Jonathan M said:
Interesting, because my feelings are that cyclists are still currently marginalised as a road user - whereas in France, as an example, cyclists are afforded in law all of the same road rights as other users, and on the whole this appears to be respected by others.
A car driver would probably thik twice about perorming Yenrod's described manoevre with a motorbike or a scooter rider, even though within an urban environment they may not be riding much faster than a good-going cyclist could achieve. A mtorbike rider may be wearing kit that would offer much more protection than a cyclists equivalnet as well. But faced with a cyclist, such consideration would not feature in many drivers thoughts.
Being different in terms of choosing to use none motorised transport is not the same as being different in having to expect other road users not to consider a cyclists safety.
I'd agree that this is probably not the riskiest scenario for a cyclist, but when it occurs it does tend to suggest a blatant lack of regard for the cyclist from that particular driver.
Jonathan,
Think you've the wrong end of the stick here.
The cyclist is the one being subject to risky manouvre as they are NOT going anywhere - 'cept straight on !
Its the CARDRIVER whos making the turn ONTO to then road, the cyclist is on THEN having said jerk drive alongside them whilst they floor the engine to get away form the cyclist.
ITS TOTALLY WRONG ! - Especially if theirs a car oncoming !
Who, would you feel would be 'taken out' if the oncoming was travelling fast and the pulling out vehicle got the speed of this oncoming totally wrong;
They'd need to go in one direction:
A left - thecyclist
B nothing, they'd brake ('backwards')
OR
C they'd hit the oncoming !
D they could try right, before the oncoming hit them.
I dont want to be or put up with being A.