Is it time to start calling out bad cyclists?

I'd wear thick socks.

I keep meaning to get some each summer, but summer never happens.

ftfy

With a silk liner?

Thermal inner soles.

I tried to call out some bad cyclists this a.m. but most of the flourobrigade seems to have taken the tube. Must have been the cold, the heavy rain, the wind and the darkness that put them off. Pfff.

Of those I saw though most were ladies, so respect due to the fairer sex today for being tougher than all those boyracers (on Marlins).

It's relevant because 15+ years ago when there wasn't really a problem with RLJing most London drivers still hated cyclists

Citation required.
You have the audacity to call people out for making assumptions yet can't provide citation for your own supposition that 15+ years ago there were fewer cases of RLJing.

You've just invalidated any comment you've made on this thread to date.
Get to fuck.

You have the audacity to call people out for making assumptions yet can't provide citation for your own supposition that 15+ years ago there were fewer cases of RLJing.

You've just invalidated any comment you've made on this thread to date.
Get to fuck.

Oh dear - what's with the swearing?

I like to swear.
What's with the lack of facts?

I thought as it's pretty obvious - even for a mentally challenged person like yourself - to realise that there were fewer cyclists on London's roads 15+ years ago. I'm sure you can find said fact on google if you looked.

I haven't stated any facts. so there's nothing for me to check on google.

You made a statement, presented as fact, without citation. Whilst simultaneously bitching at other people for doing the same thing.

When I called out for it you firstly questioned my profanity then went on to insult my intelligence. A pointless ruse based on the fact that you are in the wrong (Just like you're in the wrong when you jump red lights).

Get better at arguing or learn to tell the truth based upon actual evidence or you'll continue to come out looking like a pillock.

You made a statement, presented as fact, without citation. Whilst simultaneously bitching at other people for doing the same thing.

This isn't quite correct, as I never presented any statement as a fact. I presented statements as possibilities.

This isn't quite correct, as I never presented any statement as a fact. I presented statements as possibilities.

Object's not even arguing with you!

Have you all gone quite mad?

I haven't stated any facts. so there's nothing for me to check on google.

You made a statement, presented as fact, without citation. Whilst simultaneously bitching at other people for doing the same thing.

When I called out for it you firstly questioned my profanity then went on to insult my intelligence. A pointless ruse based on the fact that you are in the wrong (Just like you're in the wrong when you jump red lights).

Get better at arguing or learn to tell the truth based upon actual evidence or you'll continue to come out looking like a pillock.

Fuck me get over yourself - do you have anger problems?

As this is a forum I don't think citations are needed - but like I said before, I know as so do you ( I hope) that 15+ years ago there were less cyclists on London's roads. Just because I don't provide a citation does not make this untrue.

A guy at uni had these and he was the quickest gay in the cycling club...

fixed

@DaveH - I asked you a question in my previous post.

Re @TattyVikings original post, which bits did you actually think where wrong, and why?

I'd still like to know...

You really think if the majority of cyclists stopped RLJ these people would stop hating cyclists or do you think they JUST hate cyclists?

It's relevant because 15+ years ago when there wasn't really a problem with RLJing most London drivers still hated cyclists
It seems like you're saying drivers will always hate cyclists regardless of whether they jump REDs, so why not do as we please. I might be reading too much into it with that conclusion. Anyway, I don't buy it.

^ you're doing it wrong you haven't offended/insulted him in any way whatsoever.

Personally, I'm not saying do as you please, but I am saying even if we all combined our best efforts and became perfect cyclists then it wouldn't even make a dent the size of a shot peen in the amount of twatty cycling, and it definitely wouldn't make the drivers who hate us, hate us any less.

May as well give up then, and do what everyone else does.

EDIT/ Baaaaaaaaaaa

DaveH,
You said "15+ years ago when there wasn't really a problem with RLJing".
You didn't say "15+ years ago when there were fewer cyclists in London".

Unfortunately I don't believe that the latter entails the former, hence the need for citation.

Obviously if the proportion of RLJers has remained constant then there would have been fewer RLJers 15 years ago.
However, that DOESN'T mean that drivers didn't still have RLJing as their number 1 gripe about cyclists.
So what is your EVIDENCE that RLJing wasn't a problem 15 years ago?
(A quick google analytics chart on "red light jumping" won't suffice!)

I still believe that if tomorrow EVERY SINGLE cyclist stopped RLJing then we would see far more goodwill toward us from the cagers.

They wouldn't have daily evidence that we believe we are "above the law" (obviously we don't speed - much - and cycling on the pavement is de minimus AFAIK). So the driving fraternity would have to say to themselves, "gosh, those cyclists are actually a law-abiding bunch, I better treat them well" (as they do for other vulnerable road users such as pedestrians - they don't swerve into pedestrians to teach them a lesson for example).

Let's just go crazy and start doing what the haters do to us.

Drivers? They're all red light running, pedestrian and cyclist killing, road ruining, uninsured, un-taxed, dangerous pricks.

This isn't quite correct, as I never presented any statement as a fact. I presented statements as possibilities.
It was entirely correct as I was talking to John. This was apparent as I quoted his post.

I haven't accused you of presenting anything as anything.
In fact, until this reply, I hadn't addressed you in any way, shape or form.

15 years ago I recall being regarded as a freak rather than as a figure of hatred.. Fewer RLJers then I think, on bikes or in cars. Fewer people who put their bins out on the wrong day or argued about their library fines as well... Hell, handcart etc. Feeling bruised at the moment as my motoring friends regard my two very serious incidents this week as my own fault just for being on the road.

It was entirely correct as I was talking to John. This was apparent as I quoted his post.

I haven't accused you of presenting anything as anything.
In fact, until this reply, I hadn't addressed you in any way, shape or form.

Ha - I was being pedantic.

I believe DaveH originally criticised *me * by stating I had made assumptions. He didn't say that I was presenting statements as facts without any supporting evidence. So he didn't criticise anyone for that per se.

You questioned DaveH for calling out others for presenting statement as fact, but as far as I can see the did not do that. So he is within his rights to do that himself, to the extent that it is not contradictory with his previous admonishments.

Anyway, this is about as worthwhile as the original discussion, especially since I believe we are both in agreement that in the vast majority of instances the right thing to do is wait at red lights.