Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ackroman

The Road Rage Thread - would you have pulled off?

118 posts in this topic

The highway code does not state 3 feet.

Have a look here to check it out

As a driving instructor it would be impossible to teach that.

How would someone judge 3ft whilst driving a car?

Most young people have no idea about 3ft as they use metric.

I bow to your greater knowledge. When I did a cycling proficiency course we were taught the three feet rule. The HC from your link suggests to leave more than three feet, which I welcome as a cyclist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bow to your greater knowledge. When I did a cycling proficiency course we were taught the three feet rule. The HC from your link suggests to leave more than three feet, which I welcome as a cyclist.

Not having a dig.

Its amazing how much has changed since people learnt years ago.

A good refresher session with a driving instructor would go along way to helping a lot of drivers out there.

Also have a good read of the latest Highway code would also help drivers/cyclists as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O Lordy you aren't doing yourself any favours with your posts here. It is perhaps inadvisable to overtake a cyclist from the lights until it is safe to do so.

Really? Well, I wouldn't have guessed that one! However, if you read my post I said that cyclists PULL OUT IN FRONT OF ME. I didn't actually mention overtaking them. But they PULL OUT IN FRONT OF ME without actually letting me know first. Because I am a good driver, I always signal if I intend to move away from my lane, checking first that there is no car on my shoulder. Cyclists on the whole don't do that. They just pull out. No hand signal, no checking over their shoulder first. The cyclists that do signal and look over their shoulder don't cause a problem at all, other than the minor annoyance of slowing everybody down but that is only a minor annoyance because either I need to get to work by a set time or I want to get home as quickly as possible, both very reasonable emotions when on a commute. Should I encounter cyclists at other times of the day - which I very rarely do (except when it is warm and sunny, ie rarely this year) - even the slowing down the traffic doesn't bother me as I'm a relaxed driver. However, YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might want to get your eyesight checked if you can't see a cyclist even without lights. Of course, that is if you are actually driving properly and using your mirrors.

No good using my mirrors if the cyclist is in front of me is it? In fact, if I was using my mirrors and a cyclist was in front of me I would be more likely to crash into the cyclist. What kind of driver are you?

Clearly you don't drive along country lanes on your commute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I am a good driver,

The cyclists that do signal and look over their shoulder don't cause a problem at all, other than the minor annoyance of slowing everybody down but that is only a minor annoyance because either I need to get to work by a set time or I want to get home as quickly as possible,

If you are a good driver. How do you suffer any annoyance. If you allowed enough time. They would not cause you any problem whilst legally overtaking/moving lane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are a good driver. How do you suffer any annoyance. If you allowed enough time. They would not cause you any problem whilst legally overtaking/moving lane.

You are putting all the onus on the car driver. However, it takes two to tango in all walks of life and that is the case on the road shared by cyclists, motorcyclists, other motor vehicles and, when crossing, pedestrians too. Cyclists should take responsibility for their own safety as well as other road users watching out for them. I am happy with my approach to cyclists which is always, without exception, considerate. However, my complaint was with those cyclists who think they have the right to totally ignore the rules of the road and also leave common sense behind when they mount their bikes. They are a real problem for all other road users and part of that idiotic behaviour is not signalling their intention when on the road, not using lights on their bikes (for which they can be fined on the spot incidentally), jumping red lights (again, they can be fined), cycling two abreast, cyling on the wrong side of the road, and not wearing helmets, which I find ludicrous. However, as I said earlier on, there ARE some cyclists who do obey the rules of the road and do bring common sense with them when they mount their bikes and they don't present me with any problems at all.

As for my MILD annoyance at being slowed down, I'm MILDLY annoyed by a number of things which slow me down: for example, car drivers who refuse to drive to the speed limit when conditions are fine and there is a clear road ahead. I believe a driver can still fail their driving test for such behaviour. I also get MILDLY annoyed by drivers who stop at traffic lights but leave a massive gap until the next car, or who slow down for no apparent reason or who don't use indicators or who cut me up. There are a lot of things that mildly annoy me while on a commute. I treat them all the same. I just call them idiots. They can't hear me because they aren't in the car with me but it certainly helps ease my mild annoyances during commutes.

I don't believe a single person who claims they don't get mildly annoyed by other road users at some point during their car journeys, especially on commutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are putting all the onus on the car driver. However, it takes two to tango in all walks of life and that is the case on the road shared by cyclists, motorcyclists, other motor vehicles and, when crossing, pedestrians too. Cyclists should take responsibility for their own safety as well as other road users watching out for them. I am happy with my approach to cyclists which is always, without exception, considerate. However, my complaint was with those cyclists who think they have the right to totally ignore the rules of the road and also leave common sense behind when they mount their bikes. They are a real problem for all other road users and part of that idiotic behaviour is not signalling their intention when on the road, not using lights on their bikes (for which they can be fined on the spot incidentally), jumping red lights (again, they can be fined), cycling two abreast, cyling on the wrong side of the road, and not wearing helmets

No cyclist wants to be involved in a collision with a car, the onus has to be on the car driver not to drive into another road user. If a cyclists swerves out in front if you and you are in danger of hitting them, you probably haven't given them enough room. A cyclist will always come off worse in a collision and possibly require a stay in hospital (I know from personal experience). There may be a reason why a cyclists has to pull out suddenly, e.g., pot holes although I agree that those cyclists who jump red lights are annoying. BTW riding two abreast is perfectly legal and recommended practice in some situations as it reduces the space needed to overtake.

Riding a bicycle in busy roads means you have to be constantly aware if possible dangers. Whether its pedestrian stepping out into you, cars cutting you up, getting doored by parked cars and cars in traffic, cars pulling out if side roads without looking and aggressive and drivers who seem to want to injure you. I hae experienced all of the above during my commute, just a little consideration on the part of drivers (of which I am one) and pedestrians makes everyone's life easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a cyclists swerves out in front if you and you are in danger of hitting them, you probably haven't given them enough room.

That's rubbish. I have seen many cyclists who deliberately swerve in and out of traffic, often without looking, as they seem to think that they do not have to slow down or obey rules of the road and that it is the motorists obligation to give way to them. They constantly ignore traffic lights and put themselves in danger. I saw one the other day who, despite the lights being on red, pulled out into the middle of a yellow box junction so he was side on to the oncoming traffic forcing them to swerve around him while he stood there. Idiots like that can have no complaint if a car hits them as they have brought it on themself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's rubbish. I have seen many cyclists who deliberately swerve in and out of traffic, often without looking, as they seem to think that they do not have to slow down or obey rules of the road and that it is the motorists obligation to give way to them. They constantly ignore traffic lights and put themselves in danger. I saw one the other day who, despite the lights being on red, pulled out into the middle of a yellow box junction so he was side on to the oncoming traffic forcing them to swerve around him while he stood there. Idiots like that can have no complaint if a car hits them as they have brought it on themself.

I agree that what you have described is idiotic behaviour. But sometimes swerving is unavoidable on a bike. The cyclist has a choice between going over the handlebars or swerving out. This is why cars should give cyclists room.

I have lights on my bike, wear a hi vis jacket, obey the rules if the road, and never run red lights. Why is it that on an almost daily basis I experience dangerous behaviour from car drivers and pedestrians alike? Why do I get verbal abuse when I am on my bike? The is a worrying anti cyclist sentiment from people in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No cyclist wants to be involved in a collision with a car, the onus has to be on the car driver not to drive into another road user.

And unless you are a nutjob sick sod white van man in Cardiff, no car driver wants to be involved in a collision with a cyclist. ALL road users have to take responsibility for themselves as well as each other. Some cyclists need to take more responsibility for themselves.

If a cyclists swerves out in front if you and you are in danger of hitting them, you probably haven't given them enough room.

lol! I am behind them. They pull out IN FRONT of me. Did you not read the words IN FRONT OF? How can I not be giving them enough room when they are IN FRONT OF me?

A cyclist will always come off worse in a collision

Indeed. Which is why it should be the case that all cyclists would obey the rules of the road, bring common sense on to their bike and wear helmets. However, so often these factors are absent from cyclists.

BTW riding two abreast is perfectly legal and recommended practice in some situations as it reduces the space needed to overtake.

That is asking for trouble. Exactly where is it recommended practice? It used to be outlawed practice.

Riding a bicycle in busy roads means you have to be constantly aware if possible dangers. Whether its pedestrian stepping out into you, cars cutting you up, getting doored by parked cars and cars in traffic, cars pulling out if side roads without looking and aggressive and drivers who seem to want to injure you.

And how is that any different from being a car driver?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are putting all the onus on the car driver.

No i am not.

I mentioned about the things that get you wound up.

Big difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.......or you could spot a potential hazard and adjust your driving to take it into account.

The biggest problem I've found (Not hit one yet) is many cyclists seem to think that only they are using the road and often change direction around pot holes etc without any form of indication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the recent posts do I assume cylclists cause the most anger?

Personally its old duffers. I had one pull out on me from a Give Way without looking late Friday morning and I totalled her car. I was driving a pick up towing another car to the garage on a car trailer, so I had a lot of weight.

Apparently she thought it was my fault she was in the middle of the road, the sun was in her eyes and I was driving too fast.

I politely pointed out that for the sun to be in your eyes you had to be looking in the direction of the sun, i:e my direction. The sun was also pretty much at it's zenith so she must have been looking through the sunshine roof not the passenger window to get dazzled. I also pointed out that I had priority as I was on the carriageway, I was also polite to explain that I was coming out of a z bend and was therefore proceeding at a speed less than 30 miles an hour. What I don't have is the reactions of a featherweight boxer with a 3 ton rig under my ######. I thought the last bit rather than saying it because the old dear was becoming even more confused.

However by and large I found this experience pushed me closer to rage than a meat-head trying to kill me or when confronted by a bunch of bycylamentalists riding 4 abreast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And unless you are a nutjob sick sod white van man in Cardiff, no car driver wants to be involved in a collision with a cyclist. ALL road users have to take responsibility for themselves as well as each other. Some cyclists need to take more responsibility for themselves.

A driver of a car involved in a collision with a bicycle will most probably just suffer a bit of shock. A cyclist may end up in hospital.

lol! I am behind them. They pull out IN FRONT of me. Did you not read the words IN FRONT OF? How can I not be giving them enough room when they are IN FRONT OF me?

Well what is the problem then? If they are in front of you then they aren't in danger of hitting you.

That is asking for trouble. Exactly where is it recommended practice? It used to be outlawed practice.

I'm a member of British Cycling they produced the report linked below summarising the view of its members when it comes to road safety. It might make interesting reading for you as they mention that many drivers do not know the rules/best practice for cyclists.

http://www.leighday....REPORT_2012.pdf

And how is that any different from being a car driver?

A cyclist is in a very vulnerable position, not enclosed by a steel cage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem I've found (Not hit one yet) is many cyclists seem to think that only they are using the road and often change direction around pot holes etc without any form of indication.

Sometimes unavoidable, hence why the highway code says to give cyclists as much room as you would if they were a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A driver of a car involved in a collision with a bicycle will most probably just suffer a bit of shock. A cyclist may end up in hospital.

More than a bit of shock.

Well what is the problem then? If they are in front of you then they aren't in danger of hitting you.

Are you for real? It's not them hitting me I'm worried about. It's me hitting them. If they suddenly pull out into my lane without any indication that they are going to then the chance of me ploughing into them increases significantly, don't you think?

A cyclist is in a very vulnerable position, not enclosed by a steel cage.

Indeed, which is why they should take more responsibility on the road by observing the rules of the road and not behaving like prats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than a bit of shock.

I think we can definitely say the cyclist will come off worst.

Are you for real? It's not them hitting me I'm worried about. It's me hitting them. If they suddenly pull out into my lane without any indication that they are going to then the chance of me ploughing into them increases significantly, don't you think?

You seem to be having difficulty understand what I am saying. If you are behind a cyclist then either you overtake giving them as much room as you would a car and therefore even if they do serve in the road you aren't going to hit them or you drive behind them. If it is a two lane carriageway ad they do serve across into the outside lane in front if you without signalling then yes you are correct, they are idiots.

I would like to see cycling as part of the driving test. It wasn't until I started cycling that I realised the dangers that cyclists have to watch out for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree entirely. You should not be able to get even a provisional car licence without first passing cycling test.

Oh, and incidentally, Highway Code section 146 states

Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular

  • do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit
  • take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution
  • where there are junctions, be prepared for road users emerging
  • in side roads and country lanes look out for unmarked junctions where nobody has priority
  • be prepared to stop at traffic control systems, road works, pedestrian crossings or traffic lights as necessary
  • children, are looking the other way, they may step out into the road without seeing you.

151: In slow-moving traffic. You should

  • reduce the distance between you and the vehicle ahead to maintain traffic flow
  • never get so close to the vehicle in front that you cannot stop safely
  • leave enough space to be able to manoeuvre if the vehicle in front breaks down or an emergency vehicle needs to get past
  • not change lanes to the left to overtake
  • allow access into and from side roads, as blocking these will add to congestion
  • be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side

and so on and so on. you are not entitled to hurtle around in excess of the speed limit as if you own it and expect everyone else to keep out of the way until you have sailed majestically past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes unavoidable, hence why the highway code says to give cyclists as much room as you would if they were a car.

In that case a cyclist should have insurance and have to pass some kind of test so they can become responsable cyclists as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can definitely say the cyclist will come off worst.

I didn't say they wouldn't. I just said that I would suffer more than 'a bit of shock' if I happened to knock over a cyclist.

You seem to be having difficulty understand what I am saying. If you are behind a cyclist then either you overtake giving them as much room as you would a car and therefore even if they do serve in the road you aren't going to hit them or you drive behind them. If it is a two lane carriageway ad they do serve across into the outside lane in front if you without signalling then yes you are correct, they are idiots.

I understand what you are saying perfectly. But you are missing my point. A cyclist is to my left but in front of me. We are stationary at traffic lights, say. Lights go to green. Everyone, including cyclist, accelerates - as one does when one wants to make a vehicle move forward- but cyclist is still ahead. Then, out of the blue, cyclist crosses in front of my car. No indication that is what they are going to do. Nothing. They just do it. I have to hit brakes. That is what I am talking about now and it is the scenario I first described.

I would like to see cycling as part of the driving test. It wasn't until I started cycling that I realised the dangers that cyclists have to watch out for.

Absolutely agree. All road users should have to pass a test, not least to teach them how to be aware of others on the road, not just for their own safety but for the safety of other road users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you are saying perfectly. But you are missing my point. A cyclist is to my left but in front of me. We are stationary at traffic lights, say. Lights go to green. Everyone, including cyclist, accelerates - as one does when one wants to make a motorised vehicle move forward. Then, out of the blue, cyclist crosses in front of my car. No indication that is what they are going to do. Nothing. They just do it. I have to hit brakes. That is what I am talking about now and it is the scenario I first described.

Are you in the same lane?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case a cyclist should have insurance and have to pass some kind of test so they can become responsable cyclists as well.

In a responsible cyclist but there are occasions when you need to serve to avoid pedestrians, pot holes and obstacles. If car drivers follow the Highway Code this isn't a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say they wouldn't. I just said that I would suffer more than 'a bit of shock' if I happened to knock over a cyclist.

I understand what you are saying perfectly. But you are missing my point. A cyclist is to my left but in front of me. We are stationary at traffic lights, say. Lights go to green. Everyone, including cyclist, accelerates - as one does when one wants to make a vehicle move forward- but cyclist is still ahead. Then, out of the blue, cyclist crosses in front of my car. No indication that is what they are going to do. Nothing. They just do it. I have to hit brakes.

What you have described shows you are in the wrong. If the cyclist is in front of you they have the lane. If you want to overtake you must insure that there is enough room to do so. This is why there is a green strip at many sets of lights, so a cyclists can take up a position in front of the cars. Although in my experience many car drivers seem to think this is for them. It seems like you don't realise that a cyclist is well within their rights to cycle in the middle of the lane. Personally I don't do this and cycle towards the left of the lane unless I feel it is unsafe to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you have described shows you are in the wrong. If the cyclist is in front of you they have the lane. If you want to overtake you must insure that there is enough room to do so.

*pulls hair out through frustration*

I wasn't in the wrong. I wasn't bl*ody overtaking! I hadn't even got to that stage yet! Jeez! The bloke pulled in front of me without signalling. Had I been going any faster than I was at the time there would have been no guarantee I could have stopped in time to avoid him, the total and utter plank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*pulls hair out through frustration*

I wasn't in the wrong. I wasn't bl*ody overtaking! I hadn't even got to that stage yet! Jeez! The bloke pulled in front of me without signalling. Had I been going any faster than I was at the time there would have been no guarantee I could have stopped in time to avoid him, the total and utter plank.

Calm down dear.

If you weren't overtaking and driving behind the cyclist then you weren't in danger of hitting him. As you say that you might not have stopped in time then you were probably driving too close to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.