Another accident caught on camera

[derrick]

Well OK, but the cars are supposed to stop surely ?

"Get over it" the last refuge of someone without an argument, or perchance trying to start one

He did stop. There is no argument the cyclist is a twat.. Read the highway code

 

[Profpointy]

He did stop. There is no argument the cyclist is a twat.. Read the highway code

Good advice - try rule 170 for a start

 

[derrick]

He just came flying off thepavement which he should not have been on in the firstplace. When i cross a road i stop and check to see whats coming before i cross.Common sense really. But not everyone is blessed with that are they.

 

[Jody]

Good advice - try rule 170 for a start

Think that falls down on the definition of pedestrian and is debatable whether the cyclist started to cross first before the car turned into the junction.

 

[Profpointy]

Think that falls down on the definition of pedestrian and is debatable whether the cyclist started to cross first before the car turned into the junction.

My point really is that it's all very well blaming the cyclist for being on the pavement, but if he'd instead been walking in the very same place, let's say a small child even, it would be 100% car driver's fault - even if its (sadly) wiser as a pedestrian to bow down to the superiority of the motor car.

Hey, only yesterday a car was driving onto the zebra crossing I was half way across in a "hurry up, get out of my way" manner. When I gestured disapproval - and to be clear it was a WTAF are you doing gesture rather than the (or two) finger - the response from the driver wasn't contrition.

 

[Custom24]

Assuming the audio is in sync with the video, the horn was sounded pretty much as soon as the collision occurred

That, and the driver's subsequent smug attitude make me think that he knew the cyclist was there, possibly even saw that he'd started across the junction, and decided to assert his car's priority vs the illegal pavement riding cyclist

In other words, the driver is likely a dangerous ass on the road, as much as the cyclist

 

[derrick]

 

[Milkfloat]

My point really is that it's all very well blaming the cyclist for being on the pavement, but if he'd instead been walking in the very same place, let's say a small child even, it would be 100% car driver's fault - even if its (sadly) wiser as a pedestrian to bow down to the superiority of the motor car.

That depends if the pedestrian was already crossing the road.

 

[Profpointy]

[QUOTE 4288282, member: 45"]He wouldn't have been walking, but running. He'd be running into the road and you'd be calling him an idiot.[/QUOTE]

The car should still have seen and stopped-for a runner - no?

Or is the mere pedestrian to defer to car at all times?

Sadly one has to look, because "might is right" when it comes to the car, but it shouldn't be like this, and in law, isn't.
For cyclists to support this view is sad

 

[derrick]

I give up the motorist was a complete idiot. The cyclist was in no way to blame. Cyclist rule.

 

[Jamieyorky]

Love it how the cyclist is at fault .... So let's shout and swere at the driver.......

 

[jefmcg]

If a car is stopped in a box junction, are other drivers legally allowed to ram it, because it's not supposed to be there? Just because the cyclist is not in the right, doesn't make hitting him ok. And when you drive your car into vulnerable road user, gloating is never appropriate.

Can anyone hear the indicator click as the driver approaches the turn? I can only make it out just as the car starts turning.

For the record, even if it was a shared footpath, apparently it's still OK to drive over a cyclist using it, as long as you say were indicating and there are no witnesses alive to contradict you. http://lcc.org.uk/articles/senior-coroner-concludes-henry-langs-death-accidental

 

[jefmcg]

Love it how the cyclist is at fault .... So let's shout and swere at the driver.......

He's just been hit by a car. This is lizard brain response. Logic doesn't come into it.

 

[PK99]

Think that falls down on the definition of pedestrian and is debatable whether the cyclist started to cross first before the car turned into the junction.

The clue is in the name....pedestrian

Pedestrian ....on foot.
Cyclist on a cycle
Person on foot pushing a bike on pavement = pedestrian
Person riding a bike on the pavement = cyclist

The cyclist in this case was a complete and arrogant farkwit.

 

[Jamieyorky]

He's just been hit by a car. This is lizard brain response. Logic doesn't come into it.

I wouldn't have responded like that, but I also wouldn't have ridden on the pavement and have common sense to stop when a car is turning.