Be careful in the West Rand! (and SA in general!)

[Quagga]

SNIP

 

The fact that you are content with only Road bikes does not justify holding up traffic and being in the road where there clearly isn't enough space

What is your view on learner driver holding up traffic? 

Or the big truck doing 5 YES 5kmph on Vissershok EVERY afternoon?

The scooter with the high school kid on it doing 20 and holding up traffic?

[MTB-More]

A lot of BS

 

Cool story bro. Woman's rights have nothing to do with your self entitlement to ride in the middle of the road breaking the law riding abreast, blocking traffic (oh this is also against the law btw) or your inability to realize your entitlement is immature and childish.

 

Go ride wherever you want

 

Rightly so, as the motorist should obey the traffic laws and rules

 

But you shouldn't? Riding abreast is against the law? As soon as you stop breaking the law you can expect others to do the same.

[Patchelicious]

It's ignorant to assume I haven't been clipped before.

It's incorrect and ignorant to tell me I MUST ride off the road, when I am well within my right to ride responsibly in the road.

My opinion remains the same

 

I think this is one of those where both people have good points, where the one doesn't make the other wrong.

 

The whole "its my right" angle is true and should be enforced. But then you get the common sense angle too. In an example that I used before. I have every right to go walking around Ponte Tower at midnight, but do I choose to do this?

 

We as cyclist have every right to be on the roads, but because off the sad state of reality, we could choose to go and exercise that right on the slightly safer roads that are available to us.

[Patchelicious]

What is your view on learner driver holding up traffic? 

Or the big truck doing 5 YES 5kmph on Vissershok EVERY afternoon?

The scooter with the high school kid on it doing 20 and holding up traffic?

We have touched on this before too.

 

Even though the net effect is almost exactly the same when a car must wait for a tractor, donkey cart, truck, learner driver or cyclist, the perception is very different.

 

Usually when cyclists block the roads, its done so out of choice, these other examples are often out of necessity and people react differently that. Thats where these "self entitlement" , "think they own the road" comments from. I am not saying they are right, but it does help when you understand where they coming from.

 

People have empathy for learner drivers/tractors/donkey carts, but much less so when it comes to a "bunch of arrogant guys on their R100k bikes who drink snob coffee"

[MTB-More]

It's ignorant to assume I haven't been clipped before.

It's incorrect and ignorant to tell me I MUST ride off the road, when I am well within my right to ride responsibly in the road.

My opinion remains the same

 

And its idiotic and intellectually dishonest in riding on the road dealing with getting clipped rather than getting a flat and then wanting to blame motorists. 

 

And Yes you are allowed to ride in the road but then please stop at all lights. Don't skip a stop and while you at it use your arms to signal when turning. Also refrain from EVER going abreast as Single file is the LAW

 

Selective law following and then expecting everyone around you to 100% follow it is intellectually dishonest... Just saying

 

 

EDIT - 

Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest.

[Quagga]

Cool story bro. Woman's rights have nothing to do with your self entitlement to ride in the middle of the road breaking the law riding abreast, blocking traffic (oh this is also against the law btw) or your inability to realize your entitlement is immature and childish.

 

Go ride wherever you want

 

 

But you shouldn't? Riding abreast is against the law? As soon as you stop breaking the law you can expect others to do the same.

I was not addressing riding abreast, but even if someone did it does not give anyone the right to "clip" them. I responded to your comment about pitchforks....if you hurt / kill a cyclist weather he was 1cm from the edge or in the middle of the road, they SHOULD come out. 

 

WRT to your "self entitlement" When last did you read the traffic rules esp the part about what rights cyclist have? Those rules are not very clear....words like "as far left as possible" that can be 30cm left of middle line due to debris etc. and it can be 1cm left of the yellow line.....

[Dirkitech]

I think this is one of those where both people have good points, where the one doesn't make the other wrong.

 

The whole "its my right" angel is true and should be enforced. But then you get the common sense angle too. In an example that I used before. I have every right to go walking around Ponte Tower at midnight, but do I do this?

 

We as cyclist have every right to be on the roads, but because off the sad state of reality, we could choose to go and exercise that right on the slightly safer roads that are available to us.

Agreed Patch, though I feel like I should just clarify from my side. 

I am indeed telling mtb-more that it's foolish to expect someone to change from a road bike to an mtb, just for a portion of road with no tar shoulder, especially if youre going to ride 40-100km and its just a single 0.1-1km stretch that is without soulder.

Suffice to say, when I cycled on Jan Smuts 2 weeks ago, I still went onto the pavement (illegally, ironically), but I'd have increased everyones risk being in the road. My point is simply that it is pointless to tell people to use different bikes to accommodate selfish/reckless behaviour of road users.

[Quagga]

And its idiotic and morally dishonest in riding on the road dealing with getting clipped rather than getting a flat and then wanting to blame motorists. 

 

And Yes you are allowed to ride in the road but then please stop at all lights. Don't skip a stop and while you at it use your arms to signal when turning. Also refrain from EVER going abreast as Single file is the LAW

 

Selective law following and then expecting everyone around you to 100% follow it is morally dishonest... Just saying

Why must he be incoinvienced by riding next to the road and getting a flat but NOT the motorist having to slow down for 30sec?

 

I will bet you that cyclist obey the rules better than most motorist. You say stop at stop street, COOL then tell your motorist buddies to do the same, and tell them put their phones down while you are at it.

Single file is the LAW

So is 1.2m away from a cyclist.

Wearing your seatbelt

Not using your phone

Stopping BEHIND the white line at a red traffic light.......

and 

and 

and

and

Even taking % into account I see maybe 12% cyclist not adhering to the traffic laws, but I see and have recorded on camera 90% of motorist ignoring road rules

[Dirkitech]

And its idiotic and Intellectual dishonesty in riding on the road dealing with getting clipped rather than getting a flat and then wanting to blame motorists. 

 

And Yes you are allowed to ride in the road but then please stop at all lights. Don't skip a stop and while you at it use your arms to signal when turning. Also refrain from EVER going abreast as Single file is the LAW

 

Selective law following and then expecting everyone around you to 100% follow it is Intellectual dishonesty... Just saying

 

 

EDIT - 

Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest.

More assumptions, more ignorance.

 

I never ride in groups so your ignorant assumption that I ride 2 abreast is moot.

Your matter of preference gets no precedent over my matter of preference. If I'd rather get clipped again than get a puncture and subsequently get mugged and stabbed to death in a bush, its my prerogative.

Its an ignorant assumption telling me to stop at red lights, not skip a stop sign and use hand signals- matter a fact I do this already.

Your edit explaining "intellectual dishonesty" just proves my point on your ignorance and negligent assumptions.

There exists no "selective" in this context- everything is perfectly lawful, so whats your point?

 

You're trying to preach to the converted here and you're terrible at it.

 

edit: fixed spelling

[Patchelicious]

Agreed Patch, though I feel like I should just clarify from my side. 

I am indeed telling mtb-more that it's foolish to expect someone to change from a road bike to an mtb, just for a portion of road with no tar shoulder, especially if youre going to ride 40-100km and its just a single 0.1-1km stretch that is without soulder.

Suffice to say, when I cycled on Jan Smuts 2 weeks ago, I still went onto the pavement (illegally, ironically), but I'd have increased everyones risk being in the road. My point is simply that it is pointless to tell people to use different bikes to accommodate selfish/reckless behaviour of road users.

 

I think its pointless telling other people what to do full stop. 

[MTB-More]

 

Why must he be incoinvienced by riding next to the road and getting a flat but NOT the motorist having to slow down for 30sec?

 

I will bet you that cyclist obey the rules better than most motorist. You say stop at stop street, COOL then tell your motorist buddies to do the same, and tell them put their phones down while you are at it.

Single file is the LAW

So is 1.2m away from a cyclist.

Wearing your seatbelt

Not using your phone

Stopping BEHIND the white line at a red traffic light.......

and 

and 

and

and

Even taking % into account I see maybe 12% cyclist not adhering to the traffic laws, but I see and have recorded on camera 90% of motorist ignoring road rules

 

 

I love how you want the Motorist to 1st follow the rules and then you will...

 

Do your part and then you have a foot to stand on. Don't come with this YEA but when he puts his phone down then I will stop... Just Stop... Be the difference. You cant expect everyone else to do everything right before you do it.

[MTB-More]

More assumptions, more ignorance.

 

I never ride in groups so your ignorant assumption that I ride 2 abreast is moot.

Your matter of preference gets no precedent over my matter of preference. If I'd rather get clipped again than get a puncture and subsequently get mugged and stabbed to death in a bush, its my perogative.

Its an ignorant assumption telling me to stop at red lights, not skip a stop sign and use hand signals- matter a fact I do this already.

Your edit explaining "intellectual dishonesty" just proves my point on your ignorance and negligent assumptions.

There exists no "selective" in this context- everything is perfectly lawful, so whats your point?

 

You're trying to preach to the converted here and you're terrible at it.

 

Yes... Sadly it is your right to be a "dwis" at your own peril too. I think you miss the point of this. You out of a 1000 do it. I am happy for you. My assumptions/comments are clearly not directed at you personally but clearly the depth of this discussion alludes you and even due to popular belief this discussion isn't about you. Its a generalized statement of the general cyclist attitude.

 

But please continue feeling offended

 

EDIT-

Oh and I edit fixing spelling mistakes else that's all you will have to use as a argument.

 

EDIT2-

Screw this I'm out. If you want to cycle in the middle of the road. Good luck and safe miles. 

[eddy]

Cool story bro. Woman's rights have nothing to do with your self entitlement to ride in the middle of the road breaking the law riding abreast, blocking traffic (oh this is also against the law btw) or your inability to realize your entitlement is immature and childish.

 

Go ride wherever you want

 

 

But you shouldn't? Riding abreast is against the law? As soon as you stop breaking the law you can expect others to do the same.

 

 

Listen, and read carefully to what you had described as BS. I specifically spoke about a single rider. How that constitutes riding abreast is disconcerting.

 

 

Are you at least prepared to accept this statement : "All cyclists are entitled to be on the road and all motorists have an obligation to wait until it is safe before overtaking." ?

[Patchelicious]

Listen, and read carefully to what you had described as BS. I specifically spoke about a single rider. How that constitutes riding abreast is disconcerting.

 

 

Are you at least prepared to accept this statement : "All cyclists are entitled to be on the road and all motorists have an obligation to wait until it is safe before overtaking." ?

 

Could one claim that if one cyclist takes up the space of two that it could be considered "2 abreast"?

 

[Quagga]

I love how you want the Motorist to 1st follow the rules and then you will...

 

Do your part and then you have a foot to stand on. Don't come with this YEA but when he puts his phone down then I will stop... Just Stop... Be the difference. You cant expect everyone else to do everything right before you do it.

Never said that...I follow the law ALL the time cycling or Driving. Hence I have a foot /  pedalstal to stand on

[MTB-More]

Listen, and read carefully to what you had described as BS. I specifically spoke about a single rider. How that constitutes riding abreast is disconcerting.

 

 

Are you at least prepared to accept this statement : "All cyclists are entitled to be on the road and all motorists have an obligation to wait until it is safe before overtaking." ?

 

As a final comment to this drivel.

 

1. Yes it was BS cause you were comparing riding abreast to a woman being raped. Totally not the same thing. You choose to ride abreast. No woman choose to get raped. The equivalent would be a woman coming outside naked with a Board stating "I have a right to be naked" (Forget about the public indecency LAW) and expect nothing to happen. See the correlation between breaking the law?

 

2. Yes cyclist have the right to be on the road WHEN THEY FOLLOW THE LAW. The OP posted 2 cyclist riding abreast. Him tooting at them and then they wanted to get aggressive with him. 

2.1 Cyclist were breaking the law riding abreast. FACT

2.2 Motorist was in his right to prevent a accident by tooting to get them single file. FACT

 

Now can you acknowledge that the cyclists were wrong in riding abreast braking the law and then got aggressive defending their illegal activity by wanting to assault a motorist?

 

(This topic is so not worth my time anymore)