Squiggs Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 Car driver is passing cyclist. Car driver slows down. Cyclist doesn't. Cyclist pulls in front of car. Sorted. So do you normally slow down during an overtaking manouvre then? If the answer is no, then your point is invalid. If your answer is yes, then you are a dangerous driver, overtaking when it is not clear and safe to do so. 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. As above: If your answer is yes, then you are a dangerous driver, overtaking when it is not clear and safe to do so. Glad you agree and also raise the point that I missed, that a dangerous driver may also try to combine an overtake with a turn, again, dangerous driving. But, let's be fair. Cyclists sometimes break the law too. Only today I rode the wrong way down a section of one way street. What I SHOULD have done was squeeze through the gap and say within the cycle lane, hoping of course that no pannier straps, pedal teeth etc contacted the illegally parked car that arrogantly pulled into the lane and obstructed forcing me out of the contra-flow and into the opposing lane it as I approached. The driver of the vehicle recorded may be interested to learn that mandatory cycle lane enforcement is NOT, as for parking enforcement, passed to the council and remains a police matter.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 So do you normally slow down during an overtaking manouvre then? If the answer is no, then your point is invalid. I so love members of the forum who pick bits of posts to suit their ends. I can think of many reasons for slowing down whilst perhaps passing a cyclist. The fact you cannot even think of one tells me a great deal. If your answer is yes, then you are a dangerous driver, overtaking when it is not clear and safe to do so. Obviously you do not drive a motor vehicle or you would know that there are occassions when it may appear safe to overtake, and then turns out not to be so. As above: If your answer is yes, then you are a dangerous driver, overtaking when it is not clear and safe to do so. As above - answer is perhaps you should try looking at this from more than one restricted viewpoint. Glad you agree and also raise the point that I missed, that a dangerous driver may also try to combine an overtake with a turn, again, dangerous driving. Oh think about it and if you still cannot think of a way this is not dangerous driving then maybe I will explain. But it does not take much figuring out. But, let's be fair. Cyclists sometimes break the law too. Only today I rode the wrong way down a section of one way street. What I SHOULD have done was squeeze through the gap and say within the cycle lane, hoping of course that no pannier straps, pedal teeth etc contacted the illegally parked car that arrogantly pulled into the lane and obstructed forcing me out of the contra-flow and into the opposing lane it as I approached. The driver of the vehicle recorded may be interested to learn that mandatory cycle lane enforcement is NOT, as for parking enforcement, passed to the council and remains a police matter.... You mean you was forced to cycle dangerously by the actions of someone else? Surely not? And drivers are never put in a situation that should be straightforward and safe, but turns out not to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 I so love members of the forum who pick bits of posts to suit their ends. Obviously. This is why you have attempted to do so..but... Obviously you do not drive a motor vehicle or you would know that there are occassions when it may appear safe to overtake, and then turns out not to be so. Unfortunately you fail immediately since I have a clean driving licence with full no claims bonus and drive regularly. I have such a licence and insurance policy because I overtake only when safe to do so, not when it "might be" safe. As above - answer is perhaps you should try looking at this from more than one restricted viewpoint. You are right of course. Not having a motorcycle licence my viewpoint is restricted to that of a pedestrian, cyclist, car driver, van driver and 7.5 tonne driver. I can't speak for a motorcycle, PCV or HGV >7.5T Oh think about it and if you still cannot think of a way this is not dangerous driving then maybe I will explain. But it does not take much figuring out. Please do explain how, given that unsafe = potentially dangerous, that overtaking when it APPEARS to be safe but turns out NOT to be (thereore is unsafe) is not dangerous? You mean you was forced to cycle dangerously by the actions of someone else? Surely not? And drivers are never put in a situation that should be straightforward and safe, but turns out not to be? Occasionally it is necessary to take evasive action to avoid a hazard. This is COMPLETELY different to a failure to adequately read the road in order to attempt to pass someone else purely for one's own convenience. Different kettle of fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Cyclist travelling along left hand side of road quite happily. Driver moves alongside preparing to do a right turn. There have been no indications the cyclist will also turn. Driver slows car in order to make the turn. Cyclist pulls manouvre. Unfortunately it happens. Are you saying that every driver should slow down at the approach to every junction if there is a cyclist in sight, and travel behind the cyclist until the juntion has been passed? Approaching traffic lights that are on red. Cyclist on left of road. Car slows to pull along side cyclist. Cyclist speeds up and manouvres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Travelling along Manchester Road there is a 60mph stretch with reasonably good visibility where it should be safe to overtake. On a couple of occasions I have followed vehicles travelling 25-30 mph along this stretch, and decided to overtake. On both occasions as soon as I am alongside the vehicle the driver has chosen to accelerate to match my speed. Different vehicles and different drivers of the other vehicle on both occasion. What should have been a safe, straight forward overtaking has become hazardous. Same type of scenario but this time preparing to overtake a white van travelling slowly. The white van driver decides to block the overtake making a safe manouvre hazardous. There are lots and lots of examples of what should be safe manouvres being made dangerous by other road users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Cyclist travelling along left hand side of road quite happily. Driver moves alongside preparing to do a right turn. Unless there is a right turn lane when they move along side then they've got it completely wrong. You wouldn't pull alongside another car in preparation for a right turn, you'd stay behind it, that's what you do with a cycle as well. There have been no indications the cyclist will also turn. Driver slows car in order to make the turn. Cyclist pulls manouvre. Unfortunately it happens. It sounds like the cyclist was probably in the wrong in the example we are discussing, the car was preparing to pass him and the cycle didn't indicate before changing position in the lane. Are you saying that every driver should slow down at the approach to every junction if there is a cyclist in sight, and travel behind the cyclist until the juntion has been passed? If they intend to make use of the junction and can't safely overtake before reaching it, then yes, particularly if they are turning left. What do you do, attempt to get past, only get halfway and then make a 2nd manoeuvre anyway? Approaching traffic lights that are on red. Cyclist on left of road. Car slows to pull along side cyclist. Cyclist speeds up and manouvres. No, the car should NOT pull along side the cyclist, why would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 <snip> Are you saying that every driver should slow down at the approach to every junction if there is a cyclist in sight, and travel behind the cyclist until the juntion has been passed? <snip> . Please read section 167 of the Highway Code, first bullet point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongo Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 No, the car should NOT pull along side the cyclist, why would it? Does this also go for cyclists who ride along the left side of stationary traffic at red lights ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 13, 2010 Author Share Posted June 13, 2010 No, because filtering on bicycles is specifically allowed and motorists are even advised to check the left for cyclists when opening car doors. I passed my driving test twenty odd years ago and I still remember all this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perplexed Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Cyclist travelling along left hand side of road quite happily. Driver moves alongside preparing to do a right turn. There have been no indications the cyclist will also turn. Driver slows car in order to make the turn. Cyclist pulls manouvre. Unfortunately it happens. Are you saying that every driver should slow down at the approach to every junction if there is a cyclist in sight, and travel behind the cyclist until the juntion has been passed? Approaching traffic lights that are on red. Cyclist on left of road. Car slows to pull along side cyclist. Cyclist speeds up and manouvres. You shouldn't be overtaking anything at a junction, cyclist, car, milk float or anything else. Particularly if you intent to turn either way yourself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.