Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

Throbbe

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

I'm starting to find this quite entertaining. "All cyclists should have compulsory, government-backed training" followed by "don't do what the government-backed training teaches you".


HAHAHA!!!

Definitely in contention for post of the year. :rotfl:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ShAnE wrote: »

I think it is appropriate to impede the progress of other traffic through lane blocking if you feel it mitigates against a risk.

And i'm talking about driving a car on a nice wide road where I am doing the speed limit but the car behind me wants to do an extra 10mph, despite not being able to see what is round the corner.

Should I drive my car with two tyres in the gravel so that I don't impede other motorists?

No.

You should do as the Police advise, and pull over to allow him to pass.....



Why?

Because, as the other signage notes....

rochja

Post 783. An excellent point well made. I have seen all sorts of vehicles follow this sagacious advice - milk floats, agricultural vehicles, pedal cycles, horse riders, even caravanners [though not so much in the SW peninsula. I have even followed the advice whilst driving some of the aforementioned. A combination of education, awareness and good manners can prevent all sorts of damage.
Also, I will definitely be offering the second photo as a defence when next caught having a quickie in a layby

Moneyer

I believe in Germany it is a legal requirement for slow-moving vehicles to pull in where safe to let following traffic past. Anybody who's ever used the A64 to Scarborough in caravan season will wonder why it isn't here too….

Norman_Castle

Nice sign that fits your argument. Presumably this is on a single lane road with passing places.

boliston

ShAnE wrote: »

....

And i'm talking about driving a car on a nice wide road where I am doing the speed limit but the car behind me wants to do an extra 10mph, despite not being able to see what is round the corner.

Should I drive my car with two tyres in the gravel so that I don't impede other motorists?.....

If you are doing the legal limit and pull over purely to allow someone to commit a criminal offence then I'm sure there is a law that says you are jointly liable for the offence as if you had committed it yourself. An analogy would be seeing a bank robbery in progress and holding the door of the getaway car open to help the thief make an even swifter getaway.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Nice sign that fits your argument. Presumably this is on a single lane road with passing places.

I have no idea and it's of no relevance anyway.

I do know these ones definitely aren't.....

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

boliston wrote: »

If you are doing the legal limit and pull over purely to allow someone to commit a criminal offence then I'm sure there is a law that says you are jointly liable for the offence as if you had committed it yourself. .

Absolute nonsense I'm afraid. You cannot be prosecuted for allowing a faster motorist to pass.

You're a road user, not a traffic vigilante, a point many cyclists would do well to remember.

esuhl

boliston wrote: »

If you are doing the legal limit and pull over purely to allow someone to commit a criminal offence then I'm sure there is a law that says you are jointly liable for the offence as if you had committed it yourself. An analogy would be seeing a bank robbery in progress and holding the door of the getaway car open to help the thief make an even swifter getaway.

If that were the case, cyclists would also be guilty for allowing speeding drivers to overtake them, wouldn't they?

If you do the legal limit and DON'T pull over to the left lane when you should to allow other vehicles to overtake you (even at illegal speeds) then I imagine you'd be guilty of driving without due care and attention (for hogging the lane) or impeding the flow of traffic.

Drivers should keep left and allow other vehicles to overtake when safe to do so, not to try to police the roads by blocking other drivers' illegal activities.

Why would drivers think they have the right to drive in a way that deliberately annoys other road users yet expect cyclists to get out of the way and stop annoying them when they want to engage in dangerous or reckless (and hence illegal) overtakes?!

SerialRenter

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No.
You should do as the Police advise, and pull over to allow him to pass.....

It implies "where safe" after, by the looks of it, in designated laybys, not just anywhere on the side of the road. Rejoining a road presents its own dangers too.

cyclist's should only take the primary for safety reasons, but that's not as rare as you make out.

A few examples:
Traffic islands
roundabouts
traffic lights
turning right
thin one way streets
thin roads with significant traffic oncoming
passing parked cars that may open their door.

Stopping myself from getting run over is significantly more important to me than shaving seconds off a motorists journey.

As i also drive in surrey, i encounter a lot of cyclists and i've never felt the need to be frustrated by their speed. You simply have to wait for a gap in oncoming traffic to safely overtake by a cars width, it never takes long.