GMP think filtering is illegal and threats of violence are ignored.

[Deleted member 26715]

He comes across to me as an entitled cyclist, okay the driver made the situation worse by blocking him either deliberately or unintentionally, but he put himself in the wrong place to start off with. He then carries on riding in the wrong lane, sorry no sympathy if you go out looking for trouble you'll find it.

 

[lazybloke]

So the footage showing the cyclist riding the wrong way up the other carriageway is acceptable?

You mean the other lane, not the other carriageway. The difference is important.

 

[alicat]

You mean the other lane, not the other carriageway. The difference is important.

I see the cyclist overtaking by riding in the opposite carriageway and not having a clear space to slot back into.

 

[midlife]

Had to Google what a carriageway actually was..... Interesting, every day is a school day as they say

 

[fossyant]

Both plonkers tbh. Not a great place to ride on the wrong side of the road for a starters. Plenty of other routes to use that are better than this too.

 

[lazybloke]

I see the cyclist overtaking by riding in the opposite carriageway and not having a clear space to slot back into.

I tried. @midlife got it

 

[Deleted member 26715]

You mean the other lane, not the other carriageway. The difference is important.

I tried. @midlife got it

Sorry I'm not sure I agree, a carriageway does not have to have a separation as I believe you are alluding to. If you believe somebody is incorrect in their description of carriageway/lane how about advising so & not trying to be cryptic.

 

[snorri]

I would love to know what greater Manchester police were thinking when they told this cyclist to cease filtering or they will consider criminal offences,

It does make sense if you read the quote in full.........................., " then you being alongside entering into an argument with the driver of a moving vehicle."

 

[lazybloke]

Sorry I'm not sure I agree, a carriageway does not have to have a separation as I believe you are alluding to. If you believe somebody is incorrect in their description of carriageway/lane how about advising so & not trying to be cryptic cryptic.

To avoid any doubt: If there's no physical separation between lanes, I'd say there were all part of the same carriageway.
The usual example is a dual carriageway - it requires a wall, fence, or even just a strip of grass between the opposing traffic flows. The number of lanes in any particular direction is completely irrelevant.

Having made this assertion, I'm now going to check the Highway code.

Edited to add: https://www.roads.org.uk/blog/what-makes-dual-carriageway

 

[alicat]

^^^ You've lost me @lazybloke. Why does that matter in this instance, other than proving that flake99please and I used the wrong word?

 

[Deleted member 26715]

^^^ You've lost me @lazybloke. Why does that matter in this instance, other than proving that flake99please and I used the wrong word?

No you've got it, that's all it proves, technically all the lanes no matter in which direction they are going are still on the same carriageway, therefore the cyclist could not have gone into the wrong carriageway, he could have only done that if he crossed the central reservation of a dual carriageway.

 

[ozboz]

I think I’d of given her the ‘up yours’ and carried on , but as she threatened to knock him off and it’s captured on video , that I think is an offence

 

[PK99]

Good morning,

I didn't read the article that way,

This video clip shows you squeezing between vehicles and the lights changing then you being alongside entering into an argument with the driver of a moving vehicle.

To be clear your behaviour in this regard is to cease.

I read it as the arguing was the issue not the filtering.

I looked at the video a few times and noted flake99please's point that the rider was riding against the direction of the traffic for the lane he was in once the argument started.

Bye

Ian

that was my reading of it too.

Also:

The cyclist was overtaking moving traffic at the junction, better practice would have been to hold back and slot in as soon as the lights started to change.

Highway code guidance is relevant:-


Rule 167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example

• approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
• where the road narrows
• when approaching a school crossing patrol
• between the kerb and a bus or tram when it is at a stop
• where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works
• when you would force another road user to swerve or slow down
• at a level crossing
• when a road user is indicating right, even if you believe the signal should have been cancelled. Do not take a risk; wait for the signal to be cancelled
• stay behind if you are following a cyclist approaching a roundabout or junction, and you intend to turn left
• when a tram is standing at a kerbside tram stop and there is no clearly marked passing lane for other traffic.

 

[Slick]

I think I’d of given her the ‘up yours’ and carried on , but as she threatened to knock him off and it’s captured on video , that I think is an offence

I think your right.

 

[winjim]

How is 'threat' defined? Does it have to be plausible, or do you need to have genuine fear that it may be carried out, or is just saying the words enough? Because I don't for one second believe that that driver would actually deliberately knock someone off their bike.