Doubling Up On Road

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

montyboy

New Member
You're making things up again.


"I have said on previous occasions that I understand that I shouldnt shout at every driver in the world who passes me closely but sometimes it gets away from me. The fact that I have a cam on doesnt encourage me to shout things or go up to drivers, it just reasures me that the incident has been filmed."

Mathew T.....just posted!
 

John the Monkey

Frivolous Cyclist
Location
Crewe
.......and there's also a guy on this forum who thinks reading the Highway Code is only for "sad old bankers" like me.


Have you found a responsible adult to read and explain the HC to you yet, freecyclist?

I bloody love the Highway Code. Its parts about cycle paths "...they may make your journey safer" are hopelessly optimistic, but its broad message (could be paraphrased as "Be Excellent to Each Other, and Leave the Partying On Until You Arrive Safely at Your Destination") is a splendid one, and I wish more road users, and especially drivers acted upon it. The story of its implementation is fascinating too, and formed part of Joe Moran's very enjoyable "On Roads" book.
 

John the Monkey

Frivolous Cyclist
Location
Crewe
and cyclists.

In five years of travelling in and out of Manchester, cyclists have given me concern for my wellbeing TWICE. (Neither time because they were cross with me, just because they were being stupid - bikes are slow, light, and easily avoided compared to cars/vans/busses/trucks though).

For all their supposed irresponsibility and fecklessness, they're a vanishingly small problem compared to drivers. Suggesting otherwise, or that there's an equal level of risk posed is surely a false equivalence.

there is a guy on this forum who seems to have a number of clips on you tube showing himself shouting at motorists.
Shouting?

We're seriously comparing this to being passed closely at speed by several hundred kg of metal, because the person in control of it has got the hump?
 

Bicycle

Guest
They're probably not bad people per se, but so what? I've had people justify a close "punishment pass" on the basis that my lights were illegal (because one was a flashing light, legal since 2005, and actually mentioned as "permitted" in the current Highway Code). The difference here isn't so much that people can't be bothered to keep their knowledge up to date, so much as them not seeing why they shouldn't take out their frustrations on others. That's bad when all you have between you and them is a layer or two of performance fabric, and possibly a polystyrene hat.

I daresay motorists in France and Belgium are as ignorant about current traffic law in their countries, but it doesn't seem to lead them to the conclusion that they'll whizz past an inch off the cyclist's elbow[1] if they think that the cyclist is in the wrong (so far as I can tell from my experience there, at least).

It's also worth restating that primary has a twofold benefit - firstly, it forestalls the dangerously close overtake, secondly, if that overtake happens, you have room to escape into. If you're already in the gutter, you're more likely to be offed, as I found out to my cost after a driver clipped my bars and left me lying on the pavement[2] during my first, abortive attempt at taking up cycling.

[1] Although I'll grant you that they seem to harbour an intense and obvious dislike for their fellow motorists.
[2] Handy, as it allowed all the following cars (I think four or five, although I was too dazed for keeping count) to breeze on past my prostrate form, as I'd not fallen in the carriageway.

You make very reasonable and coherent points. I agree with you about french drivers, but have never cycled in belgium - although I've driven there a lot.

However, on a cyclists' forum I fear slightly the "they" mentality about drivers. I don't see it in your posts, but I fear it is present in the thinking of some of us.

Nobody can justify a 'punishment pass'. Any attempt to do so would be contemptible. You're right.

However, on the matter of Primary I do worry that to many perfectly reasonable motorists the adoption of primary in some circumstances will seem at best eccentric.

I'm not saying that this will lead to the bewildered driver becoming aggressive, nor that the cyclist ought therefore to avoid taking primary.

I'm saying that cyclists in the habit of taking primary when perhaps it might not be appropriate in the circumstances might like to consider how this act may be seen by perfectly reasonable and law-abiding motorists following them.

I put this rather better in an earlier post this evening on this thread.

MoTD is over, Arsenal won and I'm off to kip. :biggrin:
 

snorri

Legendary Member
Sadly, there is just such a contributor to this forum.

I saw his YouTube channel today and it is quite a piece of work.
Sadly? You have seen his videos, so will also have seen the advice offered to this particular young lad. Are you holding this one example up as typical behaviour of cyclists?
 

montyboy

New Member
In five years of travelling in and out of Manchester, cyclists have given me concern for my wellbeing TWICE. (Neither time because they were cross with me, just because they were being stupid - bikes are slow, light, and easily avoided compared to cars/vans/busses/trucks though).

For all their supposed irresponsibility and fecklessness, they're a vanishingly small problem compared to drivers. Suggesting otherwise, or that there's an equal level of risk posed is surely a false equivalence.


Shouting?

We're seriously comparing this to being passed closely at speed by several hundred kg of metal, because the person in control of it has got the hump?


My suggestion was merely that cyclists should take some sort of test as well as motorists Any extra training could only be a good thing couldnt it.

I never compared shouting with a close pass, I merely pointed out the inapproriate behavior.
 

montyboy

New Member
Sadly? You have seen his videos, so will also have seen the advice offered to this particular young lad. Are you holding this one example up as typical behaviour of cyclists?


I dont think anyone is suggesting that this is typical behaviour only that it exists as you suggested that i was making it up.
 

Bicycle

Guest
Sadly? You have seen his videos, so will also have seen the advice offered to this particular young lad. Are you holding this one example up as typical behaviour of cyclists?

No, I'm not holding this one example as typical of anything. I do not suggest, imply or say that I do. I'm not quite sure why you might get the impression that I did.

Someone wrote on this thread that there was someone posting videos of himself shouting at drivers.

You posted a reply along the lines of "You're making things up again".

I posted the response that sadly the assertion about the 'shouty cyclist' was so, that it was not made up.

Why 'sadly'?

Sadly because there are people who will see these clips and may think they are representative of cyclists generally. They are not.

I made no comment about the advice. I said only that the existence of such a person was not made up.
 

lukesdad

Guest
Sadly? You have seen his videos, so will also have seen the advice offered to this particular young lad. Are you holding this one example up as typical behaviour of cyclists?

Not typical, but one bad apple, and a very public one at that :sad:
 

freecyclist

New Member
Even if the position is not correct, save for a muttered "FFS".

No-one is saying motorists are justified in getting angry at cyclists who innapropriately cycle in primary.
Afaicu what is being said is ;
It may cause motorists to become unjustifiably annoyed/angry - this in extreme cases may result in possibly life threateningly dangerous consequences for the cyclist in question.
Cycling innapropriately is selfish and by definition wrong.
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
Answer please.

I don't know whether to feel flattered that you care so much about my good opinion or alarmed that you seem to have started stalking me - or amused that you think you're important enough that you will receive a reply when I'm offline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom