'Filtering' Accident

Topics relating to Advanced Riding on bikes
User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Cotswolds

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby akirk » Tue May 10, 2016 1:06 pm

ancient wrote:
akirk wrote:... they are expected to be expert enough to consider the outcome of their actions on other road users - otherwise they should not be on the road - same for all road users.

Not directly relevant to the incident under discussion, but this is not the case for all road users, only for those who need a licence to use the roads. Pedestrians are there by right and there is no requirement for them to be " expert enough to consider the outcome of their actions on other road users" nor even for them to be under the control of such an expert. Anyone not compulsorily detained has a right to be on the roads and there is an obligation on licensed road users to be aware of the possibility: Easy enough to spot when it is a young child, but adults too can use the roads whilst unable to consider the outcome of their actions on others.

Had I been in the rider's position and realised I had made a mistake in coming down the right when wanting to move off left, then I would have established eye contact with the driver and used a friendly hand signal to point out my intention and request permission. Had he still driven into me (as this driver clearly did) I would have been somewhat angry. The only time a driver deliberately drove at me for filtering, he gave me verbal warning beforehand (i.e. "I'm going to f'ing kill you you b'star'" - and no, I hadn't touched his car). Taking note of where his steering was pointing I started to move on green then anchored up. He drove through where I would have been had I not stopped suddenly. Yes, some will deliberately do this. I followed him down towards Putney Bridge, then overtook when he got stuck behind the next traffic jam.


wise words :)
and yes, you are right - I was thinking of licenced road users - however actually I think that unlicenced road users can be still held responsible for their actions, so it can vary - e.g. an older person with dementia wouldn't be considered as needing to understand their responsibilities and any possible outcomes - but are still allowed to cross the road - a normal person in e.g. their mid 20s doing something stupid might be considered to have some liability - and certainly cyclists have no need to be licenced, but might be considered at times responsible... like anything else, never simple!

Alasdair

ancient
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 4:03 pm

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby ancient » Tue May 10, 2016 1:27 pm

Agreed Alasdair, not simple. I was deliberately choosing those who clearly cannot be expected to exercise what might be considered a normal duty of care and pointing out that they can be expected on the roads. As for cyclists yes "might be considered at times", but can equally be children or suffering from a mental disability which reduces their ability to take responsibility (that's usually the excuse I give for the ones who come sailing out from a side road or off a pavement without a care - or a look, for the world). A cyclist who is also a driver - or still more an AD might be expected to consider their responsibilities more than the average person; although not a legal requirement I think.
What would it be like if the law operated in the way that advanced driver forums seem to? Each incident analysed for what anyone involved could have done differently and usually with the 'victim's' behaviour being analysed most acutely for 'Ways to avoid this outcome'. Better or worse than our current system? Better I think as long as it was applied alongside 'With increased ability to cause direct harm comes increased responsibility' but worse if it came with more of a dose of 'You know you should expect danger if you venture on the roads'.

User avatar
GTR1400MAN
Posts: 1261
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby GTR1400MAN » Tue May 10, 2016 2:29 pm

gannet wrote:I chose to go over the handle bars rather than rear end her 4x4 because the last time I did that (purely my fault that one) cost a lot of pain and money.

You'll accuse me of 'victim blaming' again, but in your mitigation explanation you admit to history of running into the back of a vehicle.

The point I was making, in a twisted way (you saw the appropriate smiley? ) was that a bit more space by you may have helped. That crystal ball has to work in overdrive. Bus signalling to come out of a stop or starting to move, to me says watch the car ahead they are likely to slow/stop, regardless of where the driver comes from.

-----------------------------------------------------

On the general subject of 'victim blaming', surely the whole point of dissecting these videos from the comfort of our sofas is to learn (how to avoid such a situation)? If you are man/woman enough to put a video online you need to take any feedback, consider it, and either take it on board or throw it away.

At the end of the day she was filtering on the right with the intention to turn left. She used her bike (and foot) as a blocking tool and paid the price. That in no way absolves the driver for his poor driving/attitude! I don't however believe it was a deliberate act to hit her, whereas moving his car forward was.
Mike Roberts

gannet
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 10:23 am

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby gannet » Tue May 10, 2016 2:37 pm

GTR1400MAN wrote:
gannet wrote:I chose to go over the handle bars rather than rear end her 4x4 because the last time I did that (purely my fault that one) cost a lot of pain and money.

You'll accuse me of 'victim blaming' again, but in your mitigation explanation you admit to history of running into the back of a vehicle.

The point I was making, in a twisted way (you saw the appropriate smiley? ) was that a bit more space by you may have helped. That crystal ball has to work in overdrive. Bus signalling to come out of a stop or starting to move, to me says watch the car ahead they are likely to slow/stop, regardless of where the driver comes from.

-----------------------------------------------------

On the general subject of 'victim blaming', surely the whole point of dissecting these videos from the comfort of our sofas is to learn (how to avoid such a situation)? If you are man/woman enough to put a video online you need to take any feedback, consider it, and either take it on board or throw it away.

At the end of the day she was filtering on the right with the intention to turn left. She used her bike (and foot) as a blocking tool and paid the price. That in no way absolves the driver for his poor driving/attitude! I don't however believe it was a deliberate act to hit her, whereas moving his car forward was.


I think we are arguing the same point from different angles ;) my original post indicated that I'd learnt from my mistake of the bus and the overtakee... Ie I leave more room and am more ready to accept things that appear stupid. And the second point was, while it may appear stupid to me/us, the others it could be perfectly logical ;)

the first instance of me running into the back of things I alluded to, I've also learnt from - look where Im going - I was looking at the ground for some (still unknown to me) reason!

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 1871
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby Horse » Tue May 10, 2016 3:05 pm

GTR1400MAN wrote: She used her bike (and foot) as a blocking tool and paid the price. That in no way absolves the driver for his poor driving/attitude! I don't however believe it was a deliberate act to hit her, whereas moving his car forward was.


I'm confused now.

I understand that she took a risk by stopping where she did. But I'm not sure whether you are, by saying 'paid the price'* and 'deliberately moving forward', partially condoning the driver's actions?

In terms of risk assessment before deciding whether to ride like that, how high would you assess the risk of following driver moving off and driving into you?**

* Do you have a link to this 'price list'? ;)

** I've had driver hit the back of my bike when I was in a queue, stopped in the centre of the lane. He said, of course, "Sorry, I didn't see you".
My own views. For better or worse :)

sussex2
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:43 am

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby sussex2 » Tue May 10, 2016 3:35 pm

In Spain it is usual, accepted, that all motor and pedal cycles move to the front of the queue. It is also accepted that they move off promptly and with a certain amount of 'gusto'. This unspoken privilege is not written down and not always used but when it is by and large everyone just gets on with it - the country is one of 'getting on with it'.
I know this isn't Spain but I honestly think that the car (in particular) has held so much sway on our roads, and for so long, that the recent challenges to its supremacy have come as a bit of a shock to some.

trashbat
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 2:56 pm

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby trashbat » Tue May 10, 2016 4:39 pm

MotorSportsFan wrote:When asking an associate "what could you have done differently?" It is to make them aware that they often have choices that could mitigate the risk of injury or death. After all it is no consolation being right when you are lying in a hospital bed or wooden box. Better to act to protect yourself on the presumption that nobody else will.

Yes, I completely agree. That is after all why I bother with AD, and I was doing the same long before, on two wheels.

But there are two ways to do this retrospective. One is to use it constructively to ask the question you have, concerned with the future, and the other is to point the finger, concerned with the past.

That you can look at a mishap and make a critique or take a lesson from it, thus avoiding the same fate yourself one day, doesn't mean that the unfortunate subject of the episode ever actually did anything unreasonable.

What's the point of all this, you might wonder? Well, obviously I would love it if all road users were to take more responsibility for safety, including via this process. But, supposing that doesn't happen, a worse state than where we are now would be this kind of technical arms race where if you weren't the perfect expert doing everything absolutely perfectly then whatever happens to you is oh dear your own stupid fault. Should have just avoided it mate!

That's a crap, elitist attitude to general road safety - and it's not even got an end to it. You can do everything by the book, still have some total idiot bring disaster upon you, and then someone can still say, 'well, perhaps you just shouldn't have been there - turns out it was dangerous'.

User avatar
GTR1400MAN
Posts: 1261
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby GTR1400MAN » Tue May 10, 2016 4:41 pm

Horse

Price list not available. Open to negotiation. ;)

The 'price' (figure of speech) in this case was a painful foot and scratched bike, which could have been avoided. As we've said earlier, hindsight is a wonderful thing and can help us learn. I'm sure we've all learnt things from these dissections in the past.

I was in no way condoning his actions but making the point the deliberate act was to move forward, not to run over her foot, which was the result.

In terms of risk assessment of the driver moving away and hitting you, I'd say it's quite high if you try the "I'm coming in" move , much less so, but not eradicated, if you are in the queue.
Mike Roberts

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Cotswolds

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby akirk » Tue May 10, 2016 5:47 pm

trashbat wrote:
MotorSportsFan wrote:When asking an associate "what could you have done differently?" It is to make them aware that they often have choices that could mitigate the risk of injury or death. After all it is no consolation being right when you are lying in a hospital bed or wooden box. Better to act to protect yourself on the presumption that nobody else will.

Yes, I completely agree. That is after all why I bother with AD, and I was doing the same long before, on two wheels.

But there are two ways to do this retrospective. One is to use it constructively to ask the question you have, concerned with the future, and the other is to point the finger, concerned with the past.

That you can look at a mishap and make a critique or take a lesson from it, thus avoiding the same fate yourself one day, doesn't mean that the unfortunate subject of the episode ever actually did anything unreasonable.

What's the point of all this, you might wonder? Well, obviously I would love it if all road users were to take more responsibility for safety, including via this process. But, supposing that doesn't happen, a worse state than where we are now would be this kind of technical arms race where if you weren't the perfect expert doing everything absolutely perfectly then whatever happens to you is oh dear your own stupid fault. Should have just avoided it mate!

That's a crap, elitist attitude to general road safety - and it's not even got an end to it. You can do everything by the book, still have some total idiot bring disaster upon you, and then someone can still say, 'well, perhaps you just shouldn't have been there - turns out it was dangerous'.


of course you don't want that elitist attitude, but to build on your two approaches...
- you can analyse for the benefit of the individual / others for the future
- you can analyse to counter claims about the past - and that is all that is happening here - the video is very one sided, makes a number of assumptions, focuses on the motorcyclist as being fully in the right, actually (perhaps unintentionally) comes across a bit arrogantly with its presumption that all is the fault of the car driver - yet has been edited to suit and glosses over issues such as the fact that the rider was about to turn left and should not have been filtering on the right of the traffic - or should at least have crossed over...

no-one says that the driver is blameless - nor does anyone not feel sorry for the outcome for the rider - however a balanced view is that the rider must shoulder responsibility for being where they were which was in the wrong position - and to put up a video on youtube blaming the driver for everything because 'it is legal to filter' is not a fair approach - all we are saying on here is that a balanced view is best - that doesn't require any elitist knowledge or expertise - in this actual example the rider got it wrong as well as the driver, yet puts up a video 100% blaming the driver and edits the video to support that stance - that is not a fair approach - and the awareness or knowledge she should have used was simply the basics of being able to ride amongst other traffic - everyone knows that if you are turning left you don't move up on the right of other traffic!

interestingly - she was with another rider - why did that person not also filter in the same way - or had she made a better decision about where to position to turn left?

Alasdair

TheInsanity1234
Posts: 475
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:03 pm

Re: 'Filtering' Accident

Postby TheInsanity1234 » Tue May 10, 2016 7:28 pm

Having looked at the video, my opinion is:

Biker filters to in front of the car in question.
Driver takes mild offence at it, and "creeps" forwards to try and intimidate the biker into surrendering her space, but misjudges where her foot is, and drives over it.

I think the situation probably wouldn't have happened if the biker stopped on the white lines, in the middle, rather than angled her bike into the space in front of the car in question. Also, if the biker had put her hand up to thank the driver or to politely apologise for "cutting in", the driver might've been less upset by the biker and consequently, wouldn't have moved forwards.

Equally as important, if the car driver had simply accepted that the biker is now in front of him, and is highly unlikely to experience a major delay due to the biker's presence, the situation would not have happened.

That's my armchair analysis.

Disclaimer: This post is intended to be fair and unbiased, and it does not imply any thinking other than the fact both the driver and the cyclist are a bit stupid.


Return to “Advanced Driving - Bikes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests