Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Cyclists

 
 
On 13 Jan 2009 at 3:13pm Defender of the Realm wrote:
I've just popped into town and would like to point out to some Cyclists in Lewes the following:
A) Traffic lights apply to you as well.
B) You should not be using pavements.
C) One way steets are exactly that.
Call me a moany old git but this really annoys me, especially when they cycle around with that smug Eco-grin on their faces. I don't want to offend all cyclists but there are some out there you think they can do whatever they like on the road/pavement. If it happens again I might be tempted to stick my brolly though their spokes by accident.
 
 
On 13 Jan 2009 at 5:37pm me wrote:
Can i just add that when a car hits you, it is going to hurt. I am not superman i do not possess X-Ray eyes. When it is dark PUT SOME F**KING LIGHTS ON YOUR BIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!. And to add my two pence to DoTR. I often find driving at cyclists coming the wrong way down a one way street cures their arrogance.
 
 
On 13 Jan 2009 at 6:33pm Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
Thoroughly agree with you two - I'm fed up with these precious arty-farty sanctamonius blooming cyclists.
 
 
On 13 Jan 2009 at 7:02pm Lewes Laugher wrote:
Me too. Except for the ones who ride through Lewes early on a Sunday morning - smart, serious and law-abiding.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 12:17am Dave wrote:
I cycle the wrong way up one way streets regularly, I give way to motorist and cyclists going the right way.
I don't cycle on footpaths
I ignore traffic lights if there are no cars coming whether I'm on a bike or walking
I am careful to avoid being run over.
Cars drivers often threaten my life by the way they drive, I don't threaten anyone elses life.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 12:25am Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
Oh yes you do!
Apart from your own life, you threaten others by causing them to swerve and not considering the consequences for the poor driver that hits you (loss of licence, fine, ?custodial sentence, loss of employment, loss of family, loss of home). Stop being so selfish!
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 12:51am Dave wrote:
Oh no I don't!
Nobody has ever had to swerve out of the way of me if its their right of way, I am very particular about that.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 9:39am Defender of the Realm wrote:
Dave, as a road user ignoring traffic lights is illegal, regardless of whether you think it is clear or not. Going the wrong way down one way steetes is also illegal. Why do cyclists think they are above the law.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 10:26am motorist wrote:
i am going to start driving the wrong way up one way streets, if i see another vehicle coming i'll move over to let them past, also if i see a red light but think its clear i'll just go.
if cyclist can so do it then can't see why i can't
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 10:47am Enoch wrote:
All cyclists should have to take a proficiency test which will remind them how they should be riding and what the law requires. They teach it in primary schools so it isn't difficult. My dog ran in front of a cyclist at the Pells once and caused her to stop suddenly, I apologised and just go the reply "F##k you!" as she rode away - nice.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 1:13pm Taff wrote:
Most cyclists have probably not even read the highway code. if so then that is arrogant.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 2:21pm Dave wrote:
I drive as well as cycle I passed my test first time, have read and am conversant with the highway code.
I don't care if its illegal to go through red traffic lights, I'm not going to wait there like a complete tit watching pedestrians next to me crossing the road.
I could get off my bike and cross with them but I'm not going to. its not arrogance its just common sense, the sort of common sense a lot of users of this forum demand that the parking attendants use in not following the letter of their laws when issuing tickets.
I want to live in a society where the individual is given responsibility for his/her own actions, if I get caught running a red light on my bike I will hold up my hands and accept the punishment. I am responsible and careful enough to be aware of any danger to me and others.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 2:27pm Dave wrote:
..and Enoch the fact that the cyclist swore at you wasn't because she was a cyclist it was because you let your animal put her in danger.
It is you that should be more careful.
I've seen car drivers swear at other car drivers and I've been nearly run over by a few who weren't looking and I've sworn at them, not for being car drivers but for being ignorant gits with enough arrogance to believe either they don't need to look or think they own the road.
A cyclist is by definition much more vulnerable than a driver and therefore naturally takes more care to avoid accidents.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 3:14pm Defender of the Realm wrote:
So Dave, what you are basically saying, correct me if I'm wrong, is that you not looking like a tit while you wait at traffic lights like other road users is more important than the law of the land which others abide by.
May I make a suggestion? If not looking like a tit is so high on your list of priorities then I suggest you re-read some of the arrogant self centered tripe you have posted here and ask for them to be deleted becasue they make you look like a tit, you tit.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 3:50pm Dave wrote:
I hope abdicating your responsibility to yourself sits well with you DotR.

Can you honestly say you have never broken a law?

I am not a number I am a free man!
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 3:59pm motorist wrote:
if you don't want to look like a tit then stop cycling and get a car
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:03pm Defender of the Realm wrote:
Responsibility for what? upholding the law? - I honestly have no idea what you are on about there.
I have broken laws in the past but not deliberately and I now know that ignorance is no defence.
You come across as a particularly self righteous cyclist, yet you say you drive as well, I bet you car's a Toyota Pious.
Lets all follow Daves example and do what we want, when we want, how we want and to who we want.
POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:15pm Dave wrote:
I have a car and cycling 14 miles a day helps to stop me looking like a tit
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:23pm Dave wrote:
Responsibility for you own actions rather than giving it away to other people such as parking attendants for example.

Can you (or anyone reading this for that matter) honestly say you have never broken a law on purpose (never copied a cassette, driven faster than the speed limit, smoked pot, been drunk and disorderly, urinated in public, defaced a coin etc. etc etc)
And yes, actually, but it should be - POWER TO THE INDIVIDUAL!
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:34pm Defender of the Realm wrote:
How am I not taking responsibility for my own actions, it sounds like you are accusing me of having Sociopathic tendencies?
BREAKING THE LAW - Probably not, but there will be some on here that will say they are squeaky clean.
The original point was not about highlighting these vagabonds disregard for law and order, but airing a grievance based on what most would consider dangerous, inconsiderate and selfish behaviour by some people.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:40pm Dave wrote:
'..some people', that's fine but not all cyclists.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:43pm Davd wrote:
...some people. Thats fine, not all cyclists are dangerous or incosiderate even if they do jump traffic lights and ride up one way streets the wrong way.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 4:53pm Enoch wrote:
Sorry Dave but if I am walking on a public footpath I do not expect to be run over by a cyclist. I am not saying that I was not in the wrong and I apologised for the actions of my dog. But as my dog is not as intelligent as a human, and has the awareness of a toddler he should be treated as such. Surely the cyclist should have had the intelligence to take this into consideration, the more cosiderate cyclists I have come across do slow down around dogs and children. I did not have to apologise as the cyclist was breaking the law and she should have been grateful I did not report her!!
I have not previously had a problem with cyclists but given the arrogance in this thread I can see why some people do.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:00pm Mr Bone wrote:
Cars, buses and trains are for poor people. Bikes however are for retarded poor people
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:01pm sashimi wrote:
It's also illegal to let off fireworks in the street and to wear lipstick or a codpiece with a view to seducing one of Her Majesty's subjects. I only mention it as a contribution to the ongoing debate and not as an admission on my part. I am not quite sure where we are headed.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:02pm sashimi wrote:
It's also illegal to let off fireworks in the street and to wear lipstick or a codpiece with a view to seducing one of Her Majesty's subjects. I only mention it as a contribution to the ongoing debate and not as an admission on my part. I am not quite sure where we are headed
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:02pm Dave wrote:
Enoch whether your dog is more intelligent than you or not is irrelevant, it is your responsibility to make sure he does not cause accidents, bite anyone, defecate on the footpath or terrorise young children even if he is 'just being friendly' and wouldn't 'hurt a flea' but that's another thread altogether.
It is my responsibility to ensure my small child doesn't scratch anyones car for instance and I happily accept that.
Whether the cyclist was breaking the law is also immaterial as that still doesn't absolve you of your responsibility to keep your dog under control.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:09pm Dave wrote:
Enoch whether your dog is more intelligent than you or not is irrelevant, it is your responsibility to make sure he does not cause accidents, bite anyone, defecate on the footpath or terrorise young children even if he is 'just being friendly' and wouldn't 'hurt a flea' but that's another thread altogether.
It is my responsibility to ensure my small child doesn't scratch anyones car for instance and I happily accept that.
Whether the cyclist was breaking the law is also immaterial as that still doesn't absolve you of your responsibility to keep your dog under control.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:19pm What! wrote:
Dave,
I think you are transferring your inadequacies and illegal behaviour onto others. My advice to you is stop posting as you are not doing yourself any favours (but I suspect you will carry on digging your hole)
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 5:22pm Lewes Laugher wrote:
But how can Enoch keep his dog from under the wheels of a bike that shouldn't be on the pavement?
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 7:44pm Dave wrote:
What inadequacies? please explain
And could whoever it was explain in what way any of my posts were arrogant, I would be genuinely interested to know.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 7:50pm Dave wrote:
and how can I transfer illegal behaviour on to others? I really don't understand, and What!, I'll ask you the same question since you're trying to take the moral high ground, have you ever knowingly broken the law?
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 8:12pm Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
We've had this debate several times before and my opinion remains the same as it did 13 months ago (pasted below)....

Don't start me off!
I own a bicycle and used to enjoy a short jaunt somewhere BUT, the new eco-friendly self righteous blooming cyclists really irritate me.........to the point where I can no longer stomach a cycle ride as I do not wish to be associated with these hypocritical & arrogant people.
Hypocritical? "We cycle therefore we are environmentally friendly" What tosh! If they were such eco warriors they would not feel the need to purchase the latest synthetic fibres for their stupid clothes or wear polysterene helmets. And why do they have to be kitted out with special plastic water bottles/rucksacks?
Arrogant? "As we are cyclists (aka "sperm of Satan"), we can cycle wherever we please".......one way streets....... pavements.......cycle in pairs on the C7.........yell abuse as people in cars when we don't get our way......etc, etc.
Needless to say, I don't like them!
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 8:17pm Spinster Of This Parish wrote:
AND,
If someone is crossing a one-way street, they are not going to look the wrong way to check to see if some sanctamonious cyclist is coming the other way.
If you want to use the road, respect the rules of the road
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 8:41pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
You forgot to mention the ones that cycle illegally on public footpaths on the dowsn, Spinster! They seem to specialise in aiming at dogs.
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 8:49pm Penny Farthing wrote:
Get orf your bikes and burn them.
You are in Lewes now
 
 
On 14 Jan 2009 at 9:02pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Yes, the county council messed up badly when they resurfaced the streets with granitie setts. They should have used proper cobbles, that would have got the sanctimonious planet-savers off their bikes!
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 10:41am Dave wrote:
This morning:-
I ran 3 red lights
I cycled up 2 one way streets the wrong way
I didn't cycle on a footpath that isn't also a cycle lane.
I got cut up by 2 cars driven by people who weren't looking (and swore at them in my head)
I didn't endanger anyone.
I didn't have to avoid any dangerous animals
I got a bit fitter
I didn't feel sanctimonious, just happy to be alive
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 11:11am Defender of the Realm wrote:
And the 2009 award for smugness and self satisfaction goes to................................Dave.
Well done on making sure that I now want to make life a miserable as possible for all cyclists in the hope that one of them might be you.
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 11:12am Penny Farthing wrote:
No wonder people dislike cyclists.
I vote we should make Lewes the first cycle-free town in Britain.
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 11:14am Penny Farthing wrote:
Defender,
Thanks - I think I can safely count on your vote to rid this town of cyclists
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 11:20am Outsider wrote:
I have cycled in many places, including some where cyclists are far more numerous and assertive eg Cambridge. I've never found anywhere where people are as intolerant towards cyclists as Lewes.
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 11:32am Defender of the Realm wrote:
Outsider - Withs Dave's comments indicitive of the cyclists in town is it any wonder?
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 11:54am motorist wrote:
i think i might have been one of the people who cut you up. it was just after you had jumped the red light, really sorry its just i wasn't expecting someone to be stupid enough to do it. sorry again my fault for being on the roads in my car.
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 12:41pm Dave wrote:
I wasn't crossing a traffic light on either of the occasions I was cut up.
As I said (many times) before i am very careful not to endanger myself or others.
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 12:50pm Defender of the Realm wrote:
Dave - I'd be genuinely interested to hear about you being cut up. When? Where? How? etc...
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 1:11pm Taff wrote:
Cut up! Cut up! drawing and quartering next?
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 1:33pm Minnie Cab wrote:
Dave were you bullied when you were at school?
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 2:05pm Not from around here wrote:
Surely a sense of balance is needed regarding cyclists. I was a regular cyclist when I was a kid and teenager - and yes I did take a proficiency test at school with a cert/badge awarded at the end - that should be compulsory in my view.
And yes I did regularly cycle long-ish distances on public roads and yes I did wait at red traffic lights and no I generally did not make a habit of cycling on the pavement.
So, what's my point? It IS possible to cycle regularly and not irritate every other road user - that includes drivers and pedestrians. But at the same time I'm not one who thinks that cycles should be registered or insured or 'controlled' by legislation - we have too much legislation already.
I was saying to my wife just recently how you NEVER see a (polite) hand signal from a cyclist anymore and yet when I was cycling I always gave hand signals to show if I was turning right or left. In fact i considered it essential to give clear hand signals to avoid being in danger from larger vehicles.
So what we need is a bit of basic etiquette from cyclists. Yes, you could argue that a bike is halfway between a road vehicle and a pedestrian and so maybe occasionally cyclists can get off and push their bikes over pedestrian crossings etc (I used to do this at the more intimidating road junctions). The problem is that most cyclist do not even attempt to consider road junctions and cycle straight through red lights etc without a thought.
It's that attitude that the highway code does not apply to them that irritates people.
As a car driver I have been abused by cyclists. Not very pleasant and totally out of order. A friend tells me that if a car driver hits a cyclist that legally the car driver will always be responsible - cyclists, now do you understand why drivers get so annoyed when bikes go on the road without lights at night?
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 2:18pm sashimi wrote:
Why does 'twit' have to be spelt 'tw*t' Surely even Dave can work that one out for himself. Or does 'tw*t' have another naughtier meaning which someone will tell me when I've grown up?
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 3:11pm Carol Vorderman wrote:
think of another vowel but not E, I, O or U
or Dave is being made a COUNTDOWN of! now just loose the first O and the word Down
see what's happening Sashimi
in all honesty can see it from both sides ! Let me have a word with my mate
Jeremy Kyle he'd love this forum.
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 3:54pm Dave wrote:
I just wanted to finish by saying I'm right and you're wrong so nerrr!
 
 
On 15 Jan 2009 at 5:44pm ... wrote:
...
 
 
On 16 Jan 2009 at 2:14pm Andrew Richardson wrote:
Your friend is wrong. The responsibility for the crash will be decided by the courts. They were *talking* about introducing a system of automatic insurance *liability*, not guilt, in the event of cyclist/motor vehicle collisions, but to my knowledge this has not happened in this country.
I agree about not adding extra legislation. It is perfectly possible to enforce existing laws, which are already adequate and cover all the offences the people on here are going on about (again...) and make this enforcement high-profile. Education in the form of cycle training for the clueless would probably help as well and I'm all for this.
What I find amusing is that the same people who complain about excessive legislation for motorists and how the letter of the law is applied to them, and how it's all not fair, want the same sort of treatment for someone else whilst complaining about how hard done by they are. If cyclists are getting such a great deal, why aren't *you* doing it?
I say this as a regular cyclist and a driver.
 
 
On 21 Jan 2009 at 11:52pm faggit wrote:
Dave, I put it to you that you're not only a phookin' retard, but that you're Guy Chapman in disguise (which is, to all intents and purposes, the same thing).


This thread has reached its limit now
Why not start another one


 

Cliffe Tableau 2015 Alight 22:132
Cliffe Tableau 2015 Alight

nevermind i googled it :):):S more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
Thomas Paine