Don't ride in groups or we will be stopped cycling completely.

[mjr]

You are allowed to go out more than once for medical reasons as per updated guidance - if questioned you can explain that you are following your specialist’s recommendation

I both cycled yesterday and walked to the shops in the village around a mile from home. My rheumatologist encourages me to be as active as possible

I followed the social distancing 2m rule as best as I could (mostly much more)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...avirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do (paragraph 15)

Thank you. That seemed to be missing from @CanucksTraveller's posted copy. This is why links are needed to stop half-truths and spin spreading.

 

[snorri]

whatever happened to legislation? Is law now just an ad hoc series of whims, ideas, postulations uttered by the high and mighty and then enforced by Jumped-up badge flashers?

Yes, and for Gods sake don’t enjoy it.
The guy’s opinion, however lofty his title, are just opinions, nothing more, and not law.

The situation is ever changing, consider the delay that would be caused in reforming laws daily to cater for the latest developments in scientific research and monitoring. How long would it take to reform the laws and how many would die while we waited?
"The guy's opinion" was expressed after a lifetime of training and experience, he is trying to protect the population from serious illness and death.
For me, I'm happyto comply with current law but what I really want is sound advice on avoiding Covid-19, and if that requires more stringent restrictions than the current law then so be it..

 

[lane]

Yes a point seems to be missed by some. If you follow the guidelines you are keeping YOU safe even if you arn't too bothered about anyone else.

 

[nickyboy]

This issue of social distancing when riding on the road is presenting a bit of a challenge....

There are lots more pedestrians out than normal and if they're on the pavement on my side I need to move out to the middle of the road. But of course motorists aren't used to this. No probs if no traffic behind but if a car is behind I can (a) stop (b) pass the pedestrian too close (c) move out to the middle of the road

I've tried (c) but it doesn't feel very safe so I'm tending to slow right down, let the car pass and then move wide around the pedestrian. Not ideal

 

[matticus]

This issue of social distancing when riding on the road is presenting a bit of a challenge....

There are lots more pedestrians out than normal and if they're on the pavement on my side I need to move out to the middle of the road. But of course motorists aren't used to this. No probs if no traffic behind but if a car is behind I can (a) stop (b) pass the pedestrian too close (c) move out to the middle of the road

I've tried (c) but it doesn't feel very safe so I'm tending to slow right down, let the car pass and then move wide around the pedestrian. Not ideal

Take the whole bloody road if you feel the need. Drivers SHOULD have the skill to deal with this, and my recent experience is that drivers are being *remarkably* reasonable. (apart from a few crazy outliers, and most of those got bored after the 1st week)

 

[neil_merseyside]

This issue of social distancing when riding on the road is presenting a bit of a challenge....

There are lots more pedestrians out than normal and if they're on the pavement on my side I need to move out to the middle of the road. But of course motorists aren't used to this. No probs if no traffic behind but if a car is behind I can (a) stop (b) pass the pedestrian too close (c) move out to the middle of the road

I've tried (c) but it doesn't feel very safe so I'm tending to slow right down, let the car pass and then move wide around the pedestrian. Not ideal

Just stay centre of lane, no need to move over then.

 

[vickster]

This issue of social distancing when riding on the road is presenting a bit of a challenge....

There are lots more pedestrians out than normal and if they're on the pavement on my side I need to move out to the middle of the road. But of course motorists aren't used to this. No probs if no traffic behind but if a car is behind I can (a) stop (b) pass the pedestrian too close (c) move out to the middle of the road

I've tried (c) but it doesn't feel very safe so I'm tending to slow right down, let the car pass and then move wide around the pedestrian. Not ideal

Just get past them as quickly as possible while holding your breath

 

[Drago]

That isn't what the law says (and we've been round this many many times, so I'm sure you know that).

We all know that the measures are intended to slow or halt the progress of a deadly disease, but some people think they're more important than society as a whole so choose to go for unnecessarily long jaunts, or for multiple sessions, solely because it is not expressly legislated against. They're usually the argumentative sort who would argue black was white on the point of mere principle, and despite knowing what the actual guidance is and the governments intent on the matter, they're determined to exercise the right for no other reason than they selfishly can. It's no more than self righteous self entitlement.

 

[nickyboy]

Take the whole bloody road if you feel the need. Drivers SHOULD have the skill to deal with this, and my recent experience is that drivers are being *remarkably* reasonable. (apart from a few crazy outliers, and most of those got bored after the 1st week)

Great, I'll remember I was in the right whilst I'm in A&E

I've tried signalling that I intend to move towards the middle of the road but as there are no right turns I think car drivers get a bit confused as to what I'm doing

Safest (apart from holding my breath) is maybe slow down until no car behind

 

[matticus]

Great, I'll remember I was in the right whilst I'm in A&E

Do what you like - it works for me, and has never even resulted in a near miss.

 

[lazybloke]

A bit under six per mile? No one would bat an eyelid at six car passengers a mile and they're only allowed for work, medical and essential shopping not exercise. Double standards?

By all means go and rant about motorised vehicles in an appropriate thread, and maybe throw around more casual accusations of double standards.

I'll stay on-topic: There are now 159 riders on flyby, yet I saw very little evidence of illicit group-riding or even bunching.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Great, I'll remember I was in the right whilst I'm in A&E

I've tried signalling that I intend to move towards the middle of the road but as there are no right turns I think car drivers get a bit confused as to what I'm doing

Safest (apart from holding my breath) is maybe slow down until no car behind

Just control the road move out at least two meters and it’ll be fine.

 

[mjr]

We all know that the measures are intended to slow or halt the progress of a deadly disease, but some people think they're more important than society as a whole so choose to go for unnecessarily long jaunts, or for multiple sessions, solely because it is not expressly legislated against.

I am confident very few are doing it solely for that reason, if any. You could probably convince me some are partly, but I bet you can't show anyone professing solely.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

some people think they're more important than society as a whole so choose to go for unnecessarily long jaunts, or for multiple sessions, solely because it is not expressly legislated against

Agreed.

The legislation has to be read in conjunction with the government guidance and its ultimate aim: keeping people indoors as much as possible.

There wasn’t time to go over every eventuality when framing the legislation so it isn’t watertight but the message is clear in every broadcast made in the public service announcements; stay at home. I could be going out of the house for some fresh air a lot more by making an essential trip to the shop every single day for one pint of milk but I’m not interested in gaming the system when the stakes are this high.

It’s irresponsible to exploit the inevitable gaps in the rushed legislation when the purpose behind them is both well known and so vital.

Taking advantage of loopholes in this situation doesn’t make you clever, just an arse.

 

[mjr]

The legislation has to be read in conjunction with the government guidance and its ultimate aim: keeping people indoors as much as possible.

If that was the aim, why are we allowed (and encouraged in some advice) into our gardens?

Taking advantage of loopholes in this situation doesn’t make you clever, just an arse.

Equally, simplifying the guidance down to a simple-but-wrong instruction that would be toxic to public health and then ranting at other people who are following the actual guidance rather than anyone's preferred simplified lie doesn't make you right.