Doubling Up On Road

[Dave Davenport]

How is the highway code on Scimitars?

Only allowed if attached to wheel hubs in a 'Ben Hur' style.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Only allowed if attached to wheel hubs in a 'Ben Hur' style.

Well, I have always felt an affinity with Boudicca, so maybe I'll give it a go...

 

[Dan B]

Well, I have always felt an affinity with Boudicca, so maybe I'll give it a go...

Absolutely. We all have a right to be on the woad

 

[dellzeqq]

Absolutely. We all have a right to be on the woad

 

[Red Light]

But i still question the desirability of having very large groups of cyclists on public roads. Problems - both real and perceived.

The critical word in those sentences is public. Its not motorists' roads its public roads.

 

[Dave Davenport]

Well, I have always felt an affinity with Boudicca, so maybe I'll give it a go...

Hmmm....but if she'd been a bit more organised and not lost to a much smaller force of Romans they wouldn't have built all those roads and this thread wouldn't have started in the first place!

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Hmmm....but if she'd been a bit more organised and not lost to a much smaller force of Romans they wouldn't have built all those roads and this thread wouldn't have started in the first place!

Damn Romans and their superior infrastructure!

 

[Mad at urage]

No time to correct properly

 

[freecyclist]

[QUOTE 1588463"]
What you should do as a cyclist is control your space as much as possible. If this means riding further out from the kerb so that you've got an escape zone to your left then so be it.
[/quote]

I realise that any special interest forum is naturally going to attract its share of militants and extremists but the philosophy that you should actively prevent cars from overtaking unless their is a 100% clear opposite carriageway even when safe to do so like in my 1/3 2/3 situation is a brand of cycling fundamentalism that is quite new to me.
I am curious to know do you really put this militancy into practice or is it just harmless cyberbased bravado.
If you really cycle along in primary at the head of a line of traffic that could otherwise pass quite safely if you were in secondary , on the grounds that overtaking cars would have to dip into your carriageway then isnt that just going to piss motorists off unnecessarily and actually increase the danger of an enraged motorist driving in a way that might endanger your safety.
I dont see that it is a good idea for you , the motorist or society.

 

[adscrim]

I dont see that it is a good idea for you , the motorist or society.

On the contrary. I think you'll find that it's the cyclist riding along in the gutter that are more likely to come to harm. Also, studies such as this oneshow that it's the motorist that are to blame in the majority of cylist/motorist 'incidents'. So riding primary, while it will certainly result in more motorist having to wait for a safe opportunity to pass, will absolutely benefit the cyclist. As there are fewer accidents, this in turn benefits motorist and society in general.

 

[lukesdad]

On the contrary. I think you'll find that it's the cyclist riding along in the gutter that are more likely to come to harm. Also, studies such as this oneshow that it's the motorist that are to blame in the majority of cylist/motorist 'incidents'. So riding primary, while it will certainly result in more motorist having to wait for a safe opportunity to pass, will absolutely benefit the cyclist. As there are fewer accidents, this in turn benefits motorist and society in general.

Its a shame the motorists dont see it that way and probably never will.

 

[freecyclist]

On the contrary. I think you'll find that it's the cyclist riding along in the gutter that are more likely to come to harm. Also, studies such as this oneshow that it's the motorist that are to blame in the majority of cylist/motorist 'incidents'. So riding primary, while it will certainly result in more motorist having to wait for a safe opportunity to pass, will absolutely benefit the cyclist. As there are fewer accidents, this in turn benefits motorist and society in general.

I think we'd all agree that motorists are to blame for most crashes.
So your saying that riding primary may piss motorists off but it is in actuality safer.
Maybe and on the safety grounds i agree its valid in those circumstances. There are times i can 100% see the point in riding primary.
Its just at the extreme end where the justification for riding primary and preventing overtaking is purely ideological with no safety benefit that i have a problem.
Thats the cycling fundamentalist bit - where a cyclist adopts primary purely as part of a militant ideology with no justification through safety benefit. Like my 1/3 and 2/3 situation that i keep refering to with mrpaul.

 

[freecyclist]

without wishing to come over as either militant or extremist, your position is akin to sucking up to a bully.

Are you an expert in sucking up to bullies ?

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Are you an expert in sucking up to bullies ?

Seriously?

Why don't you just type: "I know that you are, but what am I?"

 

[freecyclist]

Seriously?

Why don't you just type: "I know that you are, but what am I?"

Hey we all plough our own furrow.