campbellab
Senior Member
- Location
- Swindon
Hence why its legal to cross solid white lines to overtake a vehicle travelling at <10mph.
Why do people ignore double white lines?
- Thread starter Matthew_T
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Hence why its legal to cross solid white lines to overtake a vehicle travelling at <10mph.
Boris Bajic
Guest
My dear chap, I do not say that you did say they'd put you in danger*. I do not even imply it.
Nonetheless, your verbal and horn-honking responses to some of the passes showed an objection beyond what most cyclists would think appropriate. Some of your responses are sufficiently dramatic to suggest that there is a degree of alarm in your reaction.
Your line "I didn't shout at every driver" makes my point rather better than I can.
Even pointing at the white line is something that few other riders would bother with in that situation.
Really, my strong advice is to enjoy the ride and let the Police police.
* For some reason this denial reminds me of Clevinger's defence "I always didn't say they couldn't ge me". Not half as clever, but equally full of grammatical discord.
Hawk
Veteran
- Location
- Glasgow Southside
True, but that does seem to be an arbitrary figure. There are lots of cases where it's perfectly safe to cross a solid line to overtake a cycling doing 11 or 20mph, but not a truck doing 50-60mph...
The figures 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70 are all equally arbitrary, but at various times and in various contexts are nevertheless legal absolute maximum speeds at which one may travel in some class of vehicle along a public road. You have to draw a line somewhere
... and TBH, the chance of anyone getting done for overtaking a cyclist at 11 or 12 mph are in any case so close to nil that it makes no difference.
D
Deleted member 26715
Guest
I'm interested in your double standards here, so it's not acceptable to cross double white lines to safely pass a cyclist, but it is acceptable to both cross & then overtake on the wrong side of wavy lines where cars have to take avoiding action?
Alan...
OP
OP
Matthew_T
"Young and Ex-whippet"
- Location
- Prestatyn, North Wales
What part of ONE YEAR AGO do people not understand?
This video was when I wasnt in the best of mindsets and I viewed a close pass as anything that was remotely near me.
Cars didnt have to take avoiding action. Noone swerved out of the way and I dont blame them. I took a stupid risk to catch up to the driver just to have a go. And it wasnt the right thing to do.
markharry66
Guru
In response to your question simple answer why do they do it. Argue road laws, logic whatever you want. It never suprises me this forum where people hunt for the hardest answer. People do it because like everyone cyclists there are good drivers and bad drivers it the person behind the mode of transport that matters, In other words if its in the nature to drive like a twat they will and sod anybody else on road.
Looks to me like that the aren't enough repeaters on that road.
I think there are 2 repeaters on the uphill section, that's enough for 1200m of road if I'm not mistaken!
I think it would be a weak argument if stopped for speeding on that stretch.
Scruffmonster
Über Member
- Location
- London/Kent
If you feel you've changed, delete the video and never share it again. Those drivers may have been in a bad mindset and have never dared to pass a cyclist so normally ever again.
OP
OP
Matthew_T
"Young and Ex-whippet"
- Location
- Prestatyn, North Wales
I leave this particular video still up so that people can see it as an example of how not to pass a cyclist.
No one cares if it was one year ago and you're now a changed man. No one cares if you got angry with someone because you were on your period.
You're going to get judged on the material you present. There's no clauses, no get outs. To be blunt, if you're a dick then you're a dick. No buts.
If the video isn't representative then take it down.
Scruffmonster
Über Member
- Location
- London/Kent
It's a better illustration of how silly teenagers often are. It's doing more harm than good. recognise your error, correct your future behaviour. It's called growing up. Remove the video, it's dumb. (By all means make a better one to make the point in a mature manner).
The white lines video..... is worse. When drivers give you a whole lane when overtaking (which 90% did), you throw up an arm in thanks. You do not toot. You do not need to give two poops what lines are in the road.
If you commuted daily in London with that attitude, you'd be some form of statistic in under a month.
GrasB
Veteran
- Location
- Nr Cambridge
When it comes to no-overtaking markings generally there's good reason for them. It can take me 2 or more to a section of road but every one I can think of that initially I've wondered why they were there of I've twigged why they were put in place. Sometimes the markings them selves may not have been the appropriate ones to put on the road IMO but the reason they are there becomes clear.
campbellab
Senior Member
- Location
- Swindon
Except one thing leads to another, my situation I get a nice wide overtake by an ambulance but over double white lines.
Then the car behind overtakes, with less room. The ambulance is probably blocking good sight of the road ahead at this point.
Then the car behind that overtakes with even less room.
I'm doing 30mph on a steep downhill approaching a 30mph zone and stick behind these vehicles for next couple of minutes.
I wouldn't toot for a wide pass - but the first pass lead to the second pass which lead to the third pass - all illegal. Shouldn't have to be worshipping drivers who give us decent amount of room, its not exactly a chore when driving to steer a wide path when the road is clear.
