PDA

View Full Version : Idiots on two wheels



Zippity
19-11-2010, 10:16 AM
This morning at approximately 7.40am whilst I was driving down Ngauranga Gorge, I was overtaken by a mad cyclist who was travelling at least twice the speed of the surrounding motor vehicles - trucks, cars, trailer units etc :(

The idiot was riding BETWEEN both lanes of traffic.

No wonder cyclists are being bowled over like nine pins - and they wonder why they are being killed :(

prefect
19-11-2010, 10:20 AM
And when he gets waxed the media will say, look another innocent cyclist has been killed by death by a horrible driver.

nerd
19-11-2010, 11:07 AM
Should have nudged him :P

SolMiester
19-11-2010, 11:50 AM
Tamaki drive on the News lats night at the spot where the latest victim lost her life, was a bus rounding the corner and some DH cyclist was so far into the middle of the road I LOL'd...***, there was a cycle lane marked out on the footpath..
If these lot dont care about there lives, why should we!

Trev
19-11-2010, 12:28 PM
This it. (http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/changes-outlined-in-wake-cyclist-s-death-2-56-video-3903040)
:)

DeSade
19-11-2010, 12:33 PM
I just watched that vid not being too familiar with Auckland.
Seems to me stopping anyone parking there would be the easiest way to fix it.

Gobe1
19-11-2010, 12:36 PM
I can see why people want to cycle along there, apart from the width the road is mint, and a great view.

Billy T
19-11-2010, 12:39 PM
You should see the speed that some motorcyclists reach when crossing the Auckland Harbour Bridge!! I've been doing 80K and indicating to change lane when motorcycles have flown past at 100+. At that speed they are likely to end up in the water or 'cheese grated' by the safety railing. Similar behaviour happens on the motorways at peak time.

The angel will only ride on their shoulder for just so long, then she'll abandon ship and leave them to it!

Good job too, no sympathy, the majority ride safely.

Cheers

Billy 8-{)

johcar
19-11-2010, 12:48 PM
Tamaki drive on the News lats night at the spot where the latest victim lost her life, was a bus rounding the corner and some DH cyclist was so far into the middle of the road I LOL'd...***, there was a cycle lane marked out on the footpath..
If these lot dont care about there lives, why should we!

Sol, I assume you're talking about the 'shared cycle path' that is marked on what is actually the original footpath that runs along the top of the sea wall from Mechanics Bay to Mission Bay and then from the other side of Mission Bay to St Heliers.

I just watched the video in Trev's link - did you notice the motorcyclist overtaking on the left about 40 seconds in? And another one at the 2:31 mark? Idiots are not limited to bicycles.

I assume the cyclist you mention is shown at the 60 second mark in that same video. If so, if he tried to use the 'cycle lane', at the speed he was riding on the road, the pedestrians and runners that use it would probably push him off into the road. Bikes easily travel at speeds in excess of 20km/h - far too fast for a shared-with-bipeds pathway (especially one as narrow as on the waterfront).

The cyclist was "wide" because he was overtaking a parked car. Cyclists are allowed, and in fact encouraged by the new road rules, to pass parked vehicles by the average length of an open car door: 1.5 metres. As you are aware, this is the exact same spot that the English girl was killed a few days ago - by trying to avoid an opening car door.

pctek
19-11-2010, 01:24 PM
I hit a cyclist once. No helmet and he'd pulled out at New Lynn intersection - me on the green light, him on the red.

But I do take care around bikes, pass them with loads of room and so on. And horses.

PaulD
19-11-2010, 01:25 PM
I assume the cyclist you mention is shown at the 60 second mark in that same video. If so, if he tried to use the 'cycle lane', at the speed he was riding on the road, the pedestrians and runners that use it would probably push him off into the road. Bikes easily travel at speeds in excess of 20km/h - far too fast for a shared-with-bipeds pathway (especially one as narrow as on the waterfront).



That cyclist could easily have been doing 50kph. I can't match that speed but in Wgtn if I'm in a 30 zone I just follow other cars without sticking to the left inviting someone to squeeze alongside.

roddy_boy
19-11-2010, 01:50 PM
Sorry johcar, but I'm pretty sure no one will ever be on your side here mate.

johcar
19-11-2010, 02:07 PM
That's OK - I have broad shoulders. I don't particular care what people think. But since this is a forum, it's good to get both (all) sides in plain view.

Then people can make up their minds to keep their prejudices and generalisations and bigotry. But at least they will have had an opportunity to see some alternative points of view.

user
19-11-2010, 02:13 PM
This morning at approximately 7.40am whilst I was driving down Ngauranga Gorge, I was overtaken by a mad cyclist who was travelling at least twice the speed of the surrounding motor vehicles - trucks, cars, trailer units etc :(

The idiot was riding BETWEEN both lanes of traffic.

No wonder cyclists are being bowled over like nine pins - and they wonder why they are being killed :(

So what does this have to do with innocent cyclists being hit head-on by car on the wrong side of the road and being hit while avoiding a car door being opened? Rather silly generalisation which I would expect to come from a redneck sort of attitude.

DeSade
19-11-2010, 02:35 PM
But there is NO need to spend millions creating a new raised cycle path, thats overkill.

Just paint yellow lines, no parked cars = no car doors.

SolMiester
19-11-2010, 02:39 PM
Sol, I assume you're talking about the 'shared cycle path' that is marked on what is actually the original footpath that runs along the top of the sea wall from Mechanics Bay to Mission Bay and then from the other side of Mission Bay to St Heliers.

I just watched the video in Trev's link - did you notice the motorcyclist overtaking on the left about 40 seconds in? And another one at the 2:31 mark? Idiots are not limited to bicycles.

I assume the cyclist you mention is shown at the 60 second mark in that same video. If so, if he tried to use the 'cycle lane', at the speed he was riding on the road, the pedestrians and runners that use it would probably push him off into the road. Bikes easily travel at speeds in excess of 20km/h - far too fast for a shared-with-bipeds pathway (especially one as narrow as on the waterfront).

The cyclist was "wide" because he was overtaking a parked car. Cyclists are allowed, and in fact encouraged by the new road rules, to pass parked vehicles by the average length of an open car door: 1.5 metres. As you are aware, this is the exact same spot that the English girl was killed a few days ago - by trying to avoid an opening car door.

Better he ride in safety on the shared lane than get killed on the road, there is just no room for them, do you expect all the cars to SLOW down to 20k during rush hour?, good grief man!
I hardly think pedestrians are going to push him off and would probably get one of the way....
Not that I care, if the cycle wants to risk his life, all power to him! Booldy sure I know where I would be cycling and it wouldnt be on the road!

Oh and where you state cyclists are encouraged to sweep out 1.5 metres passing a car, what can they not check that a vehicle traveling twice as fast is also about to pass the parked car?
It rubbish, there is NO room IMO on the same road for vehicle traveling at such disparate speeds, without a separate lane period...

Zippity
19-11-2010, 02:49 PM
So what does this have to do with innocent cyclists being hit head-on by car on the wrong side of the road and being hit while avoiding a car door being opened? Rather silly generalisation which I would expect to come from a redneck sort of attitude.

So much for Jen's warning about name calling. It is attitudes like yours that are so stupid.

I was not making a generalization. I was stating a fact.

I am sick and tired of the cycling "bleaters" bitchin' about the attitudes of motorists. Maybe it is time that they (and you) took an inwards look at their own behavior.

When you can differentiate between attitude and fact, we might make some progress :(

user
19-11-2010, 03:19 PM
Perhaps if you read my post carefully, you would see that I was calling your attitude 'redneck', not you as a person. You can easily change your attitude but not so easily your character.

DeSade
19-11-2010, 03:20 PM
Its time that all cyclists be licenced, required to pass the same road tests as motorists and be required to pay their share of the road upkeep thought licencing fees and ACC levies.

Not a day goes past where I do not see a cyclist run a red light when nothing
is coming, weaving through traffic to get to the front of the lines and other dangerous practises.

I only have on thing to say to idiots on bikes that get in my way doing stupid ****, welcome to your new life as my hood ornament

user
19-11-2010, 03:22 PM
Its time that all cyclists be licenced, required to pass the same road tests as motorists and be required to pay their share of the road upkeep thought licencing fees and ACC levies.

Not a day goes past where I do not see a cyclist run a red light when nothing
is coming, weaving through traffic to get to the front of the lines and other dangerous practises.

I only have on thing to say to idiots on bikes that get in my way doing stupid ****, welcome to your new life as my hood ornament

Troll.

gary67
19-11-2010, 03:24 PM
Sorry johcar, but I'm pretty sure no one will ever be on your side here mate.

Wrong there Roddy, I'm wth Johcar here even though I can't ride at the moment.
I get fed up with the car lobby always pushing there view with no regard for anyone else, yes it can be dangerous to ride on the road but so is riding on a shared footpath where the pedestrians just want to push you into the traffic.

I know some cyclists break the rules but is certainly not the majority where as car, bus, truck breaking the rules is the majority but do any of you jump up and down making a huge song and dance about it No you don't it's just pushed under the carpet and labelled hijinks. So tell me how can one group of road users break the rules while another group get blamed for everything when not breaking the rules

DeSade
19-11-2010, 03:25 PM
Actually no not this time,
I personally think all cyclists should be banned from my roads.

(see thats a troll)

Zippity
19-11-2010, 03:38 PM
Obviously it pays not to post here if you disagree with the minority of idiots (read "name callers") :(

prefect
19-11-2010, 03:39 PM
Have you ever seen one of these cyclist huas with fancy bike and gear not run a red light if they see a gap.
I am not really anti bike but I came off my 12 speed bike when I was pissed and hurt my nose needed stitches. Thought I was doing the right thing by not driving.

PaulD
19-11-2010, 03:46 PM
And for every cyclist running red lights how many pedestrians crossing where ever and when ever they like. Why get so wound up about it? Is it the frustration of being stuck in traffic?

DeSade
19-11-2010, 03:54 PM
For me its the holier-than-thou attitude, as in motorists must make all the concessions to cyclists cause the evil motorist is protected by a steel shell.

The reality is a lot of cyclists put themselves into dangerous situations.

johcar
19-11-2010, 04:32 PM
Is that really not perhaps just your perception of an 'attitude' of a cyclist from a motorist viewpoint? EDIT: Unless you actually met and spoke with the person, how can you really tell what their attitude is in the 15 seconds they go flying past you?

Why shouldn't the more vulnerable be protected - or at least be recognised as people, rather than objects?

Your "hood ornament" comments are tough words, although perhaps understandable in some circumstances, but I think you wouldn't see the funny side if there was a cyclist's or pedestrian's body half way through your windscreen. No matter whose fault it was.

It's not something you would forget in a hurry - or joke about with your mates - when you realise that your vehicle, in your control has killed or maimed someone's husband/wife/brother/sister/father/mother etc

DeSade
19-11-2010, 04:40 PM
Is that really not perhaps just your perception of an 'attitude' of a cyclist from a motorist viewpoint? EDIT: Unless you actually met and spoke with the person, how can you really tell what their attitude is in the 15 seconds they go flying past you?

Why shouldn't the more vulnerable be protected - or at least be recognised as people, rather than objects?

Your "hood ornament" comments are tough words, although perhaps understandable in some circumstances, but I think you wouldn't see the funny side if there was a cyclist's or pedestrian's body half way through your windscreen. No matter whose fault it was.

It's not something you would forget in a hurry - or joke about with your mates - when you realise that your vehicle, in your control has killed or maimed someone's husband/wife/brother/sister/father/mother etc

I completely understand the sentiment that your expressing here and for most people it might actually work that way, not for me thou. Just because their actions lead to their death does not absolve them of the responsibilty and the blame for the incident.

If I am at fault I will be the first to admit it and do whatever I can to make amends in whatever way I can for it, and you situation would apply and I would be devastated by it.

But if its not my fault then I would barely bat a eyelid, call it cold, callous whatever, the simple fact is I do not allow the stupidity of others to effect me. I would also instruct my insurance to pursue the family for the cost of repairs to my car. Again why should the stupidity of the cyclist leave me out of pocket.

I am a firm believer in taking ownership of the situations where your involved and at fault, this is merely an extension of that belief. Just because their actions lead to their death does not absolve them from the responsibility of the blame for the incident.

ubergeek85
19-11-2010, 04:54 PM
I like how you think DeSade.

I've had my fair share of close calls on a bike - once you ride for a week, you see how dangerous it is, with some of the loons out there. In saying that, I'm not saying that cyclists are perfect - TBH I think both sides are in the wrong at times.

Nearly been wiped out because some sod didn't bother to check behind him before opening his door, nearly sent me under a bus. Shoulda gotten off and punched him, instead I just swore at him and rode off. Also had the usual, drivers turning in front of me, cutting me off, etc etc.

My point? FOLLOW THE GOD DAMNED RULES! No matter who you are, Don't run red lights (for cyclists), Check your blardy mirrors (for cars), Don't cut across lanes without warning (both), etc etc.

coldfront
19-11-2010, 04:55 PM
I read these anti cyclists remarks on this forum and other boards it seems constantly nowdays. Yet its been this way ever since I first started riding a bike well before getting my driving licence.

Maybe thats why I am more tolerant of cyclists than others? I was unable to get a car licence until 17 so started out as a cyclist venturing into the big wide world cycling 20-30 miles just to explore to roads around the city I lived and get out into the country. Somehow I think that learning curve made me realise how much tolerance is needed and how we all interat on the road.

Yet here I read constantly anger towards cyslists and see the results either on the road or read about it.

True some cyclists are a menace BUT is that not true about vehicle drivers (not just cars)as well? The worst part about it is that the same arrogant car drivers could even be on push bikes and vica versa. Hence you get another problem.

The last five or six years I have given up cycling because of location and the hazzards of that location and the aggresive drivers that New Zealand is now breeding.

Twenty years ago (I had a driving licence then as well) I was involved in a bad cycling incident with car driver in the UK. It was on a section of two laned road approaching traffic lights in front of me was two cars indicating left so I stayed behind them. When the lights changed I was fully aware of their intentions, on reflection I should have pushed forward to the junction and got infont of them this would have avoided the incident that followed.
A car behind me also wanted to turn left however he was not indicating that intention. It was a matter of two car lengths to the junction!!! This car driver who remember was following and starting from stationary decided that he would swing wide around me at the junction. The result was a collision him driving over my front wheel and me being pinned to the ground by my bike.

Not my fault plenty of witnesses including the driver behind us and this driver was arrogant in the belief it was my fault. The insurance company even tried to 50/50 blame but my solicitor said no way.

Nothing has changed much still the same attitude towards cyclists only now days you got the internet and more vocal and actual threats.

I see a cyclist on the road I give them room, if they disobey the road rules I keep my calm knowing full well the damage the metal box I am driving could cause them. The fact is a bike is more agile than your car no matter how big your engine or ego and the fact is you are the one in the killing machine and you are the one that needs a licence to operate that killing machine.

I wonder how many of the mouthy anti cyclist people are or will be parents in the future who will but their kid a pushbike?

johcar
19-11-2010, 05:05 PM
Well said, coldfront! :thumbs:

Trev
19-11-2010, 05:56 PM
Its time that all cyclists be licenced, required to pass the same road tests as motorists and be required to pay their share of the road upkeep thought licencing fees and ACC levies.

Not a day goes past where I do not see a cyclist run a red light when nothing
is coming, weaving through traffic to get to the front of the lines and other dangerous practises.

I only have on thing to say to idiots on bikes that get in my way doing stupid ****, welcome to your new life as my hood ornament
I think you will find that most cyclists are holders of a car licence. I'm a cyclists and also hold a car licence and a MC licence and up to 4 years ago a HT licence.
:)

Snorkbox
19-11-2010, 06:13 PM
A lot of the difficulty with cyclists may be there is no enforcement of rules too. They don't have licence plates, rego, wof driving licences or at least don't have to carry one as motorists do.

So you get pulled over by a cop and asked to give your name and address,

"Donald Duck, 123 Hollywood Cres"

coldfront
19-11-2010, 06:26 PM
A lot of the difficulty with cyclists may be there is no enforcement of rules too. They don't have licence plates, rego, wof driving licences or at least don't have to carry one as motorists do.

So you get pulled over by a cop and asked to give your name and address,

"Donald Duck, 123 Hollywood Cres"

Oh oh now you will be in favour of compulsory ID cards as well :stare:

You are obliged to give a Police Officer correct details and if that police officer doubts the details as being correct or are unable to collaberate your ID then you may well be arrested for failing to give details. That applys to any alledged offence no matter if you have a driving licence or not or if you are driving a motor vehicle.

Check you Law statutes before making the assumption Police can not prosecuate a cyclist.

prefect
19-11-2010, 06:38 PM
Yep on road cops a maoris guy on a bike wouldn't give his details until they arrested him.

Snorkbox
19-11-2010, 06:39 PM
Did I say that the Police CAN'T prosecute?

Did I say I wanted ID cards?

I am simply mentioning that it may be more difficult to check the information given by an alleged offender and for the record a lot of people here rely on the Road Code for the laws. I will remind people that the Road Code is not, in fact, the law but rather the relevant Acts and Regulations and amendments made by and passed by Parliament.

There are faults on both sides as I see it.

gary67
19-11-2010, 08:08 PM
I always carry ID when i'm out on my bike just encase I do get knocked Or fall of and end up in a serious way at least the police would be able to contact my family

johcar
19-11-2010, 08:09 PM
Something to think about:


I'm not a "f***ing cyclist". I'm Ruby's daddy, on a bike

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m Ben’s brother, on a bike.

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m Vanessa’s darling, on a bike.

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m the guy in charge of creating a campaign on Facebook to help Auckland City Mission raise money for families this Christmas, and I’m riding to work on a bike.

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m Gabriel’s daddy, on a bike, and he’s expecting me home around 6pm for bathtime.

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m Scott’s mate, on a bike.

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m Rochelle’s workmate and friend and she’s expecting me on a call at 8:30 a.m.

I’m not a “f***ing cyclist”. I’m Liz’s little boy – all grown up, but still a skinned-knee five-year-old pedaling a yellow Star Flyer.

And you’re not a “motorist”. You are someone in a car. Someone I haven’t met yet, with your own universe of people who laugh when you’re around, and you rode a bike to school, and you’re trying to remember your shopping list, and you’re thinking about going for a run, and you need to check your mirror before you open your door, in case the guy who plays guitar in the office band is riding past you on a bike.

Say “hi”, next time. My name’s Greg.

From http://publicaddress.net/hardnews/im-not-a-fing-cyclist-im-rubys-daddy-on-a/

coldfront
20-11-2010, 09:53 AM
Sometimes though the thought process to consider those facts is very limited to the one eyed tunnel vision some people exhibit in the attitude towards cyclists the result is

1922

Trev
20-11-2010, 10:59 AM
There are also idiots in/on four wheels.
:)

Snorkbox
20-11-2010, 11:09 AM
Or with even more wheels than just four for that matter.

coldfront
20-11-2010, 11:13 AM
There will always be idiots!

It takes two people to cause a conflict and the most likey outcome is an avoidable collision that ends up severly injuring or killing someone.

btw, the photo in my earlier post dont show up unless you click it.

prefect
20-11-2010, 11:19 AM
I admire the guts of these cyclists who travel on roads they are a bit like ww2 Bomber Command aircrew. Sooner or later some of them will get killed by death its a numbers game.
I would guess around half and its only a wild guess of motorists really dont want cyclists on the road to inconvience them and dont care if a cyclist gets snotted off his bike and transferred to the morgue.

johcar
20-11-2010, 11:26 AM
There are also idiots in/on four wheels.
:)


Or with even more wheels than just four for that matter.

And they outnumber (and out-weigh) cyclists 10:1.

Actually, I've said in another thread some time ago - and I still stand by it - the cyclists you see behaving idiotically on two wheels are highly likely to behave in a similar manner when behind the wheel of a motor vehicle (crashing red lights, holding up traffic, making a turn without looking etc).

And the sociopathic (psychopathic?) frothing-at-the-mouth motor vehicle drivers that have a bee in their bonnets about ALL cyclists, are probably more likely than most to be involved in a road rage incident following a minor infraction.

As coldfront says above, there will always be idiots - unfortunately you can't legislate for that (well you can, but that's getting into the realm of eugenics :) - and that won't solve today's problems).

coldfront
20-11-2010, 11:54 AM
Seems to be more of a problem because of the we must have a car attitude and New Zealands pre occupation of allowing 15 year olds behind the wheel of the car before they have had a chance to learn road rules and survival on a bicycle or even motorcycle. Instead at 15 we cacoon them in a metal box and make them think they are masters of the road.

Looks like the French are adopting an interesting ploy to introduce the common courtesy to other road users thats gone missing in recent years.


CYCLISTS and pedestrians have been given new rights over cars in a series of changes to the highway code in France.

The rules, which take immediate effect, mean pedestrians now always have priority over cars when crossing a road. Until now, they had priority only at specially designated crossings.

They need to "show a clear intention to cross" a road - described as "an ostensible step forward or a hand gesture" - and vehicles are required to stop for them.

The only exception is where a designated pedestrian crossing is less than 50m away.

Drivers who ignore the rules face a fine of €135 or could lose four points from their licence.

The new rules also allow bicycles to skip red lights if they are turning right, but only at crossroads where there is a sign to that effect.

It will be up to individual mayors to decide where this should be allowed.



Note how it comes into effect with immediate effect rather than the pussy footing years to change policy adopted in this country aka Driving age, Right turn rulle etc.

johcar
20-11-2010, 12:31 PM
The pedestrian-crossing-a-road-and-halting-traffic worked well in the US to when I was there many years ago. Step out onto a road even when approaching vehicles were still in the distance had the drivers jumping on the brakes (and horns, often) and coming to a complete stop. But that is possibly more related to the the "civil suit" environment than a legal requirement.... :)

But I agree, if the French can implement NOW, why can't the NZ government do the same: for drink-driving limits, for left hand turn give way, for greater rights for more vulnerable road users (including pedestrians and motorcyclists)???

The answer is probably because they are too set in their ways: everything must go to public consultation, through umpty-dozen interminable committees until it comes out the other end looking nothing like it did when it went into the process.

Fifthdawn
20-11-2010, 01:27 PM
You know what I dislike, the fact that cyclists are happy to think they have the right to ride on the road with cars and yet as soon as some one points out they could ride on the footpath with pedestrians they act as though it would be impossible, if they are not willing (and know how annoying it would be to ride with pedestrians) then why should they think they should ride with cards instead.

I think a lot of the anger at cyclists stems from the fact that most drivers are scared ******** of the fact that they might drive around a corner on a road like scenic drive and run smack bang into two twits riding abreast in the middle of the lane.

coldfront
20-11-2010, 01:27 PM
The Sh`ell be right attitude at its best

johcar
20-11-2010, 02:58 PM
You know what I dislike, the fact that cyclists are happy to think they have the right to ride on the road with cars and yet as soon as some one points out they could ride on the footpath with pedestrians they act as though it would be impossible, if they are not willing (and know how annoying it would be to ride with pedestrians) then why should they think they should ride with cards instead.

I think a lot of the anger at cyclists stems from the fact that most drivers are scared ******** of the fact that they might drive around a corner on a road like scenic drive and run smack bang into two twits riding abreast in the middle of the lane.

What? And compete with slow-moving and unpredictable pedestrians? Have you ever walked up Queen Street when you've been in a hurry? Or on any footpath (note, it's even called a footpath). People stop without warning, change direction without warning and suddenly veer into a shop doorway without warning. Put fast travelling bikes in that mix and you're just asking for trouble.

Or try to predict which driveway a car is going to back out of next, while you're barrelling along at 30km/h plus on bike on a footpath?

And don't retort with "You shouldn't be riding at that speed!" - modern bikes can do 80km/h plus (with the right leg muscles pushing the pedals) - just watch the Tour de France or the Tour of Southland. Recreational riders can easily do 30-45km/h on the flat. And you can't get fit (or get to work on time, or lose weight) riding at 8-10km/h...

And the statement "cyclists are happy to think they have the right to ride on the road with cars" is factually incorrect. Cyclists actually DO have the right to ride on the road with cars. It's enshrined in law. And bikes have been around as long, if not longer, than cars.

And yes, more drivers SHOULD be scared shitless that they might come round a blind corner and be unable to react in time to what was hiding round that corner (irrespective of what the hazard might be). Perhaps if they did, driving standards in NZ would rise above a third world standard. It's called defensive driving - driving as if everyone else on the road is an idiot, which a lot of the time is perfectly true.

But you are right, the anger directed at cyclists is because people are scared of their unpredictability (of direction, generally). Even more reason just to back off and give them room.

Trev
08-12-2010, 08:57 AM
There was an item on Closeup on cyclists on Monday night and it showed you these cars coming out of a driveway which had to cross a cycleway/footpath before they got to the road. A group of cyclists got up to the driveway and the cars just kept on coming and one of the cyclists thumped his fist down on one of the bonnets of one of the cars. The car slowed down a bit but kept on going. How many motor vehicle drivers and I'm one of them don't realize that you have to giveway to pedestrians and cyclist when you are crossing a footpath/cycleway coming out of a driveway whether they are on your left side or right side. I was riding my bike past a Firth concrete place which the trucks have to cross a cycleway/footpath when coming out. I was riding past one day and I forced a truck to stop to let me by and when I got passed the driver had the cheek too yell out, learn your roadrules mate or something along those lines.
:)