What Annoys You The Most On The Roads?

Canis Lupus

markdrayton wrote: »

Plonker. Have you never noticed that unlit cyclists are pretty much invisible at night, even on lit roads? I'd hate to be the person who eventually mows you down.

Nope I've yet to be in an urban, lit environment and be taken by surprise by an unlit cyclist. Maybe my night vision is better than yours? Maybe you should get an appointment to see an optician just in case something is wrong with your eyes?

And don't be so morbid.

Chips Lovell

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Nope I've yet to be in an urban, lit environment and be taken by surprise by an unlit cyclist.

I have.

niceonetom

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Nope I've yet to be in an urban, lit environment and be taken by surprise by an unlit cyclist. Maybe my night vision is better than yours? Maybe you should get an appointment to see an optician just in case something is wrong with your eyes?

And don't be so morbid.

Maybe you do have great night-vision. Bully for you. Your faith that the guy in the car behind you shares your ability is foolish though.

And if he does end up flattening you, all he has to do is point to your lack of lights and, well, you're SOL is any legal wrangling that follows. By not using lights you are, by default, accepting any-and-all fault, in full and in advance, for any road incidents that you might be involved in. How clever is that?

Iwannahurl

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Nope I've yet to be in an urban, lit environment and be taken by surprise by an unlit cyclist. Maybe my night vision is better than yours? Maybe you should get an appointment to see an optician just in case something is wrong with your eyes?

And don't be so morbid.

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I often cycle without a light (in lit urban areas). It's probably the only major bold thing I do on a bike. I've done it for years and all it requires is awareness of traffic. The only 'dangerous' bit is keeping an eye out for traffic pulling out/crossing your path if you're coming from behind them. For traffic coming from behind me they can easily see me same way I can see pedestrians without them wandering about with lights and reflectors. Wouldn't do it on an unlit country road though.

My biggest hate cycling is pedestrians continually failing to look. If traffic is stopped and I'm going up the inside they'll frequently put a foot out onto the road or just walk straight out without looking as well as when I'm on the main road and they're walking the same direction as I'm going and they cross a side road that I need to turn into and again, cos I can't be heard they don't bother looking. Drives me mental. I don't mind stopping and letting a pedestrian by even if I have right of way, it's just the not looking that bugs me.

Overall I'm a fairly happy cyclist though.

Overall you're a very stupid cyclist.

Don't be so stupid.

Canis Lupus

niceonetom wrote: »

Maybe you do have great night-vision. Bully for you. Your faith that the guy in the car behind you shares your ability is foolish though.

And if he does end up flattening you, all he has to do is point to your lack of lights and, well, you're SOL is any legal wrangling that follows. By not using lights you are, by default, accepting any-and-all fault, in full and in advance, for any road incidents that you might be involved in. How clever is that?

I'm well aware of the risks same way I make the choice to not wear a helmet. I like living on the edge, it compensates for the boring desk job and the sense of futility it causes.

The car behind me should have his lights on. Doubly bold on him if with lights on, in a lit environment he can't make out a cyclist in front of him. If he doesn't have lights on and is driving literally on the curb then I have an issue but luckily it hasn't happened yet *touches wood*.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Overall you're a very stupid cyclist.

Don't be so stupid.

niceonetom

Unlit cycling: the saddest extreme sport evar.

Kintarō Hattori

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Overall you're a very stupid cyclist.

Don't be so stupid.

Now now there's no need for that. It's always good to try and keep these things civil.

Canis Lupus

niceonetom wrote: »

Unlit cycling: the saddest extreme sport evar.

Try extreme ironing.

http://www.extremeironing.com/

DirkVoodoo

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I'm well aware of the risks same way I make the choice to not wear a helmet. I like living on the edge, it compensates for the boring desk job and the sense of futility it causes.

The car behind me should have his lights on. Doubly bold on him if with lights on, in a lit environment he can't make out a cyclist in front of him. If he doesn't have lights on and is driving literally on the curb then I have an issue but luckily it hasn't happened yet *touches wood*.

Driving down the likes of Camden street at night can be a bloody nightmare with the number of ninjas about. If I'm turning left, I'm obviously going to check my mirrors and my blindspot, but given all the activity and street lighting, I have found before that an unlit cyclist is next to invisible.

Why wouldn't you use lights? They are cheap and they work.

Canis Lupus

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Now now there's no need for that. It's always good to try and keep these things civil.

In fairness I'm not being very mature about the argument either

Bunnyhopper

Canis Lupus wrote: »

The car behind me should have his lights on.

Pot, meet kettle. Kettle this is pot. :rolleyes:

Kintarō Hattori

Canis Lupus wrote: »

In fairness I'm not being very mature about the argument either

Perhaps but there's never any need to name call/attack the poster and so on.

Perhaps those who have a grievance with each other for what they do/don't do and their opinion on that as a result should hold their tongue for the moment.

Canis Lupus

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Driving down the likes of Camden street at night can be a bloody nightmare with the number of ninjas about. If I'm turning left, I'm obviously going to check my mirrors and my blindspot, but given all the activity and street lighting, I have found before that an unlit cyclist is next to invisible.

Why wouldn't you use lights? They are cheap and they work.

Okay serious answer.

I started off with them way back on my Raleigh Scorpian days, then ran out of batteries, then realised that I found no difference with them off to on. I tend to periods with and without. Now this winter I've generally had them on although the back is out atm (my leggings and back are hi viz and reflectory) and I guess perhaps my commute in London is either well lit (been ages since I was in Dub) and it's generally bumper to bumper traffic(or I'm in bus lanes out of the way as you can cycle in them over here).

I don't cycle like a dick either (even if my attitude to lights stinks). When the front light is out I do have to participate in lots of stoppy starty cycling just to be on the safe side of a decision (whether to cross a car pulling out etc). I've yet to have an incident where I said to myself, wow, if I had lights that wouldn't have happened. In fact, as I've mentioned on other threads when I switch the lights back on my cycling gets 'more' dangerous as I stop compensating for possible driver error due to visibility.

Long story short I understand it breaks the law but I'll probably keep on doing it until such a time as something changes my mind about it.

Iwannahurl

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Now now there's no need for that. It's always good to try and keep these things civil.

I was attempting to echo the poster's own sentiments.

Canis Lupus wrote: »

And don't be so morbid.

Canis Lupus

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

Pot, meet kettle. Kettle this is pot. :rolleyes:

A car is a touch more lethal than little old me.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I was attempting to echo the poster's own sentiments.

That was a serious suggestion unless you think people who use our roads shouldn't have regular eye exams!!

Iwannahurl

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I'm well aware of the risks same way I make the choice to not wear a helmet. I like living on the edge, it compensates for the boring desk job and the sense of futility it causes.

The car behind me should have his lights on. Doubly bold on him if with lights on, in a lit environment he can't make out a cyclist in front of him. If he doesn't have lights on and is driving literally on the curb then I have an issue but luckily it hasn't happened yet *touches wood*.:(

You're not trolling, by any chance?

There is no comparison between wearing a helmet and having lights on your bike. You are required by law to be lit up at night.

Go live on the edge somewhere else other than on the public roads, where by being unlit you could cause a serious collision or cause genuine stress to another road user.

Bunnyhopper

Canis Lupus wrote: »

A car is a touch more lethal than little old me.

The car will certainly do more damage, but in the event of an accident involving you and the car, it sounds like you'll inevitably be at fault (as per niceonetom's post).

By the sound of it you're at least as much a danger to yourself as the car is because you're increasing your risk, convincing yourself that it's fine, and offloading responsibility onto someone else. Either way, you're coming off worse in the case of any accident.

I hope your good luck continues and that you continue to get away with relying on the competence and consideration of others.

Canis Lupus

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

I hope your good luck continues and that you continue to get away with relying on the competence and consideration of others.

And my awesome cycling skills and spiderman like ability to detect danger.

Chips Lovell

OK, that's enough trolling and flaming for today. Don't make me come down there.

thebouldwhacker

But but but..............*sigh* ok.

I hate potholes.




AND NINJAS

mcmoustache

I've experienced most of the peeves mentioned earlier in the thread but the one thing that pisses me off the most is cyclists going the wrong way on a cycle track. I've seen it a few times and it can be quite scary. I think to myself "What if I go Right and he goes to his Left?". I usually look behind and go far out on to the road just to be on the safe side.

You'd wonder how hard it is to get the side of the road mixed up. Most cycle lanes are on the same side as the traffic and they have a picture of a bicycle on them. If the bike looks upside down, you're going the wrong way.

The people I saw doing this weren't courriers taking a shortcut either. They were the dopey types that you see travelling at low speed who break lights and don't check their surroundings. I hate those cyclists too. :mad:

petethedrummer

mcmoustache wrote: »

I've experienced most of the peeves mentioned earlier in the thread but the one thing that pisses me off the most is cyclists going the wrong way on a cycle track. I've seen it a few times and it can be quite scary. I think to myself "What if I go Right and he goes to his Left?". I usually look behind and go far out on to the road just to be on the safe side.

Just put on your best mental face and start point & shouting where you want them to go.

'68 Fastback

I hate the greasy tarmac on the leeson st. corner of stephen's green that i wiped out on this morning. nice day up in james' hos but nothing broken:o

RussellTuring

Speaking of Leeson Street, I was cycling in the cycle lane by the taxi rank at the hotel on the Upper end at the hotel and had to go around a taxi man talking to his mate parked at the rank. People standing in the cycle lane/road is a pet hate of mine so I gave a bit of an open-arms motion of disapproval. As I was passing by he said something so I stopped and we had words. I told him that standing there forces people to move into traffic unnecessarily and the best he could come up with was telling me to go on to college. I said I was and asked what of it. He said: "Yeah, the future of the country" so I said "Yes I am. You certainly aren't". Then he muttered something about emigration. What's wrong with people?