We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Sabotage and hatred: what have people got against cyclists?
Options
Comments
-
Filtering (in the absence of a cycle lane) is usually done on the offside of vehicles. Filtering is overtaking within a lane in which other vehicles are already established, usually when the traffic being overtaken is moving slowly or is stationary. 'Undertaking' is not a correct motoring term. Overtaking slow moving vehicles within lanes is a situation where everyone is charged to take extra care, motorists cyclists and pedestrians; but I do accept that the primary duty of care lies with the overtaker, whether it's a cyclist passing a queue of traffic or a car overtaking a cyclist within the same lane.If the cyclist is filtering, or more correctly called undertaking, then they should be taking greater care and travelling a suitably slow speed as they should be aware that pedestrians may be crossing.
That's just wrong. I presume you don't actually mean what you've written. I think you're trying to say that vehicular traffic must stop if the crossing lights require them to, but pedestrians can legally cross when their lights are at red.Cyclists (and motorists) seem to forget that traffic lights have the force of law, but pedestrian crossing lights are merely indicative.
Must be a city thing.My personal irritation with cyclists is those who set off before the lights turn green, although when they do it is quite amusing to see the spectacular swerves as a heavy laptop backpack gets swung in their path or an umbrella seems to be aiming towards their spokes.Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0 -
I came close to being "taken out" by pavement parking a couple of days ago.
Having parked, legally, 300yds from a take-away (closest available legal parking), I left the shop clutching hot food and was walking along the pavement. I was halfway across a side-road when a white van cut across me diagonally from behind at alarming speed and within scant inches of me, cutting me off as the driver shot onto the kerb I'd been about to mount. I reflexively jerked back and said something rude, he'd nearly gone over my foot with his back wheel. The van parked 50% on the pavement adjoining the side road, 50% on the main road over double-yellow lines. The van's passenger was laughing at me as I walked past so I pointed out to him how amusing I'd found it. I'd have stayed longer but didn't want my meal to get cold. As I drove past a couple of minutes later I saw the driver in the take-away.
So if the van had hit me, it'd have gone down as a road accident. But would have been caused by the bizarre manouevre required to enable the driver to pavement park.0 -
Filtering (in the absence of a cycle lane) is usually done on the offside of vehicles. Filtering is overtaking within a lane in which other vehicles are already established, usually when the traffic being overtaken is moving slowly or is stationary. 'Undertaking' is not a correct motoring term.
If 'filtering' was overtaking, it would be simply overtaking. It isn't.
It is trying to create a lane where one does not exist, by undertaking a vehicle to the right (there also may be one on the left).Overtaking slow moving vehicles within lanes is a situation where everyone is charged to take extra care, motorists cyclists and pedestrians; but I do accept that the primary duty of care lies with the overtaker, whether it's a cyclist passing a queue of traffic or a car overtaking a cyclist within the same lane.
I am glad that we agree that it is the cyclist who has primary duty of care not to hit pedestrians when they are crossing the road in stationary traffic. Perhaps you could get that message out to the idiot cyclists in London.That's just wrong. I presume you don't actually mean what you've written. I think you're trying to say that vehicular traffic must stop if the crossing lights require them to, but pedestrians can legally cross when their lights are at red.
I meant pedestrian crossing lights as relating to the pedestrians.Must be a city thing.
It is. Lots and lots of idiot cyclists in London.0 -
I think in general drivers find it hard to emphasise with cyclists, Its just something holding you up and if you have not cycled a lot on the road you wont understand why a cyclist will hog centre lane when there is a left turn coming up, or want to make sure they are at the front at traffic lights, or weave across the road on a windy descent and give you the eyeballs at a junction.
I think a lot of drivers also get frightened around cyclists about hitting them and it puts them under pressure.
Most cyclists are ok, as are most motorists.0 -
Hanky_Panky wrote: »Who cycles around London for fun?
Errm. Me! My friend and I love cycling in London in the evening when rush hour is over - a fantastic way to see the City all lit up.
A a motorist and a regular cyclist I can see both sides of the camp. I drive and ride like a ghost wafting through and aiming to impede others as little as possible - if I am in my car I will concentrate on the traffic lights so that when they change I make a prompt getaway to allow others behind me to make it through. On our bikes we rarely ride two abreast unless on trafficless routes. Often I am the only cyclist that stops at red lights in London! OK sometimes I will ride assertively so that I am seen and not squished.
Most motorists will make a conscious effort to overtake bikes wide and safely. Yes you have a sizeable minority of motorist who red mist at bikes. I expect some of them see them as lawless in their actions and detest them for that reason.
When you look at cyclists a lot of them are pumped up with tostesterone and are angry shouty people - Richard Hammond on his bike rides on Top Gear for example, who also sets a bad example.
But it's about expectations. I know that on my commute I will be cut up a dozen times. Similarly to make progress at rush hour I may need to make a dash for it, although I will always flash my hazards as a thank you. I know that most riders will ignore road rules, morals and regulations so I adapt to it by positioning my car so people can pass etc.The man without a signature.0 -
If 'filtering' was overtaking, it would be simply overtaking. It isn't.
It is trying to create a lane where one does not exist, by undertaking a vehicle to the right (there also may be one on the left).
You are properly confused. Undertaking is a term no longer used in law, but when it was (before 1972) it was used to describe a nearside passing manoeuvre. This common meaning of the term still applies.
Filtering is simply moving past slow moving or stationary vehicles, usually by accommodating the same lane as the vehicle they are passing.
For a better understanding read this link
http://www.cyclelaw.co.uk/overtaking-and-filtering-whilst-cycling
You misunderstand. Vehicles use the road. Pedestrians normally use the pavement. If a pedestrian decides to cross the road, they must ensure that they do so safely. No pedestrian has a right to walk into the path of any moving vehicle and expect it to stop, (junctions, crossings excepted).I am glad that we agree that it is the cyclist who has primary duty of care not to hit pedestrians when they are crossing the road in stationary traffic. Perhaps you could get that message out to the idiot cyclists in London.
There is a duty for filtering cyclists and motorcyclists (as with all motorists) to be fully aware of their surroundings and pay particular attention to the possibility of pedestrians doing daft things, but if a pedestrian walks into the road in front of a moving vehicle, that is a particularly daft thing to do.
The Highway Code is pretty comprehensive in its rules about pedestrian responsibility when they decide to cross a road.Highway_Code wrote:RULES FOR PEDESTRIANS- First find a safe place to cross and where there is space to reach the pavement on the other side. Where there is a crossing nearby, use it. It is safer to cross using a subway, a footbridge, an island, a zebra, pelican, toucan or puffin crossing, or where there is a crossing point controlled by a police officer, a school crossing patrol or a traffic warden. Otherwise choose a place where you can see clearly in all directions. Try to avoid crossing between parked cars (see Rule 14), on a blind bend, or close to the brow of a hill. Move to a space where drivers and riders can see you clearly. Do not cross the road diagonally.
- Stop just before you get to the kerb, where you can see if anything is coming. Do not get too close to the traffic. If there’s no pavement, keep back from the edge of the road but make sure you can still see approaching traffic.
- Look all around for traffic and listen. Traffic could come from any direction. Listen as well, because you can sometimes hear traffic before you see it.
- If traffic is coming, let it pass. Look all around again and listen. Do not cross until there is a safe gap in the traffic and you are certain that there is plenty of time. Remember, even if traffic is a long way off, it may be approaching very quickly.
- When it is safe, go straight across the road – do not run. Keep looking and listening for traffic while you cross, in case there is any traffic you did not see, or in case other traffic appears suddenly. Look out for cyclists and motorcyclists travelling between lanes of traffic. Do not walk diagonally across the road.
I forgot just how jaundiced you were...Lots and lots of idiot cyclists in London.Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0 -
When I am cycling pedestrians often walk out in front of me. They are often on their phones and they just cross because they can't hear an engine. They don't bother looking. It's normally OK although I have had some near misses where they suddenly spot me and change direction. I have never hit any pedestrian. If you look on youtube cyclist pedestrian crashes rarely cause any serious injury. Are pedestrians insured for damage to bicycles and riders caused by failure to look when crossing a road?0
-
When I am cycling pedestrians often walk out in front of me. They are often on their phones and they just cross because they can't hear an engine. They don't bother looking. It's normally OK although I have had some near misses where they suddenly spot me and change direction. I have never hit any pedestrian. If you look on youtube cyclist pedestrian crashes rarely cause any serious injury. Are pedestrians insured for damage to bicycles and riders caused by failure to look when crossing a road?
That may be but there are far more cyclists who choose to ignore pedestrian crossings and red lights. I go past such a crossing (with a 2 way cycle path every day on the way to work and there is usually one cyclist who ignores the queue of other cyclists at the lights and shoots right through.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards