New offences for cyclists/cycling

[Boopop]

Can I go to one of these education courses voluntarily? I'd happily go and disrupt each one I attend, talking about car dependency, motonormativity, the five deaths a day caused by drivers every day in the UK and the vanishingly small number of deaths caused by cyclists.

 

[matticus]

It is not many meters from a roadway - it is immediatle adjacent the road.

Really? Just from this pic the deaths were at least two RangeRover lengths from the road. Let me remind you:

I'm sure you could find a wider shot: do come back to us with your revised geometry estimates

It is not in a built-up area - the green golfer symbol is at the accident site.

View attachment 760954

This was in Wimbledon. And it was outside a Primary School. Trying to paint this as
nOT in a built up area isn't going to fly. Did the driver travel there along the M3? Or perhaps across the Serengeti?

 

[rydabent]

View attachment 760465

~ Road CC link ~

Small minded B'crats can always think up laws to restrict the freedom of the other guy.

 

[Alex321]

Small minded B'crats can always think up laws to restrict the freedom of the other guy.

But as you would know if you had read a bit more of the thread, this is not what has happened here, and in fact there are no new laws at all.

 

[a.twiddler]

Much ado about nothing, really, but the media like to create a drama to get people frothing.

 

[Jameshow]

Where I think cyclists might get "done" is:-

Riding up the inside of cars and lorries.

Weaving around cars that position themselves so as to restrict a cyclist on the inside.

Keeping momentum at a large roundabout by not stopping to a car coming from the right.

Not using a cycle lane...

 

[DCLane]

@Jameshow - you're describing my inner city commuting, well, apart from the roundabout bit. I track stand those.

I'll prepare to be chased down . I'm not stopping for someone waving me to: on my south Leeds commute they're more likely to be muggers.

 

[mjr]

Where I think cyclists might get "done" is:-

Riding up the inside of cars and lorries.

[...]
Not using a cycle lane...

So those two combined would mean no overtaking for cyclists if there's a cycle lane. That would be ridiculous.

 

[TheDoctor]

All the stuff that's going on worldwide and they're focussing on this?
I feel so much safer...

 

[Alex321]

Where I think cyclists might get "done" is:-

Riding up the inside of cars and lorries.

Weaving around cars that position themselves so as to restrict a cyclist on the inside.

Keeping momentum at a large roundabout by not stopping to a car coming from the right.

Not using a cycle lane...

What makes you think a cyclist might be "done" for any of those except niot giving way to a car from, the right on a roundabout?

All the rest of those are perfectly legal, and within the highway code.

 

[oldandslow]

So those two combined would mean no overtaking for cyclists if there's a cycle lane. That would be ridiculous.

It isn't overtaking; it's filtering. This is where lots of people arguing about cyclists "undertaking" go wrong. Overtaking happens in traffic that is broadly free-moving. Since, when that happens, cars are faster than bikes then, if it's possible for a bike to get past a car, it's not normally going to be by overtaking.

When traffic is not free moving, filtering is accepted. For motorists, because their vehicles are so big, two lanes are needed but "undertaking" is OK in those circumstances - only, again, it's filtering. Undertaking is doing 70mph in the inside lane to get past a vehicle doing 60mph in the middle lane.

Highway Code rule 88 assumes that motorcyclists will filter. Rule 182 tells motorists to watch out for cyclists and others coming up on the left. Rule 74 of course tells cyclists not to filter on the inside of vehicles signalling to turn left (although we know that we can't rely on all motorists to signal, and indeed some only do so as they turn, which is a bit of a waste of time as we can already see what they are doing).

None of this is to say that filtering does not need to be done with great care. But the idea that it is not allowed simply does not stand up to examination.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

It isn't overtaking; it's filtering. This is where lots of people arguing about cyclists "undertaking" go wrong. Overtaking happens in traffic that is broadly free-moving. Since, when that happens, cars are faster than bikes then, if it's possible for a bike to get past a car, it's not normally going to be by overtaking.

When traffic is not free moving, filtering is accepted. For motorists, because their vehicles are so big, two lanes are needed but "undertaking" is OK in those circumstances - only, again, it's filtering. Undertaking is doing 70mph in the inside lane to get past a vehicle doing 60mph in the middle lane.

Highway Code rule 88 assumes that motorcyclists will filter. Rule 182 tells motorists to watch out for cyclists and others coming up on the left. Rule 74 of course tells cyclists not to filter on the inside of vehicles signalling to turn left (although we know that we can't rely on all motorists to signal, and indeed some only do so as they turn, which is a bit of a waste of time as we can already see what they are doing).

None of this is to say that filtering does not need to be done with great care. But the idea that it is not allowed simply does not stand up to examination.

I filtered left past a long queue of cars at a roundabout a few months back, one driver took obvious exception and blasted his horn as I went past. I took the first exit and carried on up the road, about a minute later I could hear a car approach and slow and knew it was that clown. He pulled up right alongside me and in a very loud Jeremy Clarkson style voice shouted "You are a disgrace to cyclists everywhere" and drove off. Not what I expected, I was laughing my head off!