Dispicable cyclist

2»

Comments

  • ai_1
    ai_1 Posts: 3,060
    steadyrollingman wrote:
    Erm, no, sorry. Firstly, not quite sure why you seem to think I would distinguish between riding for sport and riding for transport - I regularly do both, and the latter (commuting) is done far more regularly than any other method of getting to work (despite owning several cars). I'd consider myself to be a cyclist on either of those occasions. Your jet pack statement is also flawed if you'd just read what I wrote properly, but I really CBA to start getting into petty pedantic dissections of statements.

    But yes, you're right I don't want to be tarred with the same brush as 'pricks on bikes' as per my original statement, and I'm not quite sure why that's such a bad thing. At no time do I feel I share anything in common with someone pootling along the path from one part of a housing estate to the next, riding in everyday clothes, no lights, or whatever. Given that most of the time I'd condemn/consider that behaviour to be idiotic, I really fail to see how that makes me 'part of the problem'. Quite the opposite I'd have thought...
    Sure, I never said you were part of the problem on the road/path. I said you're part of the problem in terms of labelling based on your earlier posts. You claimed people on bikes wearing normal clothes and riding on paths weren't cyclists. Which they are.
    Cyclists are widely regarded to act selfishly, dangerously and irresponsibly by the general public. There are cyclists who act that way and have earned the rest of us those prejudices. The problem is the association between cycling and these behaviours. People behave this way doing all sorts of activities but are very visible and problematic when they do it on a bike on public roads/footpaths. I'm saying we need to break the perception of a link between the activity and the behaviour. You don't want to fix the problem, you just want it to belong to someone else. So you are suggesting that people who ride bikes in a differnt way to you are not cyclists and are the real problem. These other people are the selfish, dangerous and irresponsibe ones.....
  • tootsie323
    tootsie323 Posts: 199
    Sometimes I walk. Regardless of how I dress I'd still consider myself a pedestrian.
  • ai_1
    ai_1 Posts: 3,060
    tootsie323 wrote:
    Sometimes I walk. Regardless of how I dress I'd still consider myself a pedestrian.
    How presumptuous of you!
  • awavey
    awavey Posts: 2,368
    Chris Bass wrote:
    I'm pretty sure if he had run her over in a car he would have been called a driver.

    Do you have a link to his side? I'm interested in how he justifies it.

    he doesnt try to justify it other than as an accident I guess, I dont know, and I know its the Daily Fail, but actually seems less sensationalised for them, maybe all the normal staff were on holiday over the bank holiday... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... three.html

    doesnt make me more sympathetic to his side, he shouldnt have been on the pavement and should have been able to avoid even a random child, but as already noted the consequence of labelling this incident in the way it has been, is already that the Beeb thinks its ok to do an "At Risk From 'cyclists' " phone in, on Radio 4 no less,where all the usual anti memes get an airing.

    so whens the "At Risk from Motorists" phone in.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    I remember as a kid I used to cycle to the newsagents/convenience store near me for sweets and occasionally cheap toys, when I was old enough that is. I wore my normal clothes but I was.cycling. That meant I was a young cyclist. Now I occasionally ride my bike in jeans the short distance to my parents, still a cyclist. My partner does that journey on the pavement despite my attempts to dissuade her. She's mostly a lot responsible cyclist also wearing b street clothes. In fact we don't own many cycle specific clothing. I have cycle gel mitts, she has a hi-viz jacket. Our helmets don't get used. Still cyclists.
    I think the only way you can separate irresponsible cyclists from responsible cyclists is with the distinction over responsibility. Considerate cyclists and inconsiderate cyclists. You cannot separate the cyclist tag from the irresponsible cyclist just because general public lumps all cyclists as bad as those irresponsible cyclists. If you follow my argument.
    A dangerous driver is b still a driver. A dangerous cyclist is still a cyclist. A dangerous pedestrian is still a pedestrian (say one who crosses the road with a nose in their phone as a cyclist passes for example).

Categories