Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
This was filmed in London, which actually has some of the best cycling infrastructure in the UK (though that's a low bar to pass). It seems, however, that he's taking a route that happens to not have much of that infrastructure on it.
Though as you say, people should be able to cycle however they please, and it is enshrined in UK law that cyclists are not required to use cycling infrastructure. In this case I'd say he's going fast enough that he'd be a danger to the slower cyclists and pedestrians on the cycle paths and multi-use pathways, so riding on the road makes more sense anyway.
There's definitely some bits of that with a shared pedestrian/cycle path on the left.
While it's perfectly legal to ignore that, I've seen how people drive in this country. I'd fucking use it. I don't really want "But I had right of way" on my headstone, while some van driver gets a £60 fine and a two month ban.
Shared paths require cyclists to stop at every side road, which is bullshit. They have right of way on the road itself so they will obviously use it instead.
Also, pedestrians don't read road signs so they often think you're not allowed to be on the shared path. I've seen cyclists get assaulted for using them and had plenty of people shouting at me for doing what I'm allowed (but not legally required) to do.
They're just a cheap and lazy way to pretend there is cycling infrastructure when there isn't, really.
Shared paths are more dangerous to use if you're going at any speed. Motorists aren't looking for cyclists when driving over them into side roads and driveways, and cyclists lose priority at every side road.
Quite so. My city in Australia has excellent shared paths, but the one paralleling one main road is the only one where I have had a close call with a car
On that route I ride on the road so I'm seen and cars can avoid me
They're probably not looking for you whizzing up the middle of them either.
At the end of the day you're a squishy meat sack and they're in a two ton metal box, albeit in central London, one travelling at about 5 mph. If you feel safer doing that then you do you. I'm just saying I wouldn't.
Feel what you want to feel, but we have data that it's safer on the road than the "pavement" (sidewalks in the UK) and I'd rather go by data than feelings. Feeling safe is not the same as being safe.