Horror Video Of Motorist Abuse!

[mr_hippo]

There is a footpath along side the bridge. It is perfectly suitable to ride over.

If you had bothered to read any of my posts, you will see that I have cycled over there since the bridge was opened; I even told you where to get off on the Widnes side "Use the shared use footpath. Cross the bridge, stop at the first bus stop, cut throught to Irwell Street and then left onto Mersey Road".
As for its status as 'shared use' - officially it may not be but through custom and usage it is; a group of us in the mid 60s were advised by the police that it is alright to cycle on the footpath..

 

[sabian92]

I have read them. I just pointed it out.

 

[black'n'yellow]

If you were saying that you felt it was a dangerous section of road and it was in the interests of the cyclists safety to avoid it I would understand the sentiments,

congrats fella - that's exactly what I was saying at the start. I'll leave the rest if you don't mind, because I find that arguing with you is rather depressing. But, I'll leave you with my original thought, which was that the cyclist and the driver are both idiots and that the whole situation could have been avoided with the application of a little more common sense from the cyclist. So stick that in your sanctimonious pipe and smoke it...

 

[Mugshot]

Good fun though, keep it up...

I'll leave the rest if you don't mind, because I find that arguing with you is rather depressing.

Pfft, you soon changed your mind

 

[black'n'yellow]

It was fun - until you started going over the same stuff repeatedly. I prefer arguments to progress. Anyway, I've just noticed your sig - saves me the bother....

 

[Mugshot]

It was fun - until you started going over the same stuff repeatedly. I prefer arguments to progress. Anyway, I've just noticed your sig - saves me the bother....

You're right of course and I was conscious that I seemed to be having to repeat myself, but you said you were struggling to understand so I felt the polite thing to do was to try explain myself more clearly

 

[disabled rider]

The bicycle is traffic, he has as much right to be on the road as the motor vehicles. Whilst he may be slower moving and be human powered that doesn't mean he's not allowed to be on that particular stretch of road. It is very unlikely that the car driver would have acted in that way to a road sweeper or a tractor or certain of the contractors vehicles which would have likely been traveling at a similar or lesser speeds to the cyclist, so what's the difference? Do you think one of those should take any of the actions which you've suggested, and if not why not?
You're not subservient to other traffic because they are faster or because they pay road tax () it's not about being an urban warrior either as someone else has suggested, the guy on the bike had the right to make his journey without the fear of bullying by other road users simply because they felt superior because they're in a bigger/quicker vehicle. Do you think the journeys of the car drivers were more important?
I'm all for consideration and politeness between road users, I'll do my best not to impede other road users unnecessarily, but if it's a choice between my safety and their convenience I know which wins, and I would suggest that if you feel you are an inconvenience to other road users you either think again or quit cycling

Completely agree with you.

This is also what I been trying to address when dealing with disability right to use side walks

What I noticed about vid was he mentioned doing 30, what speed was the road set for through construction? Point I am trying to make is I doubt he was holding traffic at all. Based on the posted speed limit through construction.

By riding center, "if legal", forces the following driver to obey the law of passing unless, they run over him outright. What he did say with subtitles " there was no "LEGAL" viable passing for cars along that stretch" I think his attempt to pass that gray car was the rider trying to prove that fact. That there is not enough room.

So if he had moved left, as some stated he should have, you start to get into the area about being a increased risk for able bodies, garrenteed kill, If you lack any of your senses like hearing. lets say that was a deaf rider, car behind is getting P'O'ed off honking. what good is that to deaf rider if he/she cannot hear said honking. or sound of the car if not honking. 30 or less, through construction on bridge here in the states is usually the speed limit. What if that had been a tadpole? which is wider than standard bikes and being below the height of say a dash of a truck with just a flag?(some bad drivers might mistaken that flag as a sign for construction if the tadpole was all the way left). doing 30 through there? being left death for sure, regardless of type of rider.

Note how many people would seriously take a cam with them just for the heck of it?

Only time I would take a cam is to address serious issues or specific trouble spots or policy in general.

And the whole thing of telling the rider to take the long way? why not make the driver take the long way, with the fact they don't have to waste personal energy unlike a peddler on a cycle. not all cyclist are fit as a marathoner. I am in this category despite all my transportation being by bicycle..

 

[disabled rider]

Erm... a bicycle?

Bicyclist have the same rights as a car here most areas in the states, I would assume its same over the pond. How it is powered, is of no consequence in regards to the equal right of using the road.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

Bicyclist have the same rights as a car here most areas in the states, I would assume its same over the pond. How it is powered, is of no consequence in regards to the equal right of using the road.

There is the law, your rights and then there is your safety. The first two mean nothing if the latter is compromised.

 

[Drago]

Bicyclist have the same rights as a car here most areas in the states, I would assume its same over the pond. How it is powered, is of no consequence in regards to the equal right of using the road.

It is the same here, and I never suggested to the contrary.