Infirmary Road Tesco - are drivers targeting cyclists?

[sgtkate]

They shouldn't, it's asking to be hurt.

 

What I often find happens though is that I pull up (generally just in front of a car if I can), and a few seconds later the indicator goes on.

At which point there's not much I can do. I can't read minds before the indicator is on, and once there I can't reasonably go backwards, so they have to wait until I clear the junction.

 

If a car at the front is indicating, I stay behind it. If several in a row are indicating, I stay behind them all. It's rare that they (all) indicate whilst stationary at a junction though, because they don't think about the possibility of a filtering cyclist, instead thinking that no one needs to see their intention.

 

I will admit to be guilty of not indicating when waiting at traffic lights unless I'm the first car, until the traffic starts moving. I hadn't even considered filtering cyclists, so now I shall try to remember to indicate earlier as there is a valid reason.

[mattleonard]

What I often find happens though is that I pull up (generally just in front of a car if I can), and a few seconds later the indicator goes on.

 

What?!!! You mean that when you pull up at a set of traffic lights the drivers in the cars near you seem to have some magical awareness that you are there?! How can this be?! I'd expect them to not bother to indicate and just decided to aggressively run you over instead

[monkey69]

Technically 49% would be a minority, but I doubt the word is often used to mean that apart from in politics.

 

I can't give you anything other than a subjective judgement of course, but I'd say it's a fraction of a percent at the highest.

 

Perhaps you see more manifest abuse specifically because you refuse to conform to the rules of the road... You don't cycle any more than I do. Yet in the last 3 years of commuting I've exchanged words with 2 drivers, shaken my fist at a dozen who have done something dangerous to me and shouted threats of imminent death at one other who luckily for them I didn't catch.

I find pedestrians to be more of a daily risk than cars to be honest. And the tram tracks to be a bigger risk than that!

There are countless thousands of vehicles that have passed me and that I have passed which has caused no concern for either party.

 

did any of theses occurrences involve waiting at a junction? say with traffic taking up the red box that's supposed to put cyclists in a safe position regarding the layout of the junction.

 

following the letter of the law does not make it safer for everyone. example, many drivers flash their headlights to allow cars or cyclists out from junctions. BUT the law states you should only flash your lights to alert other road uses to your presence.

Nothing their about directing drivers to pull out in front of you.

BUT this happens many thousands of times a day and technically its against the law.

but with COMMON SENSE you can see it makes commuting safer and traffic flows better for it.

[mattleonard]

following the letter of the law does not make it safer for everyone. example, many drivers flash their headlights to allow cars or cyclists out from junctions. BUT the law states you should only flash your lights to alert other road uses to your presence.

Nothing their about directing drivers to pull out in front of you.

BUT this happens many thousands of times a day and technically its against the law.

but with COMMON SENSE you can see it makes commuting safer and traffic flows better for it.

 

You seem to be confused about the difference between the Highway Code and the law. The law does not state that you should only flash your lights to alert other road uses to your presence.

 

There's an argument that the Highway Code is wrong on this - you are right that this signal can help traffic flow. It doesn't make commuting safer though, since it perpetuates a signal which can potentially cause confusion since it has an ambiguous meaning. If no-one ever signalled giving way by flashing their headlights then there would be no ambiguity.

[Cyclone]

did any of theses occurrences involve waiting at a junction? say with traffic taking up the red box that's supposed to put cyclists in a safe position regarding the layout of the junction.

No, not one.

 

following the letter of the law does not make it safer for everyone. example, many drivers flash their headlights to allow cars or cyclists out from junctions. BUT the law states you should only flash your lights to alert other road uses to your presence.

Nothing their about directing drivers to pull out in front of you.

BUT this happens many thousands of times a day and technically its against the law.

No, it's against the HC, that's different to running a red light that is actually against the law.

but with COMMON SENSE you can see it makes commuting safer and traffic flows better for it.

 

Running a red light never makes sense and never makes it safer. This is just an excuse to not stop IMO.

[monkey104]

There is no ambiguity, it is stated in the Highway Code and that is why I don't flash my lights to other drivers as an indication to give them right of way.

[richkent]

There is no ambiguity, it is stated in the Highway Code and that is why I don't flash my lights to other drivers as an indication to give them right of way.

 

So what do you do to indicate you are giving them right of way?

[mattleonard]

There is no ambiguity, it is stated in the Highway Code and that is why I don't flash my lights to other drivers as an indication to give them right of way.

 

There is an ambiguity if you are the one who sees someone flashing their lights - rule 111 of the HC makes that very point. I applaud your stance to not flash your lights to give other road users right of way, but if you actually only ever judge (the HC's word) them flashing their lights as them making you aware of their presence then I reckon you must be stuck at some junction having been locked in a stalemate of politeness for months.

[sgtkate]

So what do you do to indicate you are giving them right of way?

 

Highway code says to leave a gap and allow them to pull into it. I do tend to flash people (with my headlights!) to show I'm giving way if needed, but then you can end up in a mess if they don't go...how long do you keep flashing them for? Or when do you give up and pull forward? Because sod's law says when you move so will they etc...

 

"110

 

Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

 

111

 

Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully."

[johnme]

There isn't a cycle path just there. It starts just after the chicane as you're going downhill (as I was) or just before it going up. Using it (as I always do with considerable inconvenience to myself) requires me to slow down and swerve sharply to leave the main carriageway and cross the pavement. Riding on the pavement where there's no cycle path contravenes the highway code.

 

Leave out the tired old anti-cyclist cliches please. If cycle paths were designed with bikes in mind perhaps more cyclists would use them (as I always do).

 

As for sensationalism, when someone delberately aims a heavy vehicle at a cyclist, what do they think the end result will be? Deliberate serious harm is meant. I have a knowldege of the law, and where deliberate serious harm is meant and results in death it's murder.

 

Please try cycling in Sheffield to see the dangerous hateful and illegal attitude of many motorists before you accuse me of being sensationalist.

riding on the pavement where theres no cycle path contravenes the highway code does it. try telling that to the hundreds of cyclists that do it everyday of the week. if you put a thread on here saying i was nearly injured by a cyclist riding on pavement you would get a thousand others telling you the same, weather its to cut a left turn or to use a crossing to make a right turn cyclists DO use pavements on a regular basis even on the moor. ever thought thats one of the reasons theres so much friction between drivers and cyclists plus the fact that you use the roads free yet they pay expensive road tax to pay for your tight pockets