One of the dozen

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Or to put it another way - being vulnerable should be a reason not to act like a dick, not an excuse to do so.

Copyright waived

[fungus]

Or to put it another way - being vulnerable should be a reason not to act like a dick, not an excuse to do so.

Copyright waived

Yes.

Nigel.

[GTR1400MAN]

Interesting article in The Guardian about "presumed liability".

Personally I can't see it ever working over here as, as has been alluded to earlier in this topic, there are two many cyclists "with an axe to grind". We've all experienced them. Deliberately riding two abreast, extra wide, extra slow, continually looking over their should laughing at the queue building up behind them. Or the man on a mission in commuter traffic, travelling at near 30mph inside and outside of any other vehicle. I could go on.

NB. Before I'm accused of tarring with the same brush, I'm a (motor)biker so I know how that feels. I also know that a minority cause the very draconian attitude to motorcycles in this country, but I have to live with it. So there are thousands of good, well behaved cyclists and motorcyclists out there.

[Silk]

Usual blinkered bollocks. First came pedestrians, then horse riders, then carts, carriages and finally cars and motorcycles.

We didn't have the roads we have now before the motor vehicle, so your argument falls flat on its arse before you've even started.

Everyone has the same right to use the road, whatever your personal perception of your own importance may be. The Highway Code makes that very clear.

Nowhere in the highway Code does it say everyone has the same right, or any right at all for that matter when it comes to road use. The simple fact is, some road transport *is* more important - that's just the way it is. It seems that these days we put politically correct "equality" nonsense above natural order. Cyclists need to know their place, which, to be frank, is somewhere near the bottom of the road-using pecking order. Once this is understood, we can all get along just fine.

What it makes less clear, despite various paragraphs pointing it out indirectly, is that everyone should exercise courtesy towards everybody else, with appropriate judgement being exercised where one road user is more vulnerable than another.

I would chose avoidance over courtesy when dealing with cyclists - I'm not going to force them into the ditch, but they should be prepared to move into it voluntarily in order to make way for me should it be necessary - that's only right and proper. If there is any courtesy to be shown, it should be by the cyclist in deference to the superior road user, who will always have far more important things to do than get stuck behind some muppet who thinks it's clever to chose to ride a bicycle on a road wholly inappropriate, for no good reason other than they can. It's just mental.

[waremark]

Nigel I remember being very much 'on your side' when you reported this incident at the time. However, I cannot find a wall on the left from your link.

[fungus]

The wall is covered in ivy. There is a small patch of white painted brick on the left running parelell to the road(Church Street). just after this the wall bends left at 90 degrees where a triangular area of grass separates Church Street from Back Lane which comes in from the left at an acute angle.
This is the view from the opposite direction.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.80245 ... 312!8i6656

[Imsensible]

The attitude seems to be that cyclists are somehow second class citizens.

It's not an attitude, it's a fact. The roads are there primarily for motor vehicles; which makes cyclists secondary users. HTH

Yep, it definitely helps. It confirms that you are indeed an idiot.

[Imsensible]

Thank you Silk for you usual bout of diplomacy.

Nick is correct. Now here's the but. I have had experience of a cyclist riding out from behind a blind wall into the NS of my car. There was no way in which the driver, a learner, or myself could have foreseen this event. See the link below for a street veiw of the incident site. And before anyone says that it's my fault for taking a ton of motorised metal out on the road, it was taxed, insured, and the driver was appropriately licenced. Therefore we had a right to be there. The cyclist rode out from behind the wall on the left just before the road comes in from the left as we were driving past, into the side of my car.

I am, beleive it or not, of sane mind. If I walk out into the path of a motorised vehicle giving the driver no chance to avoid me, does that make the driver guilty. I think not. It's my fault for being so bloody stupid. Now, I accept that the posters on this forum would probably consider that there is the posibility that I might have learning difficulty and not be able to take responsibility for my actions and would adjust their speed and position to accomodate that possibility, something that Mr/Mrs average might not do. Blame can only be apportioned by reason and not just because one road user is more vulnerable than the other. If it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that the less vulnerable road took allreasonable steps to prevent the accident, then why should it be assumed by certain groups that the more vulnerable is not to blame. That would give them carte blanche the right to do as they like without consequence to their actions. IMHO there are so many grey areas to consider.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.80201 ... 312!8i6656

Nigel.

And how many motorists crash in to the side of other cars? Having the right to be there doesn't exclude the possibility of stupidity on your or anybody else's part. Including cyclists, pedestrians and low flying birds. You might want to ask how many cyclists DON'T crash in to cars, despite the stupidity of many motorists.

[Imsensible]

Sorry Silk, but the highway code is not where you would look for a definitive statement of UK road and traffic laws, but don't let that get in the way of your imbecilic statements. Have you been inhaling too many diesel fumes from that 308 of yours?

[Silk]

Sorry Silk

Apology accepted.

but the highway code is not where you would look for a definitive statement of UK road and traffic laws.

Indeed. That's why it wasn't me who referred to it.