On 28/05/2020 13:39, Kelly wrote:
JNugent wrote:

On 28/05/2020 08:35, Kelly wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:

On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 9:24:47 PM UTC+1, Kelly wrote:
And
this, apparently, because he felt cyclists needed to be punished for
supposedly littering the countryside with plastic drinks bottles.

The same cyclists that also lob McDonalds bags, KFC trays, Monster energy drinks, fag packets, empty Stella cans, crisp packets, chocolate bar wrappers, Red Bull cans and fast food detritus out of their drivers' windows?

Cyclists are a minority group that still remain an easy target for
just about anyone.

Quote:
... cyclists – the one heterogeneous, harmless minority who it is
seemingly still fine to denigrate, dismiss and generally invent facts
about.
Unquote

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ok-to-demonise

Don't you think it would be less easy to "demonise" cyclists if they
(the majority of cyclists) simply behaved better and committed fewer
traffic offences?

Isn't the problem that there are three groups of people involved here,
pedestrians, cyclists and drivers - with each having different
self-interests?

No. I don't expect cyclists to yield their legal rights to me. In the
same way, I don't expect them not to concede mine, whether I am walking
or driving.

There is no way they are all going to see things the
same way, and they are going to rely on a degree of goodwill from each
other for things to work out optimally.

I have been a member of all three of those groups and am still a member
of two of them. I see no conflict of interest in expecting all road
users to obey the law and (thereby) behave in a predictable and safe manner.

Ignoring traffic lights, pedestrian-only rules and one-way working is
totally unacceptable, as I am sure you will agree.

So when a member of one group has bad will towards another group, then
the group towards which the bad will is direct will forever have very
many of their actions being seen in their worst possible lights by
that member. When someone has enough bad will towards you, they can
take almost anything you do the wrong way. Thus you have non-cyclist
pedestrians and drivers tending to have less goodwill (to actual bad
will) directed at cyclists. And you have pedestrians and drivers who
also cycle, tending to have more goodwill directed towards cyclists.
Unfortunately that still leaves cyclist in the minority with all the
bad will that ensues. That's a difficult disadvantage for cyclist to
overcome.

It's still something for cyclists as a group (and the forces of law and
order, of course) to address. It's no use any cyclist expecting
unbounded personal goodwill when the experience of most other road users
is that cyclists invariably behave selfishly and badly (with many of
them seeming to "think" that they have some sort of right so to behave).

I would really like to be able to be more conciliatory on this issue,
but proportions really don't play the part they do with other road user
groups because it's the majority of cyclists who behave badly.