy wrote:

[irony]So this guy had the affront to ride in primary, making himself clearly visible to traffic and asserting his right to be on the road and part of the traffic, and following the advice of Cyclecraft and all others who have an opinion on how best to keep cyclists safe and seen.. Well clearly he was a complete twunt then! Far better for him to follow Liam's advice or even better to ride up the inside of a left-turning HGV and then he might get himself squashed and cease to be an inconvenience to those 4-wheeled denizens of the road who have a far greater right to be there. Thank heavens for drivers with the common sense and decency such as Liam who help to save the rest of us from such ignorant behaviour which threatens the very basis of our society![/irony]

If the bloke in question was on a red, white and black Focus it might have been me and, guess what, I will continue to ride in exactly that fashion!

+ 100%

I do it all the time.

Take control and insist on respect, it's the only way.


.

Mikelyons

Aidy wrote:

I tend not to remonstrate motorists for doing so though.

The Highway code does allow use of ASL by motorists if lights were just changing to red when entering the ASL.
Most of the time you can't tell why a motorist is in the ASL - so there's no reason to remonstrate with them , especially if they have just obeyed a red signal.

It also states motorists should give space & time

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_070332

178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.


Mike

AndyManc

Mikelyons wrote:

.
Most of the time you can't tell why a motorist is in the ASL - .

That's simply not true.



.

AndyManc

Mikelyons wrote:

The Highway code does allow use of ASL by motorists if lights were just changing to red when entering the ASL.

I prefer the term "allow use of" to "when you have no other choice" .


.

Norky

-Liam- wrote:

If he was passing parked car etc etc I would have said. It hard to explain the geography of the road but it made thing difficult for a good half a mile and a 10mph,that is a frustrating period of time.

You had to drive at ~10mph over a distance of half a mile. That works out as 3 minutes. If you had driven that distance at 30mph (assumption on my part that it's a residential area) that would have taken 1 minute. Maybe the fellow was being petty and making a point. I don't know about you, but I can roll my eyes, keep my distance and let someone else act up for 2 minutes added onto my journey.

I've found tolerance and ignoring all but the most egregious misbehaviour from other road users to do wonders for my state of mind

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

The cyclist did nothing wrong.

What is more worrying is that people think the cyclist did something wrong.

As a motorist, when stopped at lights I prefer cyclists to position themselves in front of my car and not either side of it.

As a cyclist, when stopped at lights I position my bike in the primary position (center of the lane) as to be seen. I prefer not to be beside two vehicles or a vehicle and the curb.

The OP complains about having to wait for the cyclist to 'wobble off'. Would this waiting been any different had the ASL been full of cyclist and the OP having to stop before and not inside the ASL?

Yes the cyclist complained about a car being in the ASL. The car shouldn't have been there. Is it wrong to point out a mistake?

It is annoying and frustrating when vehicles stop in the ASL.

The OP should have noticed the big green box at the lights. Mistakes happen, it doesn't always make the mistake excusable.

I'm afraid I've had to flag this post DDD


How dare you have the front to agree with my postings on this subject

This is not what the forum expects

spen666

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

None of the actions I've highlighted actually took place, so why introduce these


We are told regularly that society ignorres criminal acts and we shouldn't do that.

Here someone make a finger wagging gesture and only that and suddenly it is now equated with aggression, shouting etc

AndyManc

The entire post from the OP is from a motorist point of view.

Full of anti cyclists propaganda, it's the sort of letter I'd expect to see in the raving loony Daily Mail letter page from a BMW owner in Surrey.


.

greg66_tri_v2.0

AndyManc wrote:

The entire post from the OP is from a motorist point of view.

Full of anti cyclists propaganda, it's the sort of letter I'd expect to see in the raving loony Daily Mail letter page from a BMW owner in Surrey.
.

For sure.

What we need for balance is some anti motorist propaganda, straight from a letter we'd expect to see in the Critical Mass Newsletter from a bicycle owner in, ummm, Manchester, for instance.

Anyone?

Aidy

Mikelyons wrote:

Aidy wrote:

I tend not to remonstrate motorists for doing so though.

The Highway code does allow use of ASL by motorists if lights were just changing to red when entering the ASL.
Most of the time you can't tell why a motorist is in the ASL - so there's no reason to remonstrate with them , especially if they have just obeyed a red signal.

It also states motorists should give space & time

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_070332

178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.


Mike

I'm well aware of the highway code. Thanks.

toontra

Mikelyons wrote:

Most of the time you can't tell why a motorist is in the ASL - so there's no reason to remonstrate with them , especially if they have just obeyed a red signal.

The chances of that happening in freely-moving traffic are ZERO. I think the OP would have mentioned this if it was relevant, don't you? In fact he said it was light traffic, so why even bring this up.

The only relevant part of your post is:

Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times

Simple enough?

jonny_trousers

MonkeyMonster wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

AidanR wrote:

I'm going to try and tread a careful line through the middle of this. Basically, yes the OP was in the wrong for encroaching on the ASL (and admits as much). But whilst I think assertive cycling is generally safer cycling, being assertive to the point of aggression or condescension is counter-productive and harmful to the reputation of cycling in general. Losing your cool and yelling at drivers tends to provoke rage rather than contrition, and so does tutting and finger wagging. In our eagerness to show that we have an equal right to be on the road as cars, we sometimes overstep the mark and come off as aggressive or smug tw*ts which doesn't do anybody any favours. When pointing out the mistakes of others you have to be very careful of the manner in which it is done, otherwise the message is not taken in and the whole endevour may be counter-productive.

Nicely put.

I'll second that.

Yep, and I'll third it. I wanted to offer an opinion, but I cannot say it better than the above.

boneyjoe

Sounds more like it was the motorist getting annoyed, rather than the cyclist - didn't take much!

Dudu

sturmey wrote:

1) I fully endorse the cyclist's RIGHT to be on the road and have his share of it.
Why wouldn't I as a cyclist myself? Perhaps you mistakenly think the same unpleasant transformation comes over me when I'm in a car as so clearly comes over you(and this guy) when your on a bike?

Are you not aware that cyclists' "share" of the road is defined in the Highway Code as the same space as a small car? Do I want the whole road? No, mate, just my half of it.

2) I merely questioned the wisdom of this cyclist being so confrontational about affirming those precious 'rights' of his to other road users, as he obviously has no concern for self-preservation.
Which sadly seems to be the case with you also.
Never mind...

It is very unlikely that any cyclist would be hit from behind by a vehicle starting from traffic lights. Being dead centre in front of drivers is a very good way of making sure they've seen you (especially if they're so purblind they can't see a ten-foot bicycle painted on the road in a green box).

If you want to get mown down while cycling, riding along in the gutter and passing stationary traffic on the inside is a very good way to start.

jonny_trousers

Isn't the bottom line here that we all - whether on a bike or in a car - make mistakes from time to time and being a busy-body, holier-than-thou, finger-wagging toss-pot (again, whether a cyclist or motorist) achieves little more than resentment?

I wonder how many motorists in the OPs position would think, "Oh my goodness, that man's right: I've driven into the ASL! I must be more careful in future" and how many would think "Bloody cyclists, they think they own the roads."

We often hear it said here that we mustn't RLJ because it brings down the standing of all cyclists (a view I now agree with), but I cannot help but think that cycling militants do just as much harm.

For what it is worth, I do support the cyclist's right to set off in primary position so as to make his presence obvious and to make it clear that that he intends to carry straight on once the lights have changed. I would also hope he moved left as soon as it was safe for him to do so and that he had a decent enough level of fitness that means he holds the traffic behind him up for as little time as possible.

tom101

RichardSwt wrote:

I see things a bit different. You have two groups - considerate people and non-considerate people.

A considerate car driver will wait to pass, a considerate cyclist will pull over slightly to make it easier for the car to pass.

Just wanted to say I agree with this statement. I can't stand all this classifying people by their mode of transport at a particular time. At what point does one become a pedestrian, cyclist, or car driver? I do all three. I don't have strong feelings about anyone due to what they are travelling in or on, only how they behave. To classify people this way is just tabloidesque inflammatory nonsense, only done by small minded people with an agenda.

Bugly

gee cyclists seem to be a sanctimonious crowd. A large number seem to have almost a religous fervour in their hatred of the infidel motorist, - time for a crusade (or jihad depending on your point of view) and subjogate the unbelievers.

:roll:

spen666

Bugly wrote:

gee cyclists seem to be a sanctimonious crowd. A large number seem to have almost a religous fervour in their hatred of the infidel motorist, - time for a crusade (or jihad depending on your point of view) and subjogate the unbelievers.

:roll:

I think you will finf the OP is from someone driving a car accusing cyclists.

I note there is not a post on here from the cyclist attacking the motorist

Aguila

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

Isn't the bottom line here that we all - whether on a bike or in a car - make mistakes from time to time and being a busy-body, holier-than-thou, finger-wagging toss-pot (again, whether a cyclist or motorist) achieves little more than resentment?

I wonder how many motorists in the OPs position would think, "Oh my goodness, that man's right: I've driven into the ASL! I must be more careful in future" and how many would think "Bloody cyclists, they think they own the roads."
We often hear it said here that we mustn't RLJ because it brings down the standing of all cyclists (a view I now agree with), but I cannot help but think that cycling militants do just as much harm.

For what it is worth, I do support the cyclist's right to set off in primary position so as to make his presence obvious and to make it clear that that he intends to carry straight on once the lights have changed. I would also hope he moved left as soon as it was safe for him to do so and that he had a decent enough level of fitness that means he holds the traffic behind him up for as little time as possible.

+1

Absolutely right.

the_hundredth_idiot

The Chingford Skinhead wrote:

Blimey, have I passed into a parallel universe.

...

Sheesh!

Beat me to it. + many

If these guys are cyclist-friendly, it says a lot about the attitude of those who don't like cyclists to start with.