Inconsidererate, aggressive, but not necessarily dangerous. Report?

Tobster86

Tilt wrote: »

The camera was positioned right of centre of the 'shot'

And the position of the camera changes in his mind AGAIN.

Tilt

Tobster86 wrote: »

And the position of the camera changes in his mind AGAIN.

Sorry, I do beg your pardon. It was LEFT of the centre wasn't it. But my opinion stands.

Tobster86

Tilt wrote: »

But my opinion stands.

No, it's incorrect. As explained by Brat.

tight_scotsman

MacMickster wrote: »

Poppycock.

So we have gone from a car door's width to 3.25 feet clearance to be given to cyclists as a minimum at ANY speed and up to 5 feet- and yet cyclists believe that it is safe to filter (weave) through moving traffic even if it involves clipping the door mirrors of cars.

Just accept that there are many idiots using our roads whether drivers, cyclists or pedestrians. Both cyclists and drivers have EQUAL responsibility to keep all road users safe. As there will always be idiots on the roads, and given that in any collision between a car and a bike the cyclist will almost certainly come off worst, cyclists should always ride defensively. It is in their own interest to do so.

I consider that the car driver behaved perfectly safely from this clip. Good to know, however, that the OP has decided to take his footage to the police and I will be extremely interested to hear if the police consider that the driver has committed an offence to an extent where they are prepared to actually bring charges.

If, however, the police offer the OP nothing but a few platitudes I'm sure that he will have the good grace to report this back to the interested parties on this thread too. Please also let us know if they have anything to sat about your foul-mouthed hissy fit.

Exellent points raised here. The most important one is we all Need to take responsibility for our actions. A wee bit more courtesy from everyone would go a long way to easing the amount of road rage on our roads.

Could you imagine if pedestrians behaved the same way. Women with prams knocking over old ladies. Then the old ladies deliberately block the path of the women with prams.

Good point about filtering. Cyclists complain about a close pass. But argue that's filtering is OK.

Retrogamer

MacMickster wrote: »

Poppycock.
So we have gone from a car door's width to 3.25 feet clearance to be given to cyclists as a minimum at ANY speed and up to 5 feet- and yet cyclists believe that it is safe to filter (weave) through moving traffic even if it involves clipping the door mirrors of cars.

What cyclist says that's acceptable?
Every cyclist on here will say it's not.
Sounds a lot like your imagination to me.

MacMickster wrote: »

Just accept that there are many idiots using our roads whether drivers, cyclists or pedestrians. Both cyclists and drivers have EQUAL responsibility to keep all road users safe. As there will always be idiots on the roads, and given that in any collision between a car and a bike the cyclist will almost certainly come off worst, cyclists should always ride defensively. It is in their own interest to do so.

You'd be surprised how many motorists get upset when you cycle defensively and move to primary position. You just need to check these forums for some replies to see or go out on a bicycle and try it yourself to see.

MacMickster wrote: »

I consider that the car driver behaved perfectly safely from this clip.

Good to know that you consider it safe to overtake whilst cars are coming towards you.

Tobster86

tight_scotsman wrote: »

Good point about filtering. Cyclists complain about a close pass. But argue that's filtering is OK.

Filtering is highly subjective. Ultimately it's completely legal, but there's good & bad examples of it, and it's all subject to discretion and merits of very different situations.

Nobody here will advocate colliding with vehicles or careless filtering, and we'll all have slight differences in method owing to our own experiences.

We will all however have been subject to jealous antics of a minority of motorists who simply object to anyone with an advantageous means of transport for the situation.

Tilt

Tobster86 wrote: »

No, it's incorrect. As explained by Brat.

So my opinion is "incorrect" because Brat says so??? Oh right!

tight_scotsman

The only circumstances where filtering should be allowed is in standing traffic.
I know this opinion wont be popular among cyclists. But from my own experiences of HGV/PCV driving , if a cyclist comes down either side of a 15m coach or lorry there are numerous blind spots.If you end up in one of them blind spots when I'm moving then there is a good chance you will be history.
On the coach I drive I have 8 yes 8 mirrors and I still have blind spots.
I'm not saying that all cyclists would filter down the side of large vehicles. The ones that do it don't deserve all they get. They deserve to be educated.

My whole point is I don't want to be the one who kills a cyclist or any other road user just because of their ignorance or gross stupidly.

Tilt

tight_scotsman wrote: »

The only circumstances where filtering should be allowed is in standing traffic.
I know this opinion wont be popular among cyclists. But from my own experiences of HGV/PCV driving , if a cyclist comes down either side of a 15m coach or lorry there are numerous blind spots.If you end up in one of them blind spots when I'm moving then there is a good chance you will be history.
On the coach I drive I have 8 yes 8 mirrors and I still have blind spots.
I'm not saying that all cyclists would filter down the side of large vehicles. The ones that do it don't deserve all they get. They deserve to be educated.

My whole point is I don't want to be the one who kills a cyclist or any other road user just because of their ignorance or gross stupidly.

I had the the opportunity to see first hand the exact filtering scenarios to which you describe on a recent trip along Euston Road in London while going to collect a group from St Pancras International on a Friday evening.

I was absolutely gob smacked at the amount of cyclists who were weaving in and out of the stop-start traffic through the tightest of gaps between buses and coaches. And most of them had no lights on thus making it even more difficult to spot them in a rear view mirror on a long vehicle.

To me they were putting themselves at risk simply to achieve as rapid progress through the traffic as possible. The last 2 words of your post sums them up very well.

Norman_Castle

Tilt wrote: »

Cyclist because he was unnecessarily riding in a 'primary position'

What is your definition of the primary position for cyclists and its purpose?.