"Read the Highway Code!": Confrontational close pass van driver fined £220; Bernal needs second spinal operation; Pidcock's rainbow bands; "Particularly British" anti-cycling sentiment; G rumbled by Phil Gaimon; But cyclists + more on the live blog

brooksby wrote:

And this tweet:

https://twitter.com/rorymeakin/status/1488674572786413569

(not sure how to link directly to their video)

That's a shocking piece of drivng in the video.... and I really despair at some of the comments  on the thread

Helmets !!!

Reply

"If I could just point out in my long experience in emergency medicine when a small child is run over by a 2 ton 4x4 driven at speed in this manner the helmet only serves to keep the head on the dead child in rough approximation of normal position."

hirsute wrote:

Helmets !!!

Reply

"If I could just point out in my long experience in emergency medicine when a small child is run over by a 2 ton 4x4 driven at speed in this manner the helmet only serves to keep the head on the dead child in rough approximation of normal position."

Indeed, and it shows how f@#ked up as a society we are becoming when so many people can completely ignore the fact that the driving from the Range Rover was utterly appaling and focus entirely on the fact the child isn't wearing a helmet.

Quite, I suppose they say only "encourage" here https://twitter.com/suffolkroadsafe/status/1489164254716391430

I agree - terrible driving.

If I was feeling generous then I would hazard a guess that the range rover driver was intending to squeeze past and close pass the adult cyclist, and only even realised that there was a child there once they'd started it.

And, yes, any fule kno that a child-sized bike helmet will provide a complete force field to protect said child from being squashed by a two tonne 4WD chelsea tractor... 

Apparently, the rr driver couldn't see the child as they are too small. When someone pointed out that perhaps rrs should be banned from the roads if drivers cannot see, this was not well received.

What a state we are in when people cannot compromise on a vehicle or cannot see the roads used for anything other than motorised traffic.

Other daft comments based on a 4 second clip

the road was too busy for a child - and you got that from 4 seconds of 3 motor vehicles?

the rr driver was commited to an overtake - no they could use brakes plus there was nothing behind the van, it's just they couldn't give a shit.

How on earth are they coming up with this?! Is it on purpose, or is someone with an IQ of 75 trying to interpret the HC. Let me try some more:
 

• Drivers must not open a door once parked.
• Horse riders must mount pedestrians.
• Lorries may not turn left at a roundabout.

I had to watch that in case it was deep fake news or those deep fake rjl photos that wtjs does.

But how did anyone write that let alone read it aloud !!!

I really thought for a moment that they'd done a new series of Brass Eye!

The only bit that made sense was the interview with the CTC representative (but even then, I'm not sure what area of Northampton he's riding in where motorists are respectful of cyclists!).

Sent off a complaint for a correction to be done.

Cyclists are the new Corbyn; the media will say anything, make up anything, lie through their teeth about us, and because they're all doing it, not one of them is held to account.

eburtthebike wrote:

Cyclists are the new Corbyn; the media will say anything, make up anything, lie through their teeth about us, and because they're all doing it, not one of them is held to account.

Next they'll be showing us alongside the Kremlin and colouring us to make us appear red. As long as they don't photoshop us wearing russian hats instead of helmets then we'll be fine.

Maybe they just mean ones that no-one's been told about.

GMBasix wrote:

Quote:

"non-public right of way"

That's a new one. Unless they mean rights of way enjoyed by specific persons (A) for access over another person's (B) land, such as A's right to pass and repass along a way on land owned by B to access A's land.

But if it's a right for any member of the public to pass and repass over land, whether that is owned by B or is in public (local authority) ownership, then it's a public right of way.

I think I can explain this one, I guess they mean roads (in the broadest sense) that are open for anyone to use but are not statutory rights of way (roads, byways, bridleways etc.) - permissive paths for example. I live in Bracknell & the whole area is lousy with traffic-free (or almost t-f) cycling & walking routes that don't appear on any maps (not even Google Maps). For example, Wellington College in Crowthorne allows cyclists to use their main drive (they close it for one day a year so it can't become a right of way). All the housing developments here have multi-use paths as part of the design to encourage cycling & walking, but they're not on the local authority's definitive RoW map because they're not classified as bridleways or whatever. That sort of thing. Bracknell Forest Council issues a rather neat map showing a lot of them & I found it very handy when I first moved here & was trying to figure out how I could cycle to shops, work etc. without getting killed.

I didn't know that about Wellington college, might take a pootle through next time I'm in crowthorne.  Ta.

It could also include public footpaths where cycling is permitted.

It is a matter of some debate whether bridleways are cycling rights of way, though I think generally it tends to be accepted, but footpaths it is the case that cycling is not a permitted right.

The other place that comes to mind is footpaths between roads on estates where cycling is not banned - there is not a right to cycle but it is not against the law unless explicitly signed, IIRC.

Maybe they work like traffic lights and everyone can pass as long as they aren't established?

Where does this 'after just three days' come from? Weren't they doing the same before they'd even come in (and in most cases apparently before they'd even read them)?

Your guess is as good as mine...  Do they just mean that those amendments to the HC have been in place for three days?

Curiously, in the Wales Online version, it was after just two days: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/drivers-call-new-highway-code-22953877 .   

brooksby wrote:

A spokesperson told MailOnline: “Our concerns over the Highway Code include the fact that encouraging the undertaking and overtaking of vehicles intending to turn by cyclists will cause more crashes that drivers will be blamed for under the new ‘hierarchy of road users’.”

What!?  You have to admire the inventiveness of the driving addicts, and I wonder what they would say when you point out that it says nothing of the sort.

eburtthebike wrote:

brooksby wrote:

A spokesperson told MailOnline: “Our concerns over the Highway Code include the fact that encouraging the undertaking and overtaking of vehicles intending to turn by cyclists will cause more crashes that drivers will be blamed for under the new ‘hierarchy of road users’.”

What!?  You have to admire the inventiveness of the driving addicts, and I wonder what they would say when you point out that it says nothing of the sort.

And in fact it specifically advises against it (both before and after the changes): "Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left."

brooksby wrote:

I haven't looked at the comments BTL...

Never mind the headlines, the video at the top seems to be full of misinformation starting with

"The rule previously saw drivers given priority at a roundabout but that has now changed"

followed by "now, cyclists will have priority over road users, in force of the new section under rule 186"

"cyclists, horseriders and horsedrawn vehicles are to stay in the left hand lane when attempting to cross a roundabout"

I've bunged in a complaint about the video and the article https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/how-to-complain/

cyclists, horseriders and horsedrawn vehicles are to stay in the left hand lane when attempting to cross a roundabout

Speaking of roundabouts, I'm branching out and seeking pastures new. This is Garstang's radical driver of Fiesta NX12 JVA going anti-clockwise round a roundabout while executing a U-turn

I just checked the video...what utter mendacious BS. The anti cycling lobby are going into  Hermann Goering misinformation overdrive on the HC changes. (well, not really changes at all, just change of stress)

The world is indeed going mad.