You're sitting in an ASL at the start of the clip, which is for cyclists and not motorbikes. So you'd crossed the solid line on red to get there (unless you were stopped there in stationary traffic when the light turned red. That's the same infringement that you're moaning about the cylist making. And you're speeding. You can't complain about the actions of other road users while you're riding illegally yourself...
I'm pretty sure from your videos that you exceed the speed limit fairly regularly. Of course most motorists do, most any time they can really. It's breaking the law. I'll give you that that isn't a very safe intersection to jump, not at that speed.
A cyclist, a BMW driver, and a Volvo pull up to an intersection... The cyclist jumps the light, the Volvo hits the cyclist, and the BMW tailgates the ambulance.
Hey mate, can i use this video in my new compilation? i will give you full credit in the description & comment section, i'll put your channel name in compilation
@@IceBoNeZ Yep, at the first set of lights the red light was still showing (red and amber). Nasty moved off before he had the green light, so if he didn't run the red entering the bike box he ran the red when he took off early.
@@nastyevilninja Hey mate, check out the edit called Stupid, Crazy & Angry People Vs Bikers - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-G5O7lPGBTXQ.html with your clip featured. Thanks for letting me include it! MM
Dan P: Right. Are we generalizing much? You are aware that most road users break the rules from time to time, and that study done on this show that cyclists are no worse than drivers in following the rules? It is easy to see the cyclist running a red light there you sit in your car or motorcycle, but it is not quite that easy to see all the drivers on their phones sitting at the red light, is it now? Another interesting fact is that most people who cycle often drive. The 0 tax bit is just... It really amazes me that there exist people to this day that can be that ignorant about a topic. Would not just google that topic, and maybe you be the wiser? Just for sake of it though, I can provide some info here in case it help the darkness (as in ignorance): *“Bicyclists don’t pay gas taxes, and shouldn’t be allowed on roads.”* Ah, where to begin… First, most bicyclists own and drive motor vehicles, buy gasoline for them, and therefore pay gas taxes. We all also pay gas taxes indirectly when we pay for other goods and services; businesses pass along the costs of shipping and travel to customers. But even if cyclists paid nothing, use of public rights-of-way is not contingent on payment of taxes. The Declaration of Independence does not say “all taxpayers are created equal,” but “all men are created equal” (meaning persons), and traveling along a public right-of-way is an essential liberty. Many other taxes contribute to the construction and maintenance of public roads, including property taxes, sales taxes, impact fees, and more. Much of the gas tax is used to widen roads to accommodate more and more cars. Gas taxes also go toward the construction of sidewalks along many roads. Using the same “don’t pay gas taxes” reasoning, school children should not be allowed to walk to school on sidewalks because they don’t pay gas taxes. cyclingsavvy.org/road-cycling/#taxes *New study shows that "scofflaw cyclists" don't break the law any more than drivers* "It is a standard trope that cyclists ignore red lights, blow through stop signs and generally ignore all the traffic rules that govern cars and are not very nice to law abiding pedestrians either. People on bikes are often told that "If cyclists want legitimacy, they should obey the rules of the road”. And indeed, a new study find that cyclists do break the rules fairly often. But guess what? So do drivers and pedestrians, just as often." "When it comes to rule-breaking bicyclists, one popular opinion is that if bicyclists want to be taken seriously as road users, they need to obey the rules of the road like everyone else. Our survey results and the literature review both suggest that drivers break the rules of the road just as much, if not more, than bicyclists. The other common argument is that cities need to step up bicycle law enforcement to improve safety. While bicyclists are certainly not immune from causing harm, the literature suggests lower societal costs and safety risks associated with lawbreaking bicycling as compared to lawbreaking driving. Drivers speed, roll through stop signs, park in bike lanes, and run lights that have just turned red while still considering themselves to be law-abiding citizens. Despite research showing a causal link between such driving behaviors and increased crash rates, injuries, and fatalities, society continues to see these behaviors as rational decisions within our transportation system, other than in the relative minority of places that take Vision Zero as more than a buzzword. Our results suggest that bicyclists seem to be making the same rational choices." www.treehugger.com/bikes/new-study-shows-scofflaw-cyclists-dont-break-law-any-more-drivers.html *"Cyclists don't pay their own way on the road because they don't pay registration fees or other use fees such as gas taxes."* This opinion is frequently thrown in the face of cyclists, not only in roadside confrontations such as my little tiff, but in meetings of county supervisors and city staffs and others formulating transportation policy. What's more, it is an opinion accepted by many cyclists as true. In fact, not only is it not true, it isn't even close to being true. The real facts support a much different reality. Many studies have been done in recent years on the subject of how much it costs to build and maintain our roads, and who pays the bills. The numbers I will cite below come from the Victoria Transport Policy Institute, which has pulled together statistics from many of these studies. If you want a more in-depth analysis of this question than you'll get from my short column, you can crunch numbers til your eyes cross at their website: www.vtpi.org/whoserd.htm. Briefly, here is the gist of the facts: studies estimate that motor vehicle users pay an average of 2.3 cents per mile in user charges such as gas taxes, registration fees, and tolls. However, they impose 6.5 cents per mile in road service costs. In contrast, cyclist impose road service costs averaging a miniscule 2/10ths of 1 cent per mile. If I'm reading and understanding the studies correctly, this 6.5 cents per mile represents costs for infrastructure--roadway acquisition, design and construction of roads, bridges, tunnels, etc., and maintenance of same. I don't believe it covers other, associated costs such as law enforcement, emergency services, etc. Further--again, if I'm reading these studies correctly--the disparity between user fees and actual costs is even greater on local roads...the ones most commonly used by cyclists. So, we have a shortfall of over 4 cents per mile in user fee revenues to cover the expenses of building and maintaining our roads. Where does the money come from to make up the difference? It comes from the general tax rolls: property, income, and sales taxes. All of us--cyclists and motorists alike--pay these taxes, so we're all contributing to the construction and upkeep of our roads, regardless of how much or how little we use them, or how much our particular vehicle imposes in costs on the system. In fact, when you consider the extremely low costs associated with non-motorized travel, the case can be made that cyclists are actually paying way more than their fair share of road costs. Or to put it another way, if we're all sharing the burden of road expenses equally (on average), then those imposing lower costs on the system (cyclists) are in effect subsidizing those who impose greater costs (motorists). Consider further that the average cyclist logs many fewer bike miles per year than the average motorist logs in his car, so that the per-mile disparity is multiplied many times over by the difference in total miles on the road(s). Bear in mind too, that although we might wish it to be otherwise, most of us who cycle a great deal still own a car, or live in a household with at least one car in the garage. I own a car, but because I work at home and ride a bike as much as possible, I only put about 3000 miles a year on it (less than half what I put on my bike), and yet I have to pay the same registration fee on that car as the fellow who logs 10,000 or 15,000 or more miles in his car. If you divide the registration fee by the number of miles, it's easy to see the full-time motorist is getting a much better deal than I am. Wouldn't it be nice if our registration fees could be pro-rated on the number of miles driven? Finally, remember that these studies on road expenses are only dealing with dollars in federal, state, and county budgets. If you also consider the larger "costs" associated with motorized travel in terms of pollution, congestion, and accidents, and the dramatic relief in all those areas provided by switching to cycling, then the question of who is paying their fair share to use the roads is even more compelling. I'm not climbing up on a soapbox here to declare that all cars should be banned. I appreciate having and using my car when I need it. All I am trying to say is that cyclists should never have to be apologists for taking up their little bit of space on the side of the road. Aside from the fact that the Vehicle Code guarantees us the right to be there, we are more than paying our fair share of the price of admission, and don't ever let anyone try to tell you otherwise. (Source: Cycling Myths Debunked)
