Just when you think you've seen everything

Blimey thats a big bike.

 

Degrees of danger now? Like it. Fact is all vehicles (motorised or not) are potentially dangerous if handled badly. Cyclists need to accept that just as much as car drivers. But I tend to find cyclists take the higher ground in this argument (this thread confirms it).

 

What are you on about? Is it not relevant that one is far more likely to cause harm than the other? Just making a facile statement that both are potentially dangerous means nothing. It's like saying "the fact is that a Jack Russell and a fully grown African lion are both potentially dangerous if handled badly." It's technically correct but it's moronic and misses the point entirely.

Do cyclists take the higher ground? I think it's a valid point to say that if a cyclist gets it wrong and collides with a car the car might get scratched. If it happens the other way round it's probably a hospital visit. There have been several times I've been out on my bike and narrowly avoided getting flattened by a car due to the driver not paying attention. I've never been driving and though "fvcking hell, that cyclist almost killed me there."

 

No but I've been a pedestrian and had a very close call with a cyclist coming through a red light. Luckily I had my wits about me and it was him that ended up on the floor with bloodied skin (I just lost the lunch I was carrying in a bag). So yes he could have killed me, you only need to bang your head.

So it may be moronic to you, but I think you are once again missing the point (probably because you are a cyclist and taking the high ground).

 

So any disagreement with your point of view is me taking the high ground because I'm a cyclist? Please explain the point I am missing. And for the record I drive as well.

I'm not saying that cyclists are never wrong, or that behaviour of certain cyclists can be defended. All I'm saying is that when drivers take the "cyclists are a menace on the road" line they lack self awareness, as cyclists are far less likely to injure a car driver than vice versa.

 

No, it's the lack of acceptance that cyclists can be a danger that I find to be wrong. I fully accept that cars are dangerous, but so are motorbikes, buses and cycles.

The likeliness is irrelevant too, fact is they can cause accidents, they can be dangerous (particularly to pedestrians, but also because poor handling of a cycle can cause a RTA). And car drivers aren't the only other road user that need to be taken into account, it's not a car v cycle argument IMO, it's about acceptance of responsibility by all regardless of mode of transport.

 

Funnily enough, I happened upon this story today - a cyclist killing a pedestrian.*

* Not really.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-begs-judge-not-jail-claiming-fat-prison.html