J
On Saturday I had my first experience of a motorist indicating (by
vigorous gesturing) that I should leave his road and use a nearby
cycle
track; the cycle track is not at the side of the road, but in parkland
a few metres away.
We continued the conversation at a nearby traffic lights; he
confirmed
what his gesturing had meant. I suggested that he visit the cycle
track
and see by the amount of glass why I preferred the road; I suppose
I
should have mentioned that it was also bunged with pedestrians of all
ages
and dogs and prams and that I would have to cross paths and all
sorts
of nonesense at the next junction.
He then noted that he had observed that one car had nearly collided
with another because it had had to make a abrupt manoeuvre to avoid
me.
Anyway, as the amber light came on, his parting shot was "actually,
it's against the law, you know".
Scary that, for it seemed to have come as out a well formed idea in
his
head. OTOH, he didn't look like someone who has current road traffic
legislation as his specialist subject or who spends his time reading
this newsgroup.
So where did that opinion come from? Is it something that the Sun or
the Star discuss? Or that assholes talk about in pubs?
>From a recent post by me, you will know that I had figured that cycle
tracks were a purely Northern Ireland phenomenon and that, since
starting to cycle again, I had concluded independently that they were
a
far from good idea.
All very scary for at least two reasons: (i) if assholes like that are
strongly of the opinion "actually, it's against the law, you
know",
then there will be some of them who will deliberately and recklessly
disregard cyclists; (ii) from times as a long distance runner on
country roads without paths, I began to remember how abruptly and late
some mortorists used to manoeuver around us; it was as if they saw us
only in the last ten metres. Moreover, there is the shock expressed
by
friends at the danger of it, when they hear that I cycle on the road.
Best regards,
Jon C.
vigorous gesturing) that I should leave his road and use a nearby
cycle
track; the cycle track is not at the side of the road, but in parkland
a few metres away.
We continued the conversation at a nearby traffic lights; he
confirmed
what his gesturing had meant. I suggested that he visit the cycle
track
and see by the amount of glass why I preferred the road; I suppose
I
should have mentioned that it was also bunged with pedestrians of all
ages
and dogs and prams and that I would have to cross paths and all
sorts
of nonesense at the next junction.
He then noted that he had observed that one car had nearly collided
with another because it had had to make a abrupt manoeuvre to avoid
me.
Anyway, as the amber light came on, his parting shot was "actually,
it's against the law, you know".
Scary that, for it seemed to have come as out a well formed idea in
his
head. OTOH, he didn't look like someone who has current road traffic
legislation as his specialist subject or who spends his time reading
this newsgroup.
So where did that opinion come from? Is it something that the Sun or
the Star discuss? Or that assholes talk about in pubs?
>From a recent post by me, you will know that I had figured that cycle
tracks were a purely Northern Ireland phenomenon and that, since
starting to cycle again, I had concluded independently that they were
a
far from good idea.
All very scary for at least two reasons: (i) if assholes like that are
strongly of the opinion "actually, it's against the law, you
know",
then there will be some of them who will deliberately and recklessly
disregard cyclists; (ii) from times as a long distance runner on
country roads without paths, I began to remember how abruptly and late
some mortorists used to manoeuver around us; it was as if they saw us
only in the last ten metres. Moreover, there is the shock expressed
by
friends at the danger of it, when they hear that I cycle on the road.
Best regards,
Jon C.