The Argus Blues
I just can't wait for the Argus Cycle tour to be over. Not that I have a problem with the tour. I'm actually quite proud the largest cycle tour in the world takes place in my city. I also have absolutely no problem spending a day at home because all the roads around me are closed. So if you're one of those who get all angry and uptight because you're trying to drive somewhere and the roads are closed - tough. It's not my problem if you're too thick to plan in advance.
No. My problem is with all those cyclists who come out the woodwork running up to The Argus. Not the professional cyclists who know how to cycle on a public road, but all those "joy-rider" cyclists. You know the one's I'm taking about: The one's who cheerfully cycle two or three abreast, holding up traffic while having a casual conversation with the person next to him/her. The ones who cycle straight through stop streets and red traffic lights. I realise you get them all year-round - not just running up to the Argus. You just get so many more of them around Argus time it's kinda hard to ignore.
So if one of those cyclists are reading this column please, oh please, explain this to me: If you cycle through a red robot, or stop street, does that mean you also drive through red traffic lights and stop streets in your car? If not, why not? Don't you think the same rules of the road apply equally to both motorists and cyclists? And if so, how can you justify the different actions? Motorists get fined heavily for committing these transgressions. I think cyclists should too. And I don't think it would be a bad idea at all if cyclists had to go for "drivers licence" tests too.
Normally I would forget about these idiots the moment after cursing them while driving past, but a weekend or two ago they actually had me in a shaking rage. I was driving over Chapman's Peak - where there are signs at the beginning of each side of the pass, clearly asking cyclist to stay in single file - and came across clusters of cyclists riding two or more abreast four times.
One of these instances happened on a blind bend where I had to swerve partly into the oncoming lane to avoid a cyclist. Now fortunately there was no car in the opposite lane, but if I had to choose between swerving and hitting another car head-on, or knocking over a cyclist, I'd pick the cyclist. And once I'd made sure he was OK, I would sue him for the repairs to my car. Hell, I might even sue him for emotional distress and the inconvenience of having to deal with insurance claims.
Now I understand that Chapman's Peak is a wonderfully scenic route and with the rehabilitation parts of it have been broadened substantially, easily allowing enough space for both motorist and cyclist. But some parts of the pass are still very narrow with no real space for cyclists and I don't think cyclists should be allowed there. The same applies for parts of Constantia Nek and the Main road between Muizenberg and Simon's Town.
Cyclists may say that they have as much right to the road as motorists do. With respect, I disagree. Roads are infrastructure. Their main purpose is to connect point A to B. So trucks can transport goods from one city to another, and people can drive between home and work. Using the road for recreational use is of much less importance.
Claims have been made that Cape Town does not have a cycle-friendly culture. I agree. There are many beautiful parts of Cape Town that could be better experienced by bicycle than by car. So I fully support calls for more cycle-friendly routes and roads. But I don't think the lack thereof means cyclists have the right to act like sacred cows on our roads.
No. My problem is with all those cyclists who come out the woodwork running up to The Argus. Not the professional cyclists who know how to cycle on a public road, but all those "joy-rider" cyclists. You know the one's I'm taking about: The one's who cheerfully cycle two or three abreast, holding up traffic while having a casual conversation with the person next to him/her. The ones who cycle straight through stop streets and red traffic lights. I realise you get them all year-round - not just running up to the Argus. You just get so many more of them around Argus time it's kinda hard to ignore.
So if one of those cyclists are reading this column please, oh please, explain this to me: If you cycle through a red robot, or stop street, does that mean you also drive through red traffic lights and stop streets in your car? If not, why not? Don't you think the same rules of the road apply equally to both motorists and cyclists? And if so, how can you justify the different actions? Motorists get fined heavily for committing these transgressions. I think cyclists should too. And I don't think it would be a bad idea at all if cyclists had to go for "drivers licence" tests too.
Normally I would forget about these idiots the moment after cursing them while driving past, but a weekend or two ago they actually had me in a shaking rage. I was driving over Chapman's Peak - where there are signs at the beginning of each side of the pass, clearly asking cyclist to stay in single file - and came across clusters of cyclists riding two or more abreast four times.
One of these instances happened on a blind bend where I had to swerve partly into the oncoming lane to avoid a cyclist. Now fortunately there was no car in the opposite lane, but if I had to choose between swerving and hitting another car head-on, or knocking over a cyclist, I'd pick the cyclist. And once I'd made sure he was OK, I would sue him for the repairs to my car. Hell, I might even sue him for emotional distress and the inconvenience of having to deal with insurance claims.
Now I understand that Chapman's Peak is a wonderfully scenic route and with the rehabilitation parts of it have been broadened substantially, easily allowing enough space for both motorist and cyclist. But some parts of the pass are still very narrow with no real space for cyclists and I don't think cyclists should be allowed there. The same applies for parts of Constantia Nek and the Main road between Muizenberg and Simon's Town.
Cyclists may say that they have as much right to the road as motorists do. With respect, I disagree. Roads are infrastructure. Their main purpose is to connect point A to B. So trucks can transport goods from one city to another, and people can drive between home and work. Using the road for recreational use is of much less importance.
Claims have been made that Cape Town does not have a cycle-friendly culture. I agree. There are many beautiful parts of Cape Town that could be better experienced by bicycle than by car. So I fully support calls for more cycle-friendly routes and roads. But I don't think the lack thereof means cyclists have the right to act like sacred cows on our roads.
posted by Jeremy at 6:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home