Give way when turning left?

[I like Skol]

This sounds like an eminently reasonable thing to teach them in terms of surviving the present situation

I wonder however, and this is not aimed at you, it's just that your post was about education, if by educating kids from such a young age that the onus is on them to avoid conflict with motor traffic on the roads, they internalise that attitude and expect in turn that other people will defer to them when they grow up and start driving motor vehicles - thus perpetuating the problem. It's a tricky one.

I understand your reasoning when thinking ahead from my post but the overall picture couldn't be further from this. I also teach them that they have the equal right to be on the road as a pedestrian or a cyclist. If we are cycling (as we often do on the way to school) and we have to block the road while we are waiting to turn right then it is tough for the cars that might have to wait behind us. If we were in a car they would have to wait anyway and if it is not safe to leave room for them to pass then so be it. It is all about safety (for everyone) and common sense.

 

[iwantanewbike]

No. Not yet

I'm biased as I am fortunate to have never been left hooked, or even close to it. I'm not sure if that's blind luck or something else but I just dont see the problem with the current laws.

You only have to look at a handful of Youtube videos to see this is a serious problem.

 

[jonny jeez]

I'm just giving my perception of the thinking behind the changes.

I don't actually care one way or the other. I can't remember the last time anyone tried to left hook me and anyone who gets too close to me tends to get a fairly vocal idea of what I think of them. However whenever I suggest something like taking away ASLs cos they are useless, people pipe up and say how useful they are for the more vulnerable or nervous cyclist. Surely this is an attempt to aid them.

I understand and I do get your point.

However as you do, I ride a lot in town and as you do I don't find that a problem actually exists. The issue of helping nervous riders is interesting. I think we should be attracting more people to cycle. I guess there is an argument that placing more regulation...or publicity... on things like this could actually make it all look "less" safe.

bit like the whole helmet argument.

 

[jonny jeez]

This sounds like an eminently reasonable thing to teach them in terms of surviving the present situation

I wonder however, and this is not aimed at you, it's just that your post was about education, if by educating kids from such a young age that the onus is on them to avoid conflict with motor traffic on the roads, they internalise that attitude and expect in turn that other people will defer to them when they grow up and start driving motor vehicles - thus perpetuating the problem. It's a tricky one.

Just to reinforce @I like Skol education isn't focused on one section of society. We should educate everyone, before they join a tribe, before they become a driver, a rider a candlestick maker.

before they become entrenched.

 

[jonny jeez]

You only have to look at a handful of Youtube videos to see this is a serious problem.

Well...you did ask for it.

Taken 4 years ago when the problem didn't exist then either.

 

[keithmac]

Undertaking a car signalling to turn left, cycle lane or nor is just careless and putting yourself in danger imho.

Sounds like a recipe for disaster and the green light for stupid undertaking to me..

 

[martint235]

I understand and I do get your point.

However as you do, I ride a lot in town and as you do I don't find that a problem actually exists. The issue of helping nervous riders is interesting. I think we should be attracting more people to cycle. I guess there is an argument that placing more regulation...or publicity... on things like this could actually make it all look "less" safe.

bit like the whole helmet argument.

Ah it seems we actually agree.

On the less safe possibly, I honestly don't know. Regulation? Probably pointless just look at mobile phones and driving or stopping at red lights (all road users seem to treat that as advisory now). Publicity? Again I don't know. On my commute I don't get that many bad drivers (man in the van who just wants to scare a cyclist or who just ignores them) but I get a lot of drivers who really don't seem to "see" cyclists and this publicity may change that.

As I've always said, if you get a close pass or hit on the Old Kent Road it's cos the driver meant to or didn't care, cycling into Croydon it's because Tarquin in the back has a question or she's too busy with her makeup.

 

[martint235]

We don't need more legislation, we need better observance of legislation and, when that is not forthcoming, better enforcement.

Agreed. I still think there's a strong arguments for Police just targeting random areas on random days with a zero tolerance approach. If the level of one the spot fines doesn't cover the cost, just raise the fine.

 

[Flying Dodo]

Maybe I'm just a bit paranoid, but by most junctions if there's other traffic, my hand is over the brake.

Riding in traffic, regardless of going past junctions, both my hands, unless indicating, are always covering the brakes.

Expect the unexpected!

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Expect the unexpected!

You mean,

Always expect the expected, which was the unexpected, till you started expecting the unexpected so now it's expected, kind of?

 

[fossyant]

There are lots of cyclists who undertake vehicles even when about to turn. Given I'm now driving on the commute I am very wary turning left in the city centre as quite a few cyclists try and pass you even when indicating.

It's not experienced cyclists. It's usually students who don't know the rules of the road.

I say students because where I am driving is near the University

 

[MiK1138]

This sounds like an eminently reasonable thing to teach them in terms of surviving the present situation

I wonder however, and this is not aimed at you, it's just that your post was about education, if by educating kids from such a young age that the onus is on them to avoid conflict with motor traffic on the roads, they internalise that attitude and expect in turn that other people will defer to them when they grow up and start driving motor vehicles - thus perpetuating the problem. It's a tricky one.

See where your going with this but IMHO its a transferable skill, just as they looked for danger from the road as kids they will equally look for danger from the pavement as drivers.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

where I am driving is near the University

You have my condolences. I don't dare bring a car further than Regent road before I ditch it and walk

 

[mjr]

Even if they haven't started to cross they still have to give way if possible on the basis that it's not lawful to deliberately mow down peds.

That one doesn't seem to be widely understood.

So, why the new law?

To enable the highway code to say MUST/MUST NOT because what's currently in there doesn't work.

[QUOTE 4588940, member: 9609"]So does this proposal mean, if a lorry is about to turn left and is indicating to do so, any cyclist going straight on will have right of way to undertake the lorry ?[/QUOTE]
Yes. They already do, but the fear of being killed means they don't assert it. They probably still won't after this law, but it might make motorists more cautious.

And yet 66% of all collisions take place at junctions so it's not working out all that well.

75% of all collisions involving cyclists in Norfolk (2015).

What is wrong with the existing entry at rule 182 of the HC?

It needs extending to cover cycle tracks as well as carriageway and cycle lanes, especially ones like the London Cycle Superhighways and Cambridge's new hybrid tracks. And the priority in rule 170 and the whole of rules 182 and 183 needs extending to cover other vulnerable road users.

But I believe we would be better served by education and acceptance than by restriction and penalty

It's not either/or. Education will continue because that's fairly cheap and funded at county council level... but giving police the legal tools to enforce this more easily seems like a good side-effect of strengthening and clarifying the law.

Riding in traffic, regardless of going past junctions, both my hands, unless indicating, are always covering the brakes.

I'm usually on a bike with a backpedal brake, so I'm even covering the brake while indicating - the rest of you are all wild unnecessary risk-takers(!)

 

[mjr]

Does it? Are they not already covered with road markings?

Yes, but there would be education value in including them as examples in the Highway Code; plus I'm not sure the ones like

marked on one side only by coloured paint/tarmac are legally unambiguous for traffic turning in - the ones marked by give-way both sides like

almost certainly are. So legal clarity for the roadside ones would be good, if there are other reasons to revise the Highway Code too. (images from Sustrans design manual because I already had them excerpted)