Why does the UK hate cyclists?

platypus · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:07

Caracus2k said:
Another one! The cyclists are the ones in the wrong I can't get past them because they are not complying with the highway code!

Are you having difficulty with simple comprehension?

I'll try once more. The cyclists are being idiots, and should let the faster road traffic pass if safe to do so. You should not be overtaking if its not safe to do so.

Easier?

SDK^ · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:08

Caracus2k said:
Another one! The cyclists are the ones in the wrong I can't get past them because they are not complying with the highway code!

Just because you can travel quicker doesn't give you the right to force them to move out of the way !!
Otherwise the people driving supercars would have an easy time in jams

HoboSwaggings · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:08

Caracus2k said:
As much as this thread demonstrates the arrogant attitude of some vehicle drivers it also serves as a testamant to the utter pig headed ignorance and belligerence of some cyclists.

I have demonstrably shown that cyclists by the legal standard (the highway code) should not be riding two abreast on bends, busy or narrow roads. Go argue with the goverment if you think there wrong. By the current law the cyclists in my example are in the wrong no ifs no buts....

I think you're confused.

Chris Wilson · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:09

Farmer friend of mine was pulling an irrigator behind his huge Fendt, came up behind a rook of "mature racing" cyclists on a country lane to his farm, all riding en masse about four abreast, stayed patiently behind for a mile or so, then sounded his horn, no response. Took a short cut and came out ahead. Waited until the irrigator was tight between two tall hedge banks and had a fag break. Got some verbal so lit a second one. Message received. Local cyclists going to work are no issue but some of these groups of "racers", especially the ones who seem to be near pensionable, take the mickey I am afraid. Some folk have work to do. The ones that delight in weaving around city centre traffic just have a death wish, especially when they fanny about around artics.

hornetstinger · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:10

Caracus2k said:
As much as this thread demonstrates the arrogant attitude of some vehicle drivers it also serves as a testamant to the utter pig headed ignorance and belligerence of some cyclists.

I have demonstrably shown that cyclists by the legal standard (the highway code) should not be riding two abreast on bends, busy or narrow roads. Go argue with the goverment if you think they are wrong. By the current law the cyclists in my example are in the wrong no ifs no buts....

It's not illegal to ride two abrest.

Caracus2k · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:14

hornetstinger said:
It's not illegal to ride two abrest.

The highway code is the legal standard by which road users are judged... It's an offence to ride in an inconsiderate manner under the road traffic act.

I have linked to the relevant section of the highway code which outlines when a cyclist must not ride abreast of another.

Unfortunately this thread reinforces the perception of cyclists either being ignorant of or just plain ignoring the law

platypus · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:16

Caracus2k said:
The highway code is the legal standard by which road users are judged... It's an offence to ride in an inconsiderate manner under the road traffic act.

I have linked to the relevant section of the highway code which outlines when a cyclist must not ride abreast of another.

Unfortunately this thread reinforces the perception of cyclists either being ignorant of or just plain ignoring the law

And yet you, and other motorists, have said that this makes it ok for you to overtake dangerously.

Correct me if I'm wrong - you're citing law so you must be an expert - but performing something dangerous and illegal, in response to something illegal, is still dangerous and illegal, is it not?

Unfortunately, this thread reinforces the perception that drivers are in too much of a hurry to consider other people's lives ahead of their own selfish ends first.

hornetstinger · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:19

Caracus2k said:
The highway code is the legal standard by which road users are judged... It's an offence to ride in an inconsiderate manner under the road traffic act.

I have linked to the relevant section of the highway code which outlines when a cyclist must not ride abreast of another.

Unfortunately this thread reinforces the perception of cyclists either being ignorant of or just plain ignoring the law

It doesn't say MUST NOT. It says you should not.

Caracus2k · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:20

platypus said:
And yet you, and other motorists, have said that this makes it ok for you to overtake dangerously.

I never said I overtook them dangerously! I'm not responsible for other posters comments. Take your strawman and his argument away with you!

platypus · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:21

Caracus2k said:
The highway code is the legal standard by which road users are judged... It's an offence to ride in an inconsiderate manner under the road traffic act.

I have linked to the relevant section of the highway code which outlines when a cyclist must not ride abreast of another.

Unfortunately this thread reinforces the perception of cyclists either being ignorant of or just plain ignoring the law

Also, just a tiny technicality, but you've intentionally(?) mis-quoted the law you keep banging on about.

It actually says should not, rather than must not. A distinct, but perhaps subtle, distinction.

Caracus2k · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:22

hornetstinger said:
It doesn't say MUST NOT. It says you should not.

It's the legal standard for driving if you do something the highway code says you should not do you are open to beimg prosecuted under the road traffic act

FortuitousFluke · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:22

hornetstinger said:
It doesn't say MUST NOT. It says you should not.

This is an important legal distinction. You can't be prosecuted for failing to adhere to an advisory in the highway code, however, in the event of an accident these can be used to apportion liability on the balance of probabilities.

Liefrich · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:22

Caracus2k said:
I never said I overtook them dangerously! I'm not responsible for other posters comments. Take your strawman and his argument away with you!

I think you're the one plucking imaginary scenarios out of thin air bud. You need to cool your anger down and perhaps get out on a bike to enjoy the fresh air. It may do you good.

hornetstinger · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:22

Caracus2k said:
It's the legal standard for driving if you do something the highway code says you should not do you are open to beimg prosecuted under the road traffic act

You're clueless.

Caracus2k · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:23

hornetstinger said:
You're clueless.

How so? care to back up your opinion?

Caracus2k · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:24

FortuitousFluke said:
This is an important legal distinction.

'never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends'

The highway code instructs cyclists to ride in single file on busy or narrow road or on bends... It's not saying it might be a good idea to consider it.

FortuitousFluke · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:28

Caracus2k said:
'never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends'

The highway code instructs cyclists to ride in single file on busy or narrow road or on bends... It's not saying it might be a good idea to consider it.

In terms of legal documents there is a difference between passages using the word "should" and passages using the words "will" or "must". I've not read the passage myself but if, as people are suggesting, the quote says that cyclists "should" never ride more than two abreast or "should" ride single file on narrow roads or bends then it's not illegal to do so. It may be taken into account if there's an accident however, but if the driver is going round the bend at ninety whilst eating a sandwich, so will that.

hornetstinger · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:28

Caracus2k said:
'never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends'

The highway code instructs cyclists to ride in single file on busy or narrow road or on bends... It's not saying it might be a good idea to consider it.

Show me where cyclists have been prosecuted for doing so.

Compared to those driving 120mph on the motorway.

Outcast · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:28

None of us had any problems getting passed cyclists in my little (boring) vid

I'm in a 44 tonner

(Nothing happens... I filmed it because P'boro has been infested with roadworks lately and I was showing other depots alternatives around them)

Nasher · 22 Nov 2017 at 14:30

I almost took someone's head off because they were riding two abreast around a sharp bend on a rural road, thinking they were in some kind of race. He was leaning over so much his head was in the other lane. That's why they say don't do it.