Cyclists are morally superior in every way

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Cyclists are morally superior in every way

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19062 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16302

Lifetime subscriber

#312208 26-Mar-2024 11:25

OK, I'll bite.

I think most of the ranting has already occured in the Annoyances thread, but maybe we can find other things to throw at each other here.

As I have said elsewhere, I am not a cyclist but I come from a place where they rule and I have no problem with that at all. I learned defensive driving from my dad, which mainly means expecting the unexpected so you are always prepared to deal with it. This doesn't leave much room for getting angry at other road users. If you are always prepared for the worst, it doesn't surprise you when it happens.

I genuinely don't understand the agro aimed at cyclists here. I sometimes meet them on the country road to my house. If someone gets in the way you slow down. If someone does something stupid, you take evasive action. It is just like any video game. What is there to get angry about?

Because of where I live I have to have a car. There is no alternative. But I don't have a problem with cyclists. Like cats and children, they are just other road users to watch out for. Neither do I resent the spaces that councils make available for them. The more cyclists there are, the fewer other cars. Those are the ones that really get in my way!

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 10

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12765

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#3211071 26-Mar-2024 11:43

The simple way to view it for me is, every new or experienced cyclist that uses a cycle lane or shared lane makes it safer and easier for both cyclist and motorist with the added health and environment advantages. The opposition to cycling, cyclists and cycle infrastructure is illogical. There is far less infrastructure needed for cycles than there is needed for motor vehicles. Cycles don't need two lane, four lane expressways. Cycles don't need acres of car parks or multi story parking buildings and so on. To sum up I just don't get the angst, no one is forcing car use, no one is forcing cycle use. As in many European nations and cities the two coexist.

I am now heading to my bunker😄

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

SteveXNZ

64 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 63

Lifetime subscriber

#3211073 26-Mar-2024 11:48

Cyclists being morally superior may be a bit of a stretch, but promoting cycling has benefits by just about every metric you poke at it - transportation, urban planning, social cohesiveness, environment, and health. But here's the kicker - as a society we don't make evidence-based decisions. We make decisions based on ideology, vested interests and perceived short term benefits. Just have a look at the latest Transport GPS to see how bad it is. I truly feel sorry for Aucklanders - if you think gridlock is bad now, it'll be much worse in a couple of years under the current policy.

Eva888

2760 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2420

Lifetime subscriber

#3211076 26-Mar-2024 12:03

Who was ranting against cyclists? Maybe we also need a jumping to the wrong conclusion thread.

elpenguino

3576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2938

#3211082 26-Mar-2024 12:13

MikeB4:

The opposition to cycling, cyclists and cycle infrastructure is illogical.

We might therefore conclude that opposition to cycling is emotional. Why do people feel this way about cycling ?

Climate guilt? Resistance to change?

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

johno1234

3348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2842

#3211085 26-Mar-2024 12:16

Rikkitic:

OK, I'll bite.

I think most of the ranting has already occured in the Annoyances thread, but maybe we can find other things to throw at each other here.

As I have said elsewhere, I am not a cyclist but I come from a place where they rule and I have no problem with that at all. I learned defensive driving from my dad, which mainly means expecting the unexpected so you are always prepared to deal with it. This doesn't leave much room for getting angry at other road users. If you are always prepared for the worst, it doesn't surprise you when it happens.

I genuinely don't understand the agro aimed at cyclists here. I sometimes meet them on the country road to my house. If someone gets in the way you slow down. If someone does something stupid, you take evasive action. It is just like any video game. What is there to get angry about?

Because of where I live I have to have a car. There is no alternative. But I don't have a problem with cyclists. Like cats and children, they are just other road users to watch out for. Neither do I resent the spaces that councils make available for them. The more cyclists there are, the fewer other cars. Those are the ones that really get in my way!

I like cycling and generally get in at least one or two trail tours a year. I would never entertain cycling as a general transport option though. It is completely impractical and quite unsafe. Can't carry a useful amount of shopping or other goods. Slight bump from a bus, truck or car, or pothole, or gust of wind and you could be seriously injured or killed. Takes too long. Auckland is too hilly. Wind makes it unpleasant. Buses and trucks pass frighteningly close. Don't need to arrive at work wet or sweaty and need to change.

Removing car lanes to make cycleways has a massive effect on vehicle traffic flow - the waterfront route into the Auckland CBD being a classic disaster case where it was reduced to a single lane. The end result is severe congestion - but you get to see the occasional cyclist passing along the cycleway.

Mildly mention one negative thing about cycling and boy, get ready for quite a bit of hyperbole, outrage, name calling and abuse.

johno1234

3348 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2842

#3211086 26-Mar-2024 12:17

SteveXNZ:

Cyclists being morally superior may be a bit of a stretch, but promoting cycling has benefits by just about every metric you poke at it - transportation, urban planning, social cohesiveness, environment, and health. But here's the kicker - as a society we don't make evidence-based decisions. We make decisions based on ideology, vested interests and perceived short term benefits. Just have a look at the latest Transport GPS to see how bad it is. I truly feel sorry for Aucklanders - if you think gridlock is bad now, it'll be much worse in a couple of years under the current policy.

I would not buy into Simon Wilson's biased hysteria.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

Senecio

2851 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3159

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3211087 26-Mar-2024 12:17

SteveXNZ:

.... I truly feel sorry for Aucklanders - if you think gridlock is bad now, it'll be much worse in a couple of years under the current policy.

Here's an interesting piece of information. I work in East Tamaki and both myself and a work colleague live in different West Auckland suburbs. We both left the office yesterday at the same time, he on his bike and me in my car. My commute yesterday leaving at 5pm was ~75mins. It wasn't until I was 25mins from home I that finally overtook him. That means that we both covered roughly 20kms in 50mins.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41029

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3211089 26-Mar-2024 12:24

I will just post the link from the previous discussion Why is the right at war with cyclists? We’re not ‘wokerati’ – we’re just trying to get around | Zoe Williams | The Guardian

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

elpenguino

3576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2938

#3211090 26-Mar-2024 12:25

johno1234:

Slight bump from a bus, truck or car, or pothole, or gust of wind and you could be seriously injured or killed.

Definitely a real risk. On the other hand, as a nation we're getting fatter which is also a risk. Sitting on the couch with a chocolate biscuit doesn't seem dangerous tho !

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12765

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#3211092 26-Mar-2024 12:26

Eva888:

Who was ranting against cyclists? Maybe we also need a jumping to the wrong conclusion thread.

You stated in one of your responses to cycle change the following..."Short Rant. That the Mayor in Welli groin...."

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#3211095 26-Mar-2024 12:39

“Just because you’re offended, doesn’t mean you’re right” Ricky Gervais

I think the OP needs to amend the title by adding “think they” between “Cyclists” and “are”.

If your feelings of moral superiority are based on things as superficial whether you’re a cyclist or not, then maybe you need to examine your self worth?

In a previous job, one of our company’s stats provided by our health insurer showed cycling injuries rated number three for injuries that caused extended absences from work. Some were caused by the terrain biting back (mainly mountain-biking) but the majority were caused by ‘interaction’ with motor vehicles. So from my perspective, anything that separates recreational cyclists from traffic is a good thing. It doesn’t matter how morally superior cyclists think they are, they are always going to come off second best.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Eva888

2760 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2420

Lifetime subscriber

#3211102 26-Mar-2024 12:46

elpenguino:

MikeB4:

The opposition to cycling, cyclists and cycle infrastructure is illogical.

We might therefore conclude that opposition to cycling is emotional. Why do people feel this way about cycling ?

Climate guilt? Resistance to change?

It's not emotional against cyclists and I think very few people are against cycling as it’s an admirable and healthy pursuit. It’s when parking is taken away in important areas like near hospitals (Wellington) purposely to accommodate a minority that hardly use it that makes most people angry. Plus the costs when seriously important infrastructure like water is ignored.

In Cambridge Terrace where Council had a sensible option submitted by Mark Gazely to leave parking and lanes as they were and utilise/construct unused footpath in the middle of the road for cycles. Nope…that was thrown out and businesses along that road have closed shop as they have in many places where parking has been taken away. So instead of supporting those small businesses, we now use more energy driving for many kms to a Mall out of the city.

Eva888

2760 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2420

Lifetime subscriber

#3211103 26-Mar-2024 12:50

MikeB4:

Eva888:

Who was ranting against cyclists? Maybe we also need a jumping to the wrong conclusion thread.

You stated in one of your responses to cycle change the following..."Short Rant. That the Mayor in Welli groin...."

No that’s wrong, cycles were not mentioned. I said council decided to widen the footpath for pedestrians based on one event where they deemed there was not enough room for the crowds. Not for a cycleway.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12765

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#3211123 26-Mar-2024 13:01

Eva888:

No that’s wrong, cycles were not mentioned. I said council decided to widen the footpath for pedestrians based on one event where they deemed there was not enough room for the crowds. Not for a cycleway.

Come on, you know and I know what you were referring to in that post. You literally mentioned cycle in that post. I will leave it at that.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19062 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16302

Lifetime subscriber

#3211125 26-Mar-2024 13:05

Dingbatt:

“Just because you’re offended, doesn’t mean you’re right” Ricky Gervais

I think the OP needs to amend the title by adding “think they” between “Cyclists” and “are”.

If your feelings of moral superiority are based on things as superficial whether you’re a cyclist or not, then maybe you need to examine your self worth?

In a previous job, one of our company’s stats provided by our health insurer showed cycling injuries rated number three for injuries that caused extended absences from work. Some were caused by the terrain biting back (mainly mountain-biking) but the majority were caused by ‘interaction’ with motor vehicles. So from my perspective, anything that separates recreational cyclists from traffic is a good thing. It doesn’t matter how morally superior cyclists think they are, they are always going to come off second best.

I chose the title because I figured it would piss people off and provoke responses. It seems to be doing the job!

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 10