Does anyone know this cyclist?

[col]

I dont see how you can argue such an obvious mistake,you blame anything you can but the real cause?As for pointless? I dont see it.But reverting to insults(i think) isnt very constructive is it?
I dont know what the word is,or what it means,but that seems pretty pointless dont you think?

You said the car was the primary mistake,i dissagreed,how is that poinless?or do we just accept what you say,with out question?

 

[BentMikey]

I've watched the vid a few more times, and I've changed my mind. I think Brock is right, to a degree.

There were two options in that situation, IMO. One was to take primary all the way around, and not have cut in at the point Brock shows. The other would have been to wait in secondary after the exit behind the other cyclist until the muppet overtook.

You dont need to convince me about primary and reasons for it,but there is a time and place for this,a roundabout exit isnt one of them.

I don't take your points about primary Col, both the one about never being in primary on *any* roundabout exits, or on this one specifically. I'm not sure you should bother replying for my benefit, if you google "plonk usenet".

 

[Cab]

What we are on about is the vid,and it looks to me that he dropped a clanger on the exit.As for primary,if we all did that and didnt expect cars to try and pass,then your not living in the real world,and to expect traffic to go at our speeds,and stay behind us,is well pretty silly dont you think?

If I'm going at a decent lick in primary position then I expect... No, I require anyone who wants to overtake to wait for a safe moment to do so. Not only do I require it, the law requires it. If I can move over at a safe point to allow overtaking I'll do so, thats simple road craft, but in the 'real world' anyone wanting to overtake me has to go at my speed until it is safe to pass.

Anyone who believes otherwise should get off the road.

 

[col]

So following your reasoning, one should never use primary, as it encourages following drivers to overtake dangerously.

Sorry, but that's rubbish.

Again,a masterpiece of playing on words Mr P But yes,i would rather cycle safely,than claim my right when it would be inapropriate,im puzzled as to where you got the never use primary bit from,?i think you answered yourself with your last sentence

 

[col]

If I'm going at a decent lick in primary position then I expect... No, I require anyone who wants to overtake to wait for a safe moment to do so. Not only do I require it, the law requires it. If I can move over at a safe point to allow overtaking I'll do so, thats simple road craft, but in the 'real world' anyone wanting to overtake me has to go at my speed until it is safe to pass.

Anyone who believes otherwise should get off the road.

I can see the usual arguments are being used,instead of sticking to the origional topic,ill remind you what it was shall i? The video of Mag making a mistake.

 

[col]

I've watched the vid a few more times, and I've changed my mind. I think Brock is right, to a degree.

There were two options in that situation, IMO. One was to take primary all the way around, and not have cut in at the point Brock shows. The other would have been to wait in secondary after the exit behind the other cyclist until the muppet overtook.



I don't take your points about primary Col, both the one about never being in primary on *any* roundabout exits, or on this one specifically. I'm not sure you should bother replying for my benefit, if you google "plonk usenet".

So your starting to realise that swinging out in front of a car while exiting the roundabout is a mistake.Again,im not sure where you get me saying, never take primary from?But i suppose it masks having to say a mistake was made doesnt it.

Just googled what you said,and im a bit surprised at what it seems to be,if you dissagree with me that badly,thats fine,but i thought the whole idea was to debate?

 

[spindrift]

Col reminds me of the news reporter who relayed news of Zak Carr's death with the headline "Traffic chaos after accident".

Those who apologise for killer drivers and refuse to accept that driving a ton of steel at speed toward a vulnerable road user is unacceptable, threatening behaviour have blood on their hands. That's not hyperbole, attitudes like Col's are the result of a mindset that sees roads as drivers' own personal racetracks. Get out of my way. Impede me- you die. It's tragic, whether it's fed by celebrities "joking" about crushing cyclists to death or a member of parliament- that stupid bitch Kate Hoey- admitting that she uses her car as a weapon to bully cyclists off the roads, the results are the same. The bullies rule, anyone else who gets killed for the crime of being on a bicycle had it coming.

Very sad.

 

[col]

Im really gobsmacked here,where has all this inuendo and insinuation come from.Its really quite simple,a mistake was made on that vid in my opinion,and you all go off on a different tangent to the actual subject, because you dont like my answer.Did he or did he not make a mistake by swinging out at the time he did?

 

[spindrift]

A member of parliament, Kate Hoey, actually admits to using her car as a weapon to bully and intimidate cyclists off the roads and onto dangerous, ill-thought out cycle lanes:

It was The Wail that carried Kate Hoey's recommendation to terrorise
cyclists off the roads by blasting them with the car horn as you pass:

Braking point | Magazine | The Observer


This dozy bitch seriously uses her car as a weapon and boasts about it
and The Mail carries her mad dribble.

Jeremy Clarkson "jokes" about running over and killing cyclists, Nigel Havers calls us "lycra nazis" and a cyclist waiting stationary at traffic lights is crushed to death by a lorry turning left and the press report that the cyclist "collided with a lorry!"

The car driver flouted the HC and then, after giving the impression that he was on a life-or-death mission and his speeding dangerously close to cyclists was essential, then demonstrates that his journey was not urgent or pressing in any way when he chooses to stop and start screaming at magna.

Defenders of this kind of driving are the dinosaurs of road safety- happily dying off as they get older and drivers realise they have to make allowances for vulnerable road users.

 

[Cab]

I can see the usual arguments are being used,instead of sticking to the origional topic,ill remind you what it was shall i? The video of Mag making a mistake.

The video shows Mag taking an appropriate line through a corner; swung out further than I'd have done, but that doesn't mean he's in the wrong. That corner isn't a safe or appropriate place for overtaking, the driver should therefore not be overtakingl. End of story.

I don't see the problem here; you expect someone to not deviate in his distance from the kerb at all? Frankly, any motorist using that as an excuse for dangerous overtaking deserves jail.

 

[spindrift]

Did he or did he not make a mistake by swinging out at the time he did?

Magna? Of course not, read my post again, staying behind a slow moving cyclist as an impatient driver approaches the pinch point is daft. Do you actually ride a bike?

It's incredibly simple Col, the driver didn't leave enough room and blasted the horn as magna overtook the other cyclist. WTF was magna supposed to do, cycle into the other cyclist to make way? Where's the six foot gap? Why carry out a dangerous manoever in order to shave maybe a second of what transpires to be a non-urgent drive, as if that would excuse it anyway.

 

[col]

Did he or did he not make a mistake by swinging out at the time he did?

Magna? Of course not, read my post again, staying behind a slow moving cyclist as an impatient driver approaches the pinch point is daft. Do you actually ride a bike?

It's incredibly simple Col, the driver didn't leave enough room and blasted the horn as magna overtook the other cyclist. WTF was magna supposed to do, cycle into the other cyclist to make way? Where's the six foot gap? Why carry out a dangerous manoever in order to shave maybe a second of what transpires to be a non-urgent drive, as if that would excuse it anyway.

Your right ,mag shouldnt have overtook to save a few seconds,he should have waited till he was clear of the exit.And thats what he did,a dangerous manoever,im surprised you believe otherwise.

 

[spindrift]

Your right ,mag shouldnt have overtook to save a few seconds,he should have waited till he was clear of the exit.And thats what he did,a dangerous manoever,im surprised you believe otherwise.

It's "you're" FFS sake, semi- literate and an apologist for boy racers.

Don't lie about what I've said col, misrepresentation of another persons' posts is a gutless, cowardly trick. Wise up and grow up you sad sack self-gratification artist.

 

[Twenty Inch]

Col is a recidivist cager apologist, who recently tried to imply that my near-death experience with a delivery truck was my fault. I recommend everyone put him on their ignore list.

 

[magnatom]

Well don't ever let it be said I am not willing to take criticism!! (Although no-one has called me names yet so I should avoid crying)

I will be posting some aerial pics shortly which will I hope at least partially vindicate me.

Watch this space......