Cyclist Problem

[inlinesix]

Talk & talk has no ending.

 

Ride to work for 1 wk & give your feedback here.

 

Riding on the road is all about self confidence & agility.

 

Self confidence = To project road presence.

 

Agility = To take note of surrounding & react to it.

 

I love my car but not in this madness traffic.

As i said before, all these talk is leading nowhere. Ride to work for 1 wk & give your feedback here.

 

Don't give the b-------t non-sense about common sense. Common sense can only gain thru one's experience. If u have not gone on the road with bicycle, where is the common sense comes from?

 

[Scoots]

As i said before, all these talk is leading nowhere. Ride to work for 1 wk & give your feedback here.

 

Don't give the b-------t non-sense about common sense. Common sense can only gain thru one's experience. If u have not gone on the road with bicycle, where is the common sense comes from?

 

Based on your logic:

 

A person needs to kill to know it's not right

A person need to steal to know it's not right

A person need to drive recklessly to know it's not right

I rest my case.

 

Like I said: try again => Common Sense .... I wasn't the smart alec who supplied the link.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Scoots

[Moadia]

Ive nothing against them but its very risky..should consider having a seperate path 4 them beside the perdestian walkway

[Elfenstar]

As you have cited: Based on extremely conservative cyclist figures (as it is not recorded in SingStat), it's probably safer to cycle than to drive.

Isn't that just another (preferred) perception?

 

I have no problems with people who CHOOSE to cycle. Just as much as I think they should have no reason to fault me for CHOOSING to drive, or take public transport ...etc. But we all need to remember that there are rules for ALL road users and all who CHOOSE to use the common roads need to abide by those rules.

 

And if you had followed my past exchanges with davidtch, you should know why I say he evocates for 'special treatment'

 

It wasn't a preferred perception. I kind of expected it to go the other way. In fact the figure for the number of cyclists on the roads surprised me. I expected half that amount and safety figures to be comparable to cars instead of bettering them.

 

I don't know what happened between you and David (probably because I was focused on irrational posts by roadtax advocates like Tonyng ). However I don't get any feelings or sentiments of him asking for special treatment, just due regard. I don't think anyone has asked for concessions when it comes to road rules as well have we?

 

Same question back: do you remember (or even notice) all the good drivers or only the bad ones?

 

Knowing the bias, I do take an effort to notice good drivers, which is why I've been saying for the last 4 years now that idiots notwithstanding, drivers here generally seem better than before!!!

 

P.S. What is going on between the two of you anyway?

Edited July 28, 2012 by Elfenstar

[Elfenstar]

... There's a reason why non-economic, time-series data is usually measured over a 5 year period, using compounded annual growth rate. Go figure it out yourselves. That cycling is getting more dangerous over the years can be clearly gleamed from the statistics, only those hard-up to prove a particular point or to justify their own risky behaviour would quote y-on-y figures in the most favourable manner to the public...

 

Again, no offence bro, but the data measure over 5 years show an overall drop in accidents and fatalities involving cyclists.

Edited July 28, 2012 by Elfenstar

[Riceracer]

I am appalled by the ignorance of many drivers.

 

1) Nicoll highway is not an expressway.

 

2) The speed limit on the road is the maximum you can go, not the minimum.

 

3) If pay road tax gives you previleges. Do you give way to a bigger car who pays more road tax than you? So next time a bigger car comes behind you, remember to get out of its way.

 

4) Use of road is not exclusive to anyone.

 

[Erykool]

usually I very tolerant towards cyclist cycling alongside the double yellow line one. sometimes if they cycle out a bit also I try to siam them and pass them at a safe distance. But this morning I encountered something that cannot tolerate one...

 

this group of about 5-6 cyclist was stopping by the side of the road to rest and drink water. but there were two ang mo cyclist, resting in the middle of lane 3 of the 3 lane road.

 

I dunno what to say as I was too shock. they think the road is a kampong road ah.. that road towards sengkang is a 3 lane road with many vehicles going toward sengkang kopitiam and CC.

 

Want to rest cannot just carry the bicycle and rest properly on the side of the road meh... No offence I know not every cyclist is like that there is many considerate cyclist around but this one really puts me off man..

[Lightbringer]

Again, no offence bro, but the data measure over 5 years show an overall drop in accidents and fatalities involving cyclists.

 

No offence taken. I interpret the data differently, but am rather tired and not really interested in plunging into a debate over this. We might be using different denominators and metrics, such as the rather interesting debate on time spent on road vs distance travelled on the road. Even so, it doesn't really bothers me.

 

Just for record, I do take note of cyclist and give way to them even when they make my blood boil. But it is not drivers like me, or even the majority of half-decent local drivers on the road that are the real menace to cyclists. It is the unlicensed foreign drivers who often operate heavy vehicles or commercial vehicles, as well as the small but still-existent retards on the road who have no regard for human lives.

 

At the end of the day the entire community or society can argue all they want, quote all the statistics they want, and assert all they want. It's not going to protect cyclists from being run over and dying on the road. You call it fear-mongering. I call it as I see it. We live in a world with constraints. Sometimes, we choose to live on the edge and take on certain risks. That's our choice and prerogative. But to expect the environment around us to immediately shape itself to accommodate our choices is foolish and idealistic. And asserting that cycling is safe or getting safer can be misleading.

 

So, like I keep saying, no point trying to prove to the community at large that cycling is "safe" or "getting safer". Why are you trying so hard to justify your choices? Is it self-rationalizing, or comforting yourselves that you're making the right choices? I tend to see it as the latter, because I don't see any end-product or value-add even if you do manage to prove that cycling is safer. Enhancing public awareness isn't going to help because like I said, the real meance is the foreign drivers, licensed or unlicensed, or those with zero road courtesy and no regard for human lives. Educational campaigns won't change the characteristics of this demographic. So what do you want, really? For us to stand up and applaud your choices as the safe and smart choices?

 

We all make our choices, live with the consequences, and move on with our lives.

 

Unless you really have an end-product or end-goal in mind, it's pointless carrying on with this discussion because most of us simply don't care, and completely disagree.

 

It's time to move on, really.

[Trebuchet]

It's time to move on, really.

 

If the discussion tires you out or the stats do not convince you, then you can walk away and lose nothing - not reputation, not character, not integrity. You only contribute to this thread when you type some words and click on the "reply" button. Sadly many of you have already gone far enough. Your reputation character and integrity, in this forum, are undermined by it.

 

To understand why this thread carries on still, you need only look back at the first post of this thread. It defines cyclists as a problem. That is incendiary. It involves a minority group - cyclists, versus drivers. If it had involved a larger group, like a race, or a religion, it would have been sedition.

 

The ruler of this land said, if one does not challenges his accusers, then all their accusations can be assumed to be correct.

 

You are all being challenged. There is nothing more. Right or wrong, it is a matter up for debate and that is the spirit of all posts here.

 

Nobody is asking you to mow down a cyclist carelessly tomorrow because you don't agree what anyone says here.

 

Similarly, it is easy to bash taxi drivers, OPC drivers, expensive car drivers, cheap car drivers, lady drivers and heavy vehicle drivers here. In fact it is a choice topic of troll-baiters, because none of these demographics are well represented in this community.

 

However, lots of cyclists are drivers too. They are able to offer their unique perspectives, unlike the other groups mentioned. If debate does not change any perceptions - then why enter into one?

 

Kindly move on.

 

 

Edited July 28, 2012 by Trebuchet

[Lightbringer]

If the discussion tires you out or the stats do not convince you, then you can walk away and lose nothing - not reputation, not character, not integrity. You only contribute to this thread when you type some words and click on the "reply" button. Sadly many of you have already gone far enough. Your reputation character and integrity, in this forum, are undermined by it.

 

To understand why this thread carries on still, you need only look back at the first post of this thread. It defines cyclists as a problem. That is incendiary. It involves a minority group - cyclists, versus drivers. If it had involved a larger group, like a race, or a religion, it would have been sedition.

 

The ruler of this land said, if one does not challenges his accusers, then all their accusations can be assumed to be correct.

 

You are all being challenged. There is nothing more. Right or wrong, it is a matter up for debate and that is the spirit of all posts here.

 

Nobody is asking you to mow down a cyclist carelessly tomorrow because you don't agree what anyone says here.

 

I do whatever I deem fit. I couldn't give a rat ass what you think, and you and your words have zero impact on my reputation, character, integrity, whatever. I'm not sorry I don't live and breathe by an online forum like you do, but I don't answer to you, and if I can't be bothered to reply to you, I won't. Now stop having a cry and move on away from me. Don't think you have got it in you though.

 

And incendiary? Get some perspective please, you self-important and delusional twat.

[Trebuchet]

My man, I have not ever used a single derogatory word on you, and you have used so many on me.

 

I think it is obvious that I don't actually care, whereas you are so much more emotive and irrational.

 

You never ever actually talk about the logical points I take up with you.

 

Your move?

 

Are you still washing your paintwork and steel rims as we sit here? Take it down a notch, superboy. You are offensive and reckless, even in your online posts.

[Silvermini]

fellow people, i think it is pointless debating who is right who is wrong, who pay tax who doesnt, who use the road and who dont. got balls go and ask LTA or TP for advice and get ur law well before u hit ur keyboard here those keyboard warrior. In the eyes of the law, all vehicles (and a bicycle is classed as a road vehicle) are entitled to equal protection under the law and all vehicles are required to abide by their respective responsibilities as road users and "http://app.lta.gov.sg/corp_press_content.asp?start=1985" u drive? u giv way to them. lan lan SUCK YOUR THUMB. u donwan giv way then DON DRIVE. even LTA support cycling on road. don agree send email to LTA lo fellow selfish coward drivers.

 

This is singapore, not ur GrandFather country. they tax u u pay and stfu. at most don buy car.

[Civic2000]

I am appalled by the ignorance of many drivers.

 

1) Nicoll highway is not an expressway.

 

2) The speed limit on the road is the maximum you can go, not the minimum.

 

3) If pay road tax gives you previleges. Do you give way to a bigger car who pays more road tax than you? So next time a bigger car comes behind you, remember to get out of its way.

 

4) Use of road is not exclusive to anyone.

 

I like your comments. [thumbsup] I can never understand why they are people who insist that bicycle should pay road tax before they are allowed to be on the road, despite the fact that the Road Traffic Act does allow bicycle to travel on the public road (except Expressways), subject to the compliance of all traffic rules and regulations.

Edited July 29, 2012 by Civic2000

[Calford]

Gd say!

[Porker]

Arrogance won't stand up to 2 tons of pure steel smashing into you and your pathetic excuse for a "vehicle" on the roads.

 

What 2 ton car are you driving?

[Gz0707]

I stopped commenting in this thread as a cyclist when I see the huge amount of hatred drivers have against cyclists (who are by no means angels). What's really sad is that the huge population increase, together with foreign workers (who brought their 'cycling culture') have resulted in stress on all road users and everyone is releasing their frustration here. That's really a sad state of affairs.

 

Poor road planning and/or cycling rules (enforcement) have resulted in so much unhappiness. imo, this is no different from commercial vehicles hogging the faster lanes and 'block' traffic. so, guys, take a step back, you are not winning anything in this cyber world, maybe just make your ego happy only.

 

for info, I am a cyclist/driver/van driver/ex-motorbiker.

Edited August 2, 2012 by Gz0707

[Taipan49]

This is an interesting viewpoint. Was raised earlier in this thread about average speeds for cars vs cyclists on arterial roads in Singapore. But another consideration is this, the time earning the cash to pay for your mode of transport:

 

[Tianake]

after reading so many posts, i still can't get my answer to the question i am thinking.

 

 

Car A bang stationary Car B backside (obviously is Car A never keep safety distance)and cause a dent in the bumper, Car B can claim Car A insurance.

 

If Bicycle A bang stationary Car B backside and cause a dent in the bumper, Car B claim insurance from who? (this is provided that Bicyle A didn't get rolled over by Truck C and go inside big bag). Claim own self insurance?

 

i think LTA should come out and clarify this. if not, next time if you will not happy with a person, just ride a bicycle and bang into that person car and cause a big dent.