Why do some cyclists use the entire lane, use fog horns, and flashing lights?????????

prowla

esuhl wrote: »

So, you're saying that motorbikes should be unlit at night unless there are no vehicles in front of them?!

If a motorcyclist is to blame for having forward-pointing lights, then aren't you equally to blame for having rear-facing mirrors?

And what about when you drive at night? Presumably you shine your lights in other people's mirrors? Or do you just flagrantly disregard the law?!

I don't recall saying that?

But, just to help you relax, no; motorbikes should (nee, must!) have forward lights, and cars (and bikes) should (must!) have mirrors.

The point I was specifically referring to was motorbikes placing themselves close on your rear quarter, resulting in their lights shining into your driver's side wing mirror.

(But you knew that, didn't you .)

Retrogamer

prowla wrote: »

As I've said, if the vehicle is moving with the flow of traffic, or at the speed limit, then nobody behind has any reason to want to get past them. This is about cyclists, but you would always open a motorbikes thread...

You quoted a part from the highway code that says you should keep to the left. Can you show me the part that says you don't need to keep to the left if you are keeping up with the flow of traffic?

frisbeej

prowla wrote: »

I don't recall saying that?

But, just to help you relax, no; motorbikes should (nee, must!) have forward lights, and cars (and bikes) should (must!) have mirrors.

The point I was specifically referring to was motorbikes placing themselves close on your rear quarter, resulting in their lights shining into your driver's side wing mirror.

(But you knew that, didn't you .)

Should, do, do not etc. in the highway code are recommendations, they aren't mandatory.

"Must" is only used in the highway code when there is an applicable law (which will be referenced below the paragraph).

There aren't that many "musts", our roads rely on people not being idiots and having respect for others (plus a fear of death, injury or prosecution but these are a poor reason for anything).

RichardD1970

You said, on more than one occasion,

prowla wrote: »

It's an all-encompassing rule which which(sic) all road users should stick to

all-encompassing
adjective
including or covering everything or everyone; comprehensive.

but seem to only want to apply it to cyclists.

You can't have an "all encompassing rule" then make exceptions for certain types of road users because they don't get in your way.

All encompassing means just that. IT APPLES TO EVERYONE.

Synonyms for all-encompassing

sweeping, all-embracing, all-inclusive, blanket, complete, comprehensive, everything, extensive, global, including all categories, including all members, pan-optic, total.

RichardD1970

prowla wrote: »

I don't recall saying that?

But, just to help you relax, no; motorbikes should (nee, must!) have forward lights, and cars (and bikes) should (must!) have mirrors.

The point I was specifically referring to was motorbikes placing themselves close on your rear quarter, resulting in their lights shining into your driver's side wing mirror.

(But you knew that, didn't you .)

And do you have any idea of why a motorcyclist might position themselves in such a way? Or are they all just trying to p*ss you off?

Marco_Panettone

All of you - just give it a rest. This is going nowhere. Step away from the keyboard.

Norman_Castle

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

All of you - just give it a rest. This is going nowhere. Step away from the keyboard.

When stepping away from the keyboard do we use the safest route or do we have to keep left?.

[Deleted User]

prowla wrote: »

The Highway Code says you should keep left and you may move out to go around obstacles, etc.

Translating that into cyclespeak, you should normally be in the "secondary position", and only "take the lane" / move to the "primary position" when you need to.

An earlier cyclists' post alluded to that when they said they spend 90% of their time in the "secondary" position.

The purpose of the primary position is to stop motorists overtaking when it's unsafe, not a temporary position adopted whilst passing an obstacle. One of the reasons it can be unsafe to overtake is that it can leave a bike with no room to pull out around obstacles.

“Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car.” Highway Code Rule 163

“When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room” Rule 212

“Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles” Rule 213

esuhl

prowla wrote: »

The point I was specifically referring to was motorbikes placing themselves close on your rear quarter, resulting in their lights shining into your driver's side wing mirror.

Well, if you didn't hog the road and moved to the left so they could pass, they wouldn't get stuck behind you like that.

What do you suggest motorcyclists do if they aren't to "place themselves close on your rear quarter" (oo-err-missus!)? Should they be overtaking on the left to avoid shining any light into the driver-side wing mirror?!

prowla

jack_pott wrote: »

The purpose of the primary position is to stop motorists overtaking when it's unsafe, not a temporary position adopted whilst passing an obstacle. One of the reasons it can be unsafe to overtake is that it can leave a bike with no room to pull out around obstacles.

“Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car.” Highway Code Rule 163

“When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room” Rule 212

“Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles” Rule 213

Sure - the Highway code gives examples of situations where cyclists may need to move out from where they should normally be; I think that's been said multiple times.

Indeed, it gives reasons why all road users might want to move out from the normal default of keeping to the left.

RichardD1970 wrote: »

You said, on more than one occasion,

but seem to only want to apply it to cyclists.

You can't have an "all encompassing rule" then make exceptions for certain types of road users because they don't get in your way.

All encompassing means just that. IT APPLES TO EVERYONE.

Synonyms for all-encompassing

sweeping, all-embracing, all-inclusive, blanket, complete, comprehensive, everything, extensive, global, including all categories, including all members, pan-optic, total.

I don't recall saying it should only apply to cyclist, in fact I think I said it should (and does) apply to all road users; that's what all-encompassing means.

Retrogamer wrote: »

You quoted a part from the highway code that says you should keep to the left. Can you show me the part that says you don't need to keep to the left if you are keeping up with the flow of traffic?

I never said there was such a rule; what I did say was that if they are keeping up with traffic then nobody should particularly care about it, as they've no reason to want to pass.

By way of illustration, if I am driving at 30 on a 30 road, then I am not going to be looking to overtake the vehicle in front who is proceeding at 30 and will simply keep an appropriate distance behind; if they happen to be a cyclist, then they may or may not be keeping left, but since I'm not going to be right up their chuff looking to get past, it doesn't matter - they are doing their thing and I am doing mine; they could be weaving around singing a song and doing wheelies for all I care.

esuhl wrote: »

Well, if you didn't hog the road and moved to the left so they could pass, they wouldn't get stuck behind you like that.

What do you suggest motorcyclists do if they aren't to "place themselves close on your rear quarter" (oo-err-missus!)? Should they be overtaking on the left to avoid shining any light into the driver-side wing mirror?!

Sorry, not playing your game - feel free to start another thread to discuss motorbikes...