jongo Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Yes. Since we weren't there we'll never know but it reads as though the bike was in front of the car and so the horn was used as a chastisement. Perhaps you could brush up on your Highway code before advising others on it? What about what us motorists have to put up with too. Was driving down Ecclesall Rd earlier with a cyclist to the left of me, suddenly without any indication decides to turn right, into Tesco precinct, atleast when I peeped I was not greeted by the usual two fingered jesture as he must have known just how close it was. It reads to me as though the cyclist was to the left of the car, if he was in front of the car why would he say "to the left of me" You say chastisement.......... I refer you to your own words......."we wernt there" So why jump to the conclusion it was as a chastisement If I see a danger then I will continue to use my horn, no matter what the highway code says! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Perhaps you could brush up on your Highway code before advising others on it? A quote from the highway code: The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence Maybe you should check what you are going to post before you do so ! He/she was warning the cyclist of their presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 12, 2010 Author Share Posted June 12, 2010 Then you are wrong. It reads to me as though the cyclist was to the left of the car, if he was in front of the car why would he say "to the left of me" I'm no police accident investigator but I'd initially assume that a bike at the side of a faster car wouldn't usually teleport in front of it. Obviously if the bike was faster then they had the right of way in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Then you are wrong. I'm no police accident investigator but I'd initially assume that a bike at the side of a faster car wouldn't usually teleport in front of it. Obviously if the bike was faster then they had the right of way in any case. So say you. Assumption is........ Was you there? Why is it that YOUR assumptions and YOUR reading of the post is the ONLY one that matters Bout time you got your head from where it is and looked at other sides of the coins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 12, 2010 Author Share Posted June 12, 2010 I already I said that we weren't there, but could you explain the teleporting cyclist? (wednesday1 is conspicuously and unusually absent) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Your hypothesis is slanted. Cyclists are rarely to blame for vehicle/cyclist collisions. Errant cyclist behaviour is rarely the cause of RTAs. Usually, it's driver error: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time. Course they are - rarely the cause of RTA's that is. How could anyone expect you to say anything different. Just ignore the facts and stick to your beliefs no matter what. I have already described some of the scenarios that I have witnessed - stupid cyclists manouvres because they think they own the road. Not all cyclists are bad. As I said - I was one once. But to claim as you do is sticking your head in the sand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 I already I said that we weren't there, but could you explain the teleporting cyclist? (wednesday1 is conspicuously and unusually absent) Car driver is passing cyclist. Car driver slows down. Cyclist doesn't. Cyclist pulls in front of car. Sorted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Trying to overtake when they couldn't safely do so then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Trying to overtake when they couldn't safely do so then? It happens that the road may appear safe when it actually turns out not to be, or perhaps the car driver wanted to turn his vehicle - hence slowing down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 I already I said that we weren't there, but could you explain the teleporting cyclist? (wednesday1 is conspicuously and unusually absent) Tone wednesday1 has been in pub enjoying the World Cup, sorry haven't been on hand all day to answer your questions old boy. As I described yesterday I was driving down the road. There was a cyclist in front at the side of the road going much slower than I was. As I approached to go past him, he decides to turn right without signalling. I slam on brakes and collision is avoided. Simple. Yes I did peep at him, as you say partly to chastise him, but more importantly to let him know just how close he was to joining the tarmac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.