Death By Dangerous Cycling - New Laws

[Wanderer Vagabond]

8 hours ago, WotEver said:

Eh?

 

If I’m driving down the road at 30mph and the car in front of me wishes to turn left I don’t expect him to do so sliding on all four wheels in order to execute the turn at 30, I expect him to slow down in order to perform the manoeuvre. This will cause me to brake. I won’t hit him because I’m not that bad a driver.

 

You would have us believe that if I did run into him that it’s his fault? I think you need to go back to driving school. 

How did the bike get there?  Did it suddenly materialise in that position or did the cyclist slowly move down the inside of the stationary traffic and put himself into that dangerous position?  If the traffic is stopped, so should the cyclist be. 

As a personal opinion, I think that highlights a lot of driver's thinking and is what generates the hatred of cyclists. The car driver has paid a lot of money to buy,tax,insure and run his/her car so that they can spend a majority of their trip sitting in a queue of traffic closely looking at the back of the car in front whilst barely moving. How unfair is it that a cyclist doesn't have to do that and comes scooting past the queue of traffic? Motorcyclists do pretty much the same, how unfair is that? they should sit at the back of the queue and wait their turn,......or perhaps not. When mooring in places like Warwick, as a pedestrian walking into town I'm walking faster than the traffic, should I also have to wait at the back? The resentment is because someone is using a means of transport that is quicker than the one the driver has chosen (no-one is forced to drive).

 

Regarding the left turn death trap, what seems to have been overlooked is that all local authorities put the cycle lane on the left had side of the road, this is effectively another lane for the use of cyclists. Look on the road now as having two lanes (at least). If you are driving on a road with two driving lanes and the driver in the outside lane turns left across you to go up a side street resulting in a collision, are you to blame for being in the inside lane? or is he to blame for inadequate observation? As an aside I'm not a great fan of the planning of cycle lanes in this country (the Netherlands being the gold standard).  The same cycle lane can for a distance be on the road, then on the footpath then if there is a pinch point of some sort, disappears altogether then re-appears on the footpath or wherever. Then there is the shared cycleway/footpath along a road with multiple left hand turnings meaning that at every junction the cyclist is supposed to stop, whereas if he/she perfectly lawfully remained on the highway he/she can just maintain their progress without having to stop every 50 yards, hardly rocket science what they will choose to do, is it?

[LadyG]

56 minutes ago, MJG said:

Sorry but you think somebody wouldn't act irresponsibly simply because they happen to be a surgeon? Can you please explain why?

The classic irresponsible cyclist is the courier working on a paid per mile job, it is his job. He will be young, fit and determined, and may consider himself more or less invincible. These are the same reasons young men have pay high car insurance. A courier is more likely to evolve in to a white van man.

The mature professional is intelligent. As a  doctor has seen death, bad injuries, and is mature. This man was  both confident, and experienced enough to choose to cycle in London. He could probably afforded a taxi or his own car.

Edited August 17, 2018 by LadyG

[WotEver]

30 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

As a personal opinion, I think that highlights a lot of driver's thinking and is what generates the hatred of cyclists. The car driver has paid a lot of money to buy,tax,insure and run his/her car so that they can spend a majority of their trip sitting in a queue of traffic closely looking at the back of the car in front whilst barely moving. How unfair is it that a cyclist doesn't have to do that and comes scooting past the queue of traffic? Motorcyclists do pretty much the same, how unfair is that? they should sit at the back of the queue and wait their turn,.....

Firstly, I don’t ‘hate’ cyclists. I cycle myself and have friends who do the same. Secondly, when a motorcyclist passes a queue of traffic at a set of lights (I’m one of those too although I don’t currently own a motorbike) he doesn’t then hold up that queue when the lights change. He’s off and away. When a bike rider waddles his way to the front of the queue every car driver that overtook him now has to do it all over again. The cyclist has gained maybe two or three seconds on his journey and in doing so has inconvenienced a dozen drivers. And THAT’S why they’re disliked in this scenario. 

Thirdly, it contravenes the Highway Code. 

[Wanderer Vagabond]

13 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Firstly, I don’t ‘hate’ cyclists. I cycle myself and have friends who do the same. Secondly, when a motorcyclist passes a queue of traffic at a set of lights (I’m one of those too although I don’t currently own a motorbike) he doesn’t then hold up that queue when the lights change. He’s off and away. When a bike rider waddles his way to the front of the queue every car driver that overtook him now has to do it all over again. The cyclist has gained maybe two or three seconds on his journey and in doing so has inconvenienced a dozen drivers. And THAT’S why they’re disliked in this scenario. 

Thirdly, it contravenes the Highway Code. 

On the one hand we have the cyclists zipping through traffic regardless and then we have them 'waddling' through, which is it?

 

If you cycle up to the lights, in the cycle lane that is on the inside, how does that contravene the Highway Code?

 

ETA. Have just taken time to check the Highway code and rules for cyclists and cannot find the bit where is says anything about only passing on the right in slow moving traffic. It doesn't happen with cars since if you are in a multi-lane road of slow moving traffic, if your inside lane is moving and the lane outside of you isn't are you supposed to give priority to traffic in the outside lane and let them go first?

 

In your scenario you also seem to assume that immediately after the traffic lights the queue of traffic you are in is going to mysteriously disappear, in my experience, it doesn't, it just reforms at the next set of lights.

Edited August 17, 2018 by Wanderer Vagabond

[roland elsdon]

Of course the bloated fat suv that overhangs the central line leased by all, and driven through every town every day,  has no impact on the congestion. They zip through gaps make light of the terrain and give the leasor a sense of value and purpose. ( entitlement and prestige)

 

[WotEver]

9 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

If you cycle up to the lights, in the cycle lane that is on the inside, how does that contravene the Highway Code?

You must live in a different part of the country to me. At every traffic light stop where I’ve seen cyclists waddling up the inside with the sole purpose of obstructing the traffic once the lights change there are no cycle lanes. 

1 hour ago, roland elsdon said:

Of course the bloated fat suv...

What have Sports Utility Vehicles got to do with irresponsible cyclists?

[Guest]

10 hours ago, LadyG said:

The classic irresponsible cyclist is the courier working on a paid per mile job, it is his job. He will be young, fit and determined, and may consider himself more or less invincible. These are the same reasons young men have pay high car insurance. A courier is more likely to evolve in to a white van man.

The mature professional is intelligent. As a  doctor has seen death, bad injuries, and is mature. This man was  both confident, and experienced enough to choose to cycle in London. He could probably afforded a taxi or his own car.

You simply can't pigeon hole people in that way I'm afraid, I worked with enough doctors for long enough to know that such a sweeping generalisation is inaccurate.

[Robbo]

12 hours ago, LadyG said:

The classic irresponsible cyclist is the courier working on a paid per mile job, it is his job. He will be young, fit and determined, and may consider himself more or less invincible. These are the same reasons young men have pay high car insurance. A courier is more likely to evolve in to a white van man.

The mature professional is intelligent. As a  doctor has seen death, bad injuries, and is mature. This man was  both confident, and experienced enough to choose to cycle in London. He could probably afforded a taxi or his own car.

The guy was a homeopathist so I wouldn’t really say intelligent. 

[Wanderer Vagabond]

12 hours ago, WotEver said:

You must live in a different part of the country to me. At every traffic light stop where I’ve seen cyclists waddling up the inside with the sole purpose of obstructing the traffic once the lights change there are no cycle lanes. 

 

If your location is as per your profile, i.e. Nuneaton you are probably right since the concept of a cycling lane doesn't seem to have troubled your planners, so you will just have to put up with cyclists using your roads as they see fit.

 

If I fully understand your position, and correct me if this is incorrect (only judging by your quote,"... The cyclist has gained maybe two or three seconds on his journey....") what you are in effect saying is that you want the cyclist to take longer on his journey so that you can take less time on yours, is that a fair representation? and if so, why?

[WotEver]

1 minute ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

If I fully understand your position, and correct me if this is incorrect (only judging by your quote,"... The cyclist has gained maybe two or three seconds on his journey....") what you are in effect saying is that you want the cyclist to take longer on his journey so that you can take less time on yours, is that a fair representation? and if so, why?

Nope. I’m saying that we had a cyclist with three cars in a line behind him, all travelling at 10mph. Finally there is nothing coming the other way so all three cars can now safely overtake said cyclist. Due to being delayed by the cyclist the lights change ahead and all three cars stop. The cyclist now waddles his way past the inside of the cars (or, very often, just jumps onto the pavement) in order to get in front of the cars and start the whole cycle all over again.    If he’d stayed where he was it would have made no difference to his journey time and would have permitted the cars to continue their journey unimpeded. 

[LadyG]

11 hours ago, MJG said:

You simply can't pigeon hole people in that way I'm afraid, I worked with enough doctors for long enough to know that such a sweeping generalisation is inaccurate.

The principles of actuary are as off the wall as homeopathy, discuss.

A journalist and a jockey and a male under 25 will all find themselves paying higher car insurance premiums for roughly the same reason, its done by statistics, not by reading entrails.

 

Regarding cyclists who shuffle up front in a line of cars, they may do it for various reasons, least likely is to annoy drivers

 

Edited August 18, 2018 by LadyG

[Guest]

Just now, LadyG said:

The principles of actuary are as off the wall as homeopathy, perhaps.

 

No idea, I didn't mention either.

[WotEver]

10 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

If your location is as per your profile, i.e. Nuneaton you are probably right since the concept of a cycling lane doesn't seem to have troubled your planners, so you will just have to put up with cyclists using your roads as they see fit.

Fortunately, since the most recent local elections,  Labour no longer hold a majority at the Council so the abysmal planning decisions of the past might change for the better moving forward. 

Edited August 18, 2018 by WotEver

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Just now, WotEver said:

Fortunately, since the most recent local elections,  Labour no longer hold a majority at the Council so the abysmal planning decisions might change for the better moving forward. 

Oh whoopee, you can look forward to the efficiency of a Tory controlled council, like the bankrupt Northampton, nearly bankrupt Barnet , or the potentially future bankrupt Surrey. You need to be careful what you wish for, the actual control of your and my council comes from central government, to believe there is any form of 'local democracy' is just an illusion.

 

[Wanderer Vagabond]

16 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Nope. I’m saying that we had a cyclist with three cars in a line behind him, all travelling at 10mph. Finally there is nothing coming the other way so all three cars can now safely overtake said cyclist. Due to being delayed by the cyclist the lights change ahead and all three cars stop. The cyclist now waddles his way past the inside of the cars (or, very often, just jumps onto the pavement) in order to get in front of the cars and start the whole cycle all over again.    If he’d stayed where he was it would have made no difference to his journey time and would have permitted the cars to continue their journey unimpeded. 

So you want him to stay at the back of the queue and take longer on his journey, clarified that then.

[WotEver]

13 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

... you can look forward to the efficiency of a Tory controlled council...

I didn’t say it was Tory controlled. Read again. I said that Labour no longer hold a majority. 

3 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

So you want him to stay at the back of the queue

Yep. It’s simply good manners. 

Edited August 18, 2018 by WotEver

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Just now, WotEver said:

I didn’t say it was Tory controlled. Read again. I said that Labour no longer hold a majority. 

 

Who holds any majority is utterly irrelevant, the whole shebang is run from Whitehall; the only purpose of local government is to take the blame for central government ineptitude, it makes no difference whether Labour, Conservative,Liberal democrat or Monster Raving Loony party (if they still exist) hold this pointless 'majority'. The terms of local government are dictated centrally.

[WotEver]

8 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Who holds any majority is utterly irrelevant, the whole shebang is run from Whitehall...

You obviously have no understanding of how borough planning works. Besides, local government has nothing to do with this thread so I’ll not contribute any further on the subject. 

28 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Oh whoopee, you can look forward to the efficiency of a Tory controlled council

 

13 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Who holds any majority is utterly irrelevant

You’re not even consistent. 

[furnessvale]

On 17/08/2018 at 22:45, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Regarding the left turn death trap, what seems to have been overlooked is that all local authorities put the cycle lane on the left had side of the road, this is effectively another lane for the use of cyclists. Look on the road now as having two lanes (at least). If you are driving on a road with two driving lanes and the driver in the outside lane turns left across you to go up a side street resulting in a collision, are you to blame for being in the inside lane? or is he to blame for inadequate observation?

This scenario is comparable to the many occasions when an HGV has to use the outside lane, even when turning left, in order to complete the turn without clipping the corner due to tail swing.

 

The HGV driver SHOULD clearly indicate left well in advance and any motorist or cyclist undertaking him does so at his peril.

 

George

[Tigerr]

The majority of deaths from HGV's are in cities, and happen at the busiest times of the day. Construction vehicles, concrete lorries, skip trucks are disproportionately killing. These vehicles are not at all suited to busy urban streets, are often driven very aggressively by drivers on piecework/timecards and ought to be restricted to nighttime (as happens in e.g. Paris). 

 

 

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, Tigerr said:

The majority of deaths from HGV's are in cities, and happen at the busiest times of the day. Construction vehicles, concrete lorries, skip trucks are disproportionately killing. These vehicles are not at all suited to busy urban streets, are often driven very aggressively by drivers on piecework/timecards.....

 

 

I am not surprised.

Edited August 19, 2018 by LadyG

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, furnessvale said:

 

The HGV driver SHOULD clearly indicate left well in advance and any motorist or cyclist undertaking him does so at his peril.

 

George

You are assuming that all lorry drivers are perfect, they are not.

You assume all indicators work perfectly at all times, they do not.

Many cyclists are also drivers, they are not intent on suicide.

 

The Highway Code is just that, there is no way all drivers, cyclists or pedestrians follow the code to the letter, if indeed they know all the rules. They are likely to pick and choose which suit.

 

I have noted that London Drivers are particularly aggressive and / or assertive depending on the circumstance.

 

I don't know how many people have died unnecessarily because people think they are "in the right".  Its a sad day when folks drive in such  a selfish manner, sitting in their steel box,  without regard for other human beings.

 

Mirror, signal, manoevre. the MIRROR part is telling you NOT to manoevre unless the road is clear.

•  

manoeuvre

 

• A movement or series of moves requiring skill and care.

Edited August 19, 2018 by LadyG

[jds_1981]

1 hour ago, Tigerr said:

The majority of deaths from HGV's are in cities, and happen at the busiest times of the day. Construction vehicles, concrete lorries, skip trucks are disproportionately killing. These vehicles are not at all suited to busy urban streets, are often driven very aggressively by drivers on piecework/timecards and ought to be restricted to nighttime (as happens in e.g. Paris). 

 

 

As they say, on site a lorry needs a banksman. However, they're apparently don't as soon as they get off site...

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, jds_1981 said:

As they say, on site a lorry needs a banksman. However, they're apparently don't as soon as they get off site...

Banksmen would struggle to keep up with a truck doing even 20mph, let alone 30-40-56 mph.

Maybe there should be a 'banksman' on every corner and junction that 'attached himself' to the vehicle for the short time it is turning, once the manoeuvre was complete he ran back and awaited the next truck - that would certainly get the unemployment down to zero - we could even bring in some cheap labour Eastern Europeans to do it !!

 

I think you have been influenced by an earlier post suggesting 'bringing back' the man with the flag.

[cuthound]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

You are assuming that all lorry drivers are perfect, they are not.

You assume all indicators work perfectly at all times, they do not.

Many cyclists are also drivers, they are not intent on suicide.

 

The Highway Code is just that, there is no way all drivers, cyclists or pedestrians follow the code to the letter, if indeed they know all the rules. They are likely to pick and choose which suit.

 

I have noted that London Drivers are particularly aggressive and / or assertive depending on the circumstance.

 

I don't know how many people have died unnecessarily because people think they are "in the right".  Its a sad day when folks drive in such  a selfish manner, sitting in their steel box,  without regard for other human beings.

 

Mirror, signal, manoevre. the MIRROR part is telling you NOT to manoevre unless the road is clear.

•  

manoeuvre

 

• A movement or series of moves requiring skill and care.

 

Try passing your motor vehicle driving test without knowing the highway code, the examiner can ask any questions he chooses from the Highway Code.

You make an excellent point for compulsory testing and licensing for cyclists.