Magnolia or me, we are trying to be reasonable, it clearly has no place in a cyclist v motorist thread
edit: Magnolia and me, is that a tv show or just a tv show now in the making? Think about it!
Magnolia and I
Girl hits cyclist then jokes about it on Twitter.
- Thread starter JoeF1
- Start date
Magnolia and I
I think you need some driver safety training.
Many people have been prosecuted for obeying the speed limit (remember its a LIMIT not a TARGET) Just because there is a limit you still need to drive according to all the other rules in place. You CAN and WILL be prosecuted for driving at the speed limit if the conditions are unsafe to do so.
The reason we are supposed to give cyclist more room is so when/if they get it wrong. we as motorists dont kill them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2006
- Posts
- 4,687
Can I refer you to my previous post of;
No one is expecting a motorist to put themselves in danger if they follow safe overtaking procedures.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,767
- Location
- Auckland
Reasonable?
I don't think I'm trying to be reasonable, just pointing out the Groundhog Day nature of this most useless of threads.
I would watch this film
Magnolia or me, we are trying to be reasonable, it clearly has no place in a cyclist v motorist thread
I don't think I'm trying to be reasonable, just pointing out the Groundhog Day nature of this most useless of threads.
Not really. Yes, one should give as much room to a cyclist as they do to a car but that doesn't mean a cyclist is as wide as a car.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 1,222
- Location
- UK
You can be doing the speed limit and still be done for dangerous and unsafe driving if you go round a blind bend at 60 and smack into someone. I grew up in a very rural area, and have had to drive around or wait behind horses, cows, sheep, tractors, combines & wandering farm dogs constantly and never begrudged it. They have as much right to use the road as I do, and if I'm held up a bit it's not the end of the world.
Hitting someone on a horse or bike and killing them would be.
Last edited:
At least.
Cycle lanes are often full of the crap that is thrown off the road by vehicles, which is why a lot of guys don't use them. Also, when cycle lanes cross junctions motorists have a tendency to assume the cyclist is turning off and not going straight on (For example this happened to a colleague and he got run over by a lorry thanks to the actions of a car driver knocking him off). The other thing is that cycle lanes are greasy as hell.. which is another danger point. They are also slow. The cyclist has the right to use the road if they wish.
Same here, thought ironically its mad me hate other cyclists even more as I actually use the cycle paths instead of messing around in the road >.> really hate the "pro" cyclists who ride just to be elitist and annoy drivers...
Which part of "For all intents and purposes of the law" says literally
Last edited:
I'm glad someone in here has some reading comprehension skills! I shouldn't have to say this really but just to make it abundantly clear before anyone else jumps down my throat, I'm not saying that because a cyclist undertakes with a few inches to spare, that you're then justified in tearing past them leaving a similarly small gap. Just pointing out the irony and as Gilly said above, many motorists will likely think it's an acceptably sized gap if that's the gap the cyclist leaves.
Did I say it was the same? Are you aware that I only ended my post with 'FACEPALM LOL' as an ironic response, or do you just like posting ill conceived knee-jerk reactions?
Erm, what? Why would you think that?
Last edited:
Its quite shocking the amount of anti cyclist drivel people are coming out with, however the law should be toughened up with regards to cyclists, crash helmets should be law and police should prosecute people who drive on the pavements/run red lights or ride at night with no lights on. I see these examples time and time again in Bournemouth.
NSL doesn't mean do the speed limit no matter what, for example in rural areas there are horses, so therefore you should be aware that unexpected hazards may occur.
Personally I prefer the girl clip-clopping past my house on a Sunday morning to the boy racer who does whizzes by at 2am.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 15,788
- Location
- Outside in the bushes
I've done it twice! Both times I was told that you can go national speed limit in these zones in most weather except in snowy or icy conditions then you're supposed to reduce your speed by 10-20 mph!
If there is an obvious hazard then you can't go sailing past at the NSL, it would be driving without due care and attention
Same here, thought ironically its mad me hate other cyclists even more as I actually use the cycle paths instead of messing around in the road >.> really hate the "pro" cyclists who ride just to be elitist and annoy drivers...
Which part of "For all intents and purposes of the law" says literally
Well 'for all intents and purposes' isn't accurate, either. That was my point.
[FnG]magnolia;24314020 said:The only thing that differentiates this from our weekly cyclists versus normal people threads is that we have a lukewarm chick (yay!), Reddit (boo!), a hurt cyclist (yay/boo, delete as appropriate) and police involvement.
It's like every bad cyclist thread we have here but with all of the things that those threads miss so I endorse this thread as 5 star quality in the making.
e : it's already begun. GD, you never fail to disappoint
You were way behind! It only too robgmun 4 minutes to trot out the usual diatribe.
Never thought I'd applaud an MP for common sense but:
.