no blasted lights.

[theclaud]

You don't recall the story of how a rider locally lost his life ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4134206.stm

I've read that quite carefully and I can't see any link whatever with what CoG posted. Could you explain?

 

[Linford]

I've read that quite carefully and I can't see any link whatever with what CoG posted. Could you explain?

His death was avoidable by simply using a front light. The car which pulled out on him on a hill above where he lived had no idea that he and his brother were going hell for leather (35-40mph) on a unlit road at 10:30pm. I can't understand why someone would spend so much money on cycling gear and not bother sticking a light on the bike. The driver was absolved of any liability for his death.
COG thinks its clever to ride around in the dark without lights...I say you have to give others a chance to see you if they are to avoid you. I'd rather learn from other people mistakes....he died needlessly.

 

[Dan B]

[QUOTE 2758278, member: 1314"]on street lit roads [/quote]

on a unlit road

I'm also not sure I see much point asking, but I dont think this was an answer

 

[Linford]

I'm also not sure I see much point asking, but I dont think this was an answer

The law states you must use lights when cycling in the dark. Street lights or no street lights these laws have been written for good reason.
If the cars headlights are not illuminating you, you cannot expect them to see you.
They are not just so you can see where you are going, but also that others can see you.
What if all car drivers adopted this attitude that they were too lazy to turn their lights on ?

Only an idiot would argue this point.

 

[Dan B]

The law states you must use lights when cycling in the dark. Street lights or no street lights these laws have been written for good reason.
If the cars headlights are not illuminating you, you cannot expect them to see you.
They are not just so you can see where you are going, but also that others can see you.
What if all car drivers adopted this attitude that htey were too lazy to turn their lights on ?

Only an idiot would argue this point.

I've read that quite carefully and I can't see any link whatever with what CoG posted.

You may however be quite correct with your second para, though perhaps not for the reasons you assume

 

[Linford]

I've read that quite carefully and I can't see any link whatever with what CoG posted.

You may however be quite correct with your second para, though perhaps not for the reasons you assume

COG is wrong...the law states he is wrong

60
At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. ItMUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85). White front reflectors and spoke reflectors will also help you to be seen. Flashing lights are permitted but it is recommended that cyclists who are riding in areas without street lighting use a steady front lamp.
Law RVLR regs 13, 18 & 24

'Must' isn't negotiable, and is defined in the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 as amended

This sense of entitlement that people who cycle should be above the law really is quite ridiculous when the same people demand so much from other road users. People like that twit Rod Liddle paint with a broad brush.... stoop to his level when making unreasonable demands like this, and you can't realistically hold him in contempt.

 

[I like Skol]

[QUOTE 2761506, member: 45"]Why only reserved for for cyclists linf? What of drivers who sense entitlement enough to drive at whatever speed they wish? Or motorbikelists who enjoy 'giving it beans'?[/quote]
I don't think Linford is claiming to be above the law. I'm sure if he was caught breaking the law or came unstuck as a result of said digressions he would not be looking around for someone else to blame but would hold up his hands and accept his error? There's the difference.

 

[Dan B]

[riding without a front light is] not safer as such, but that on street lit roads you had to be that much more aware of what was happening in front, rather than relying on drivers etc seeing you. I can recommend the merit in that argument,

COG is wrong...the law states he is wrong

You know, I don't think the law says anything at all about whether riding without a front light makes you more aware of what's going on around you, or not. In fact, if you can quote the relevant Act and section then I'll contribute a tenner to your charity of choice

I am equally if not more sure that your sad tale of a unlit cyclist in Cloucestershire killed on an unlit road by a driver who didn't see him coming has nothing to do with the point CoG was making either. No money on offer for that one, though, as you've already been asked to explain and have instead tried to change the subject

 

[I like Skol]

.......... your sad tale of a unlit cyclist in Cloucestershire killed on an unlit road by a driver who didn't see him coming ........

That is not a fair statement! From the information available to us in this thread and the news report linked to there is no suggestion that the cyclist was killed by the driver of the vehicle he collided with. Unless you have additional information to support your claim I suggest you a withdraw your comment. Statements like yours really do not do the cycling community any favours. Sometimes drivers get it wrong and sometimes cyclists get it wrong. To always portray the driver as guilty is wrong.

 

[Linford]

[QUOTE 2761506, member: 45"]Why only reserved for for cyclists linf? What of drivers who sense entitlement enough to drive at whatever speed they wish? Or motorbikelists who enjoy 'giving it beans'?[/quote]

That would be you who stated that they would happily drive on the motorway at an indicated 75mph because the police threshhold is actually 10% +2mph (79mph) . When I pointed out that a speedo isn't allowed to under read, and you 'actually' were doing 75mph when the speedo indicated it, you went very quiet.

I got caught speeding, I held my hands up and paid the fine....it is you who is in denial about your indiscretion's whilst you try and foist your guilt onto others (like this little gem ^ )

 

[snorri]

What if all car drivers adopted this attitude that they were too lazy to turn their lights on ?.

It would be wonderful on unlit roads, they would all be driving slowly and concentrating on where they were going.

 

[Linford]

[QUOTE 2761536, member: 1314"]No he wouldn't. Not true. Ask him about deliberately causing a rta. It was on the filtering thread. He quickly deleted the post when the illegality of his actions was pointed out.[/quote]
I explained what had happened, and that I braked when the idiot tried overtaking in a red mist moment after he risked both himself, his partner, the car coming the other way, and me when he puffed his chest out.
I was perfectly calm, and TBH bemused by his loss of self control....he came unstuck and I have zero sympathy for him. He shouldn't be behind the wheel if he can't keep his temper in check.

You seem to be prone to these moments as well. Perhaps it is just as well you cycle most of the time as at least that then limits the damage you might do to others when you go off on one.

 

[Linford]

It would be wonderful on unlit roads, they would all be driving slowly and concentrating on where they were going.

Or crashing into other vehicles, driving into ditches, road furniture, or running other road users and people over who might not be able to see or hear them coming.

 

[Linford]

[QUOTE 2761582, member: 45"]That's not how the story went, regardless of how much you'd like it to have. Be careful -the lies you tell, coupled with your misunderstanding of physics, have caught you out. We all know that speedos cannot under-read. Because they're not 100% accurate the tolerance of error has to be designed in over-read. It's the %age of over-read that means that at 70mph you're likely to be driving more slowly than your speedo reads. Easily demonstrated by using a more accurate speed measure at the same time.

Anyway, as you were.....[/quote]

You clearly didn't Paul, that is why you shut up when I caught you out

 

[I like Skol]

Perhaps it is just as well you cycle most of the time as at least that then limits the damage you might do to others when you go off on one.

This thought occurred to me a few days ago after contributing to this thread. God forbid some of the people adding comments to this thread should ever get behind the wheel! The attitude that some seem to demonstrate of they are right and anyone who disagrees is wrong does not really make for a good road user. The concede or die approach is very worrying and most unattractive.