cyclists turned right when i overtook

Joe_Horner

bigadaj wrote: »

Ever thought you've got too much time on your hands?

It was a Saturday night, what else was there to do on Anglesey?

Joe_Horner

custardy wrote: »

Are you classing a single person as the majority?

Seeing as by far the majority of the posts "agreeing" he was blameless were under his own user name, perhaps he's counting all of his personalities individually?

rich13348

kraken776 wrote: »

That link does not say what you claim that it stated.
all that link shows is a group of sections of the highway code.

which part of the highway code shows the thing that you claimed the highway code says?

I answered your question in the post you quoted.

rule 213nice and big so you can't miss it this time

[Deleted User]

Can a Moderator just lock this thread?


OP is clearly much cleverer than everyone else on the road (cyclists especially) and needs to have sign on his/her car stating this so we can all identify them.

kraken776

There were only 15 hours between this post and my post which it reply's to.

It is possible but unlikely (made more so by the fact that that time covers the entire late night and early morning) that you have gone through this thread in that time and accurately collected the data which you have presented.

When i get time however i will go through the thread up to this point and verify or dispute your claims.

kraken776

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Rule 213 does, as you well know.

I'm afraid you've been totally skewered by this and Joe Horner's post. You asked a question about the Highway Code and have been given a correct answer you don't like, and you made a statement about how the balance of the argument is in your favour which has been comprehensively debunked by Mr Horner's very thorough analysis. Your response? To the former: "I can't see it." To the latter: "I can't be bothered to check for myself." You pulled the same trick with the maths: "I'm not going to do the maths myself."

I don't believe you're a troll. You're just someone who has got himself into a difficult position by being economical with the truth and is unable to accept you're in the wrong. No matter what rational analysis or reasonable opinion is expressed, you're simply unwilling to entertain it if it doesn't fit your view of events. I ask again: If you are so certain of the course of events and your entire innocence, why start the thread at all?

Nope,
Joe Horner cited the highway code and provided a link which did not work.

anyway i will cite the relevant section (213) here

Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.

This is no way supports any claim that i did anything wrong.

Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room

I did give plenty of room - also this statement explains why a cyclist may need to swerve without warning, It explains a possible excuse for making a C shape in a trajectory which otherwise would be a straight line parallel to the direction of the road. but it does not give any valid excuse for changing course and the crossing the road entirely without warning or looking back first.

pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make

I spotted the change of direction as soon as it started and was able to stop in time. This shows that i was paying sufficient attention.

DoaM

Just when you thought it was safe to go into the water .............

[Deleted User]

DoaM wrote: »

Just when you thought it was safe to go into the water .............

You should have got a bigger boat...

kraken776

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

I ask again: If you are so certain of the course of events and your entire innocence, why start the thread at all?

This question is flawed because it asserts that i must have started the thread because of some doubt about my innocence.
You cannot do this because my reason for starting the thread is completely subjective and therefore there is no way for you to know what it is.

oink oink

Because it is flawed in this was I will not answer.

The statement also implies that if i dont answer the question then it must be because the flawed assertion is true. A person reading this also could not do come to this conclusion because the reason for not answering is subjective and known only to me (although on this point i have given an explanation so at least readers have some direct evidence of the reason for my action).

oink oink

Mercdriver

Grow up and go back to your clay class.