Reckless Cyclist

[Shibadog]

10 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

Similarly, should car convoy hire Cisco escort for safety purposes?
Your statement is presumptive without proper understanding.

It is make worse with the use of that kapcai example.

 

when u say "understanding", do u mean "agreeing with your POV"?

disagree with your POV means don't understand you?

[inlinesix]

2 minutes ago, Shibadog said:

when u say "understanding", do u mean "agreeing with your POV"?

disagree with your POV means don't understand you?

It is ok to disagree with each other POV.

[Jellandross]

6 hours ago, Yeshe said:

These 2 just beat the red light, what long vehicle u talking about? 

Exactly. You should ask yourself what long vehicle are you talking about?

2 beat red light and 20 beat red light is still beat red light.

Long vehicle = Unicorn

[Spidey10]

17 hours ago, Beregond said:

put it in another way. 20 cars driving at highspeed tail gate 1 another reach a traffic light, first car pass. all 20 cars is justify to chiong the red light just because they are driving at high speed, tailgating and unable to brake in time?? its dangerous to brake, so all the cars should drive through??

make sense to u?? not to me 😂

Exactly...and king kong lorry comes and wipe out half the convoy....and it the king kong lorry driver fault!!

[Mustank]

17 hours ago, Beregond said:

if he hit the old man , and the old man is bedridden for life. need insurance to cover right. i doubt the cyclist got millions to pay personally

Will pay old man 1.36m?

[Sdf4786k]

On 4/27/2021 at 10:51 AM, Gizmore said:

With a kid, I cannot understand what is in their mind to ride the way they did. As a parent myself, whenever I'm outside (not even riding) my sense of safety is hyped up. Even if the parent in this video does not understand the road culture here, it isn't difficult to to know what is a safer route, and that is to cross a big road using traffic light ahead. 

The Vezel stopped to allow the father to pass. Cam car could have easily miss him and run him down simply because his view is block by the Vezel. 

Really poor decision making. 

 

 

I feel it’s time to add one more dimension to our learning driving class as well as have test route in cycling build up area.

that would create a better awareness of how we should drive and the expectation of cyclists.

if cyclist gets know down, there’s is just no wrong for a learner driver as there is an instructor with you.

this serves 2 purposes. More awareness of haphazard cycling as well as cyclists have a more concerted effort to know because they have rights does not mean won’t be knock down

 

[boonhat_91]

Why so many red light beaters? Need to maintain good average speed? Charge them with taking part in speed trial leh.

[Beregond]

🤷‍♂️

 

[Fcw75]

56 minutes ago, Beregond said:

🤷‍♂️

 

So what reason will one come up with? Overtaking ah?

Bloody pests. Should just die on the road.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Fcw75

[Soya]

2 hours ago, Beregond said:

🤷‍♂️

 

Yay....more good cyclist!

[Naimed]

22 hours ago, Yeshe said:

I was providing my point of view and u have to be abusive? 

For the record, I m a casual pcn rider and hates road users including cyclist, bikers, cars who use the road without respecting others. 

I have a friend who rode in a convoy in the same situation, jam his brake and cause a chain collision. Ended up in hospital for 3weeks. Yes, he was using his brains. Thanks for highlighting. Are u using yours? 

The solution is actually quite like driving any motorized vehicle. As we approach traffic junctions, we slow down - to get ready to stop if needed. 

Driven many times in convoys in both Singapore and Malaysia. It is very common for the front few cars to pass the traffic junction when lights go from amber to red. The rest of us will stop at the junction like any other road user. Those in front will stop further up and wait for us to catch up once lights go green. I doubt road bikes (and cyclists) in convoy do this. 

If cyclists are tailgating each other and cannot stop in time, this can happen any time, not only at traffic junctions. Meaning they should break into smaller groups and leave sufficient gap.

 

[Gizmore]

9 hours ago, Beregond said:

🤷‍♂️

 

Since the traffic is light and there is an available to overtake, as much as the cyclist is annoying, I probably will just overtake and let it pass.

That said, the cyclist is not doing themselves any favour in terms of the bad image they have recently. Traffic is light and both could easily occupy a single lane and side by side. Why need to take up the entire lane each???

They might as well walk in the middle of the road and insist on the right of way. I really cannot understand why these pro wannabes have such poor attitudes.

I hope there comes a day where the Gov invest millions of dollars to build a world class track for these pro wannabes in some ulu corner of Singapore and a law is enact that prohits them on the road. Only then these pro wannabes can have a safe environment to cycle and not pose a risk to others. 

 

[Lethalstrike]

41 minutes ago, Gizmore said:

Since the traffic is light and there is an available to overtake, as much as the cyclist is annoying, I probably will just overtake and let it pass.

That said, the cyclist is not doing themselves any favour in terms of the bad image they have recently. Traffic is light and both could easily occupy a single lane and side by side. Why need to take up the entire lane each???

They might as well walk in the middle of the road and insist on the right of way. I really cannot understand why these pro wannabes have such poor attitudes.

I hope there comes a day where the Gov invest millions of dollars to build a world class track for these pro wannabes in some ulu corner of Singapore and a law is enact that prohits them on the road. Only then these pro wannabes can have a safe environment to cycle and not pose a risk to others. 

 

You're right. It's obvious they aren't individual cyclists and they knew each other, so cycling side by side chit chatting while being oblivious to traffic behind is already a NO NO. They can argue its legal to ride abreast, since its a 3 lane carriageway, and THIS is correct according to Road Traffic Act. Even so, its still f**ked up riding as one is within the left filter lane, the other is already on the middle lane for turning right. Like I had always said, the pet peeve of mine on the roads nowadays is the insistence on the right of way. Drivers, cyclists, motorcyclists etc, all guilty of it. 

In this instance, AMDK cyclist pair insist that's its their right of way to ride the way they did because they are turning right. Legally yes not wrong, but being oblivious to traffic is just poor situational awareness. Insistence on the right of way and the lack of consideration of other road users are the problems. Throw license plates and licensing on these AMDKs also won't change a damn thing, at most pay fines and kanna confiscate bikes only right?

Edited May 3, 2021 by Lethalstrike

[Beregond]

1 hour ago, Gizmore said:

Since the traffic is light and there is an available to overtake, as much as the cyclist is annoying, I probably will just overtake and let it pass.

That said, the cyclist is not doing themselves any favour in terms of the bad image they have recently. Traffic is light and both could easily occupy a single lane and side by side. Why need to take up the entire lane each???

They might as well walk in the middle of the road and insist on the right of way. I really cannot understand why these pro wannabes have such poor attitudes.

I hope there comes a day where the Gov invest millions of dollars to build a world class track for these pro wannabes in some ulu corner of Singapore and a law is enact that prohits them on the road. Only then these pro wannabes can have a safe environment to cycle and not pose a risk to others. 

 

let them cycle on the road , they demand to cycle side by side

let them cycle side by side.

now they demand 2 lanes, 1 lane for 1 cyclist🤮

[Gizmore]

1 hour ago, Lethalstrike said:

You're right. It's obvious they aren't individual cyclists and they knew each other, so cycling side by side chit chatting while being oblivious to traffic behind is already a NO NO. They can argue its legal to ride abreast, since its a 3 lane carriageway, and THIS is correct according to Road Traffic Act. Even so, its still f**ked up riding as one is within the left filter lane, the other is already on the middle lane for turning right. Like I had always said, the pet peeve of mine on the roads nowadays is the insistence on the right of way. Drivers, cyclists, motorcyclists etc, all guilty of it. 

In this instance, AMDK cyclist pair insist that's its their right of way to ride the way they did because they are turning right. Legally yes not wrong, but being oblivious to traffic is just poor situational awareness. Insistence on the right of way and the lack of consideration of other road users are the problems. Throw license plates and licensing on these AMDKs also won't change a damn thing, at most pay fines and kanna confiscate bikes only right?

Primary user of roads are motor vehicles. They have the absolute right of way. All other users are sharing the road with the primary users of the road. 

Cyclists must always remember that it is priority to give way to primary road users. Even though rules states it is ok to ride side by side. If traffic is heavy and riding side by side is hindering primary road user, then they need to cycle in single file. 

Even if the cyclist need to turn right, it is necessary to give way to motor vehicle and not the other way round. If cyclist is not possible to lane change under current traffic condition, then they should seek alternate way of turning. Like using the traffic light instead. This should be common sense with regards to personal safety. Don't need be have Master Degree to judge the situation and make the best call.

Any slower road user must give way to others. This is why we have keep left unless overtaking. 

Understand what the roads are for and who's life is more at risk. Make a stupid call of insisting the right of way and end up paying with own life, is wasting all that has been done while being alive. 

It's like in the air, aeroplanes have to make way drones. Does it make sense or not??

[Lethalstrike]

12 minutes ago, Gizmore said:

Primary user of roads are motor vehicles. They have the absolute right of way. All other users are sharing the road with the primary users of the road. 

Cyclists must always remember that it is priority to give way to primary road users. Even though rules states it is ok to ride side by side. If traffic is heavy and riding side by side is hindering primary road user, then they need to cycle in single file. 

Even if the cyclist need to turn right, it is necessary to give way to motor vehicle and not the other way round. If cyclist is not possible to lane change under current traffic condition, then they should seek alternate way of turning. Like using the traffic light instead. This should be common sense with regards to personal safety. Don't need be have Master Degree to judge the situation and make the best call.

Any slower road user must give way to others. This is why we have keep left unless overtaking. 

Understand what the roads are for and who's life is more at risk. Make a stupid call of insisting the right of way and end up paying with own life, is wasting all that has been done while being alive. 

It's like in the air, aeroplanes have to make way drones. Does it make sense or not??

Fair enough with what you've wrote, they made good sense and very sensible advice such as the use of the Hook Maneuver (where cyclist makes use of the pedestrian traffic lights to turn right) during heavy traffic conditions. 

I must clarify though, that motor vehicles don't have the absolute right of way no matter what, the spirit of the current Road Traffic Act wasn't written with this in mind. This is actually a misconception among many motorists, including myself initially. If the right of way is prioritise towards motorized vehicles only and all other users have to give way, we won't even be taught to stop at zebra crossings to give way to pedestrians. 

Absolute responsibility towards the rest of other road users, especially the vulnerable ones such as pedestrians and non motorized vehicles, is however true and this onus of responsibility is on the motorists. This was taught in the Basic Theory Handbook which I've long forgotten about until the Motorist/Cyclist debates online recently, and I went to revisit it.

The source of the conflict though, is that the law abiding motorists will have to bear this onus of responsibility even towards errand cyclists when things happen. Everyone is well aware of this by now. 

 

 

[Shibadog]

don't know the details of the case thus not judging who was right or wrong here but just putting it here for awareness - a life was lost.

Might have been a reckless cyclist, a reckless driver, or both. In any case, it's too late for the deceased.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/cyclist-dies-ntu-crash-accident-car-14738154

[Shibadog]

42 minutes ago, Gizmore said:

 

It's like in the air, aeroplanes have to make way drones. Does it make sense or not??

 

IIRC, in Rules of the sea, vessels moving under own power (equipped with engine) hv to give way to vessels moving under wind power (such as sail boats). This is because it is assumed that a engine-powered vessel is more maneuverable than one that depends on the wind. Difference in size/mass not counted.

My point being, it may not be right to compare different mediums.