J
Just Zis Guy
Guest
"Michael MacClancy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> We're talking about aggression here, not negative feelings. The first couple of paragraphs of the
> Conclusions section of the TRL report read:
> "This project was commissioned following previous research for DfT that investigated attitudes to
> cycle use. A key finding of that work was that some cycle users reported significant conflict
> with motor vehicle users and some believed that motorists' approach to cycle users was one of
> hostility or even
active
> aggression. A primary objective of this research has been to investigate
the
> accuracy of that impression. In relation to that assertion, this research has not identified any
evidence
> of aggression towards cyclists among any significant number of drivers."
I know - I have read the report.
The generality of drivers endanger cyclists only because they don't know any better, but there is a
minority who do it deliberately. There is also a definite tendency even among those who in their
saner moments wouldn't dream of uttering such foolishness to use it as a way of hitting back when
they know they are in the wrong. Like the woman who ventured the opinion that her dooring one of The
Regulars was his fault for not wearing a helmet.
There is an undoubted tendency in the press to blame cyclists for all the world's ills. This is
completely unrelated to the fact that the journos are sitting in their expensive penis extensions
going nowhere while the cyclists are making rapid and trouble-free progress, obviously.
There is a tendency, seen on uk.tosspot and elsewhere, to believe that a cyclist's responsibility
not to hold up following traffic carries greater weight than a driver's responsibility to apply due
care and attention. We "force" people into dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.
There is a strong tendency for drivers to believe that where cycyle "facilites" exist we MUST use
them. I have been harangued more than once for failing to use shared-use footpaths alongside wide
urban roads with no problem passing. I'm not causing anybody any inconvenience, but I don't think
it's appropriate for a grown man moving at speeds over 20mph to be riding on the pavement,
especially when it will make my journey slower and less safe.
Nobody's saying that these are majority views, but they are views held by a highly vocal minority,
very much like the speedophiles with their camera obsessions, and their loudness and repetiveness
moves the mainstream of acceptable opinion in their direction. If the Daily Mail can say all
cyclists are red-light-running scofflaws who should be run over, surely that validates my view that
this particular cyclist should get out of my way immediately, and if he won't then it's his fault if
I overtake dangerously.
Is it really like that? I don't know. I don't understand what goes on in the "mind" of someone who
would rather risk three people's lives than be ten seconds late in the traffic jam which exists
every single morning without fail a few hundred yards ahead.
--
Guy
===
WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk
news:[email protected]...
> We're talking about aggression here, not negative feelings. The first couple of paragraphs of the
> Conclusions section of the TRL report read:
> "This project was commissioned following previous research for DfT that investigated attitudes to
> cycle use. A key finding of that work was that some cycle users reported significant conflict
> with motor vehicle users and some believed that motorists' approach to cycle users was one of
> hostility or even
active
> aggression. A primary objective of this research has been to investigate
the
> accuracy of that impression. In relation to that assertion, this research has not identified any
evidence
> of aggression towards cyclists among any significant number of drivers."
I know - I have read the report.
The generality of drivers endanger cyclists only because they don't know any better, but there is a
minority who do it deliberately. There is also a definite tendency even among those who in their
saner moments wouldn't dream of uttering such foolishness to use it as a way of hitting back when
they know they are in the wrong. Like the woman who ventured the opinion that her dooring one of The
Regulars was his fault for not wearing a helmet.
There is an undoubted tendency in the press to blame cyclists for all the world's ills. This is
completely unrelated to the fact that the journos are sitting in their expensive penis extensions
going nowhere while the cyclists are making rapid and trouble-free progress, obviously.
There is a tendency, seen on uk.tosspot and elsewhere, to believe that a cyclist's responsibility
not to hold up following traffic carries greater weight than a driver's responsibility to apply due
care and attention. We "force" people into dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.
There is a strong tendency for drivers to believe that where cycyle "facilites" exist we MUST use
them. I have been harangued more than once for failing to use shared-use footpaths alongside wide
urban roads with no problem passing. I'm not causing anybody any inconvenience, but I don't think
it's appropriate for a grown man moving at speeds over 20mph to be riding on the pavement,
especially when it will make my journey slower and less safe.
Nobody's saying that these are majority views, but they are views held by a highly vocal minority,
very much like the speedophiles with their camera obsessions, and their loudness and repetiveness
moves the mainstream of acceptable opinion in their direction. If the Daily Mail can say all
cyclists are red-light-running scofflaws who should be run over, surely that validates my view that
this particular cyclist should get out of my way immediately, and if he won't then it's his fault if
I overtake dangerously.
Is it really like that? I don't know. I don't understand what goes on in the "mind" of someone who
would rather risk three people's lives than be ten seconds late in the traffic jam which exists
every single morning without fail a few hundred yards ahead.
--
Guy
===
WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk