Re: cyclist nearly kills himself

[Art]

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:22:54 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, p.k. says...
>
>> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk,
>
>Nope
>
>> was
>> further at fault by failing to approach a roundabout correctly positioned in
>> the Primary position, was further at fault for undretaking on the inside of
>> a stationary vehicle waithing to enter the roundabout.
>>
>> The driver was at fault for failing to observe fully.
>>
>> Who was the more incompetent?
>
>The car driver. A cyclist may not have a car licence so may not
>actually know. As a car driver, like 99% of other car drivres, he would
>have experienced cyclists doing this before and should be aware of it.

As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
Highway Code as car drivers.

 

[Paul Boyd]

On 18/12/2006 16:46, p.k. said,

> HC 45 gives clear guidance:
> You should wear Light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other
> road users to see you in daylight and poor light

Like you say, that's guidance - really another way of making a
suggestion (but I do follow the guidance). The HC also says that car
drivers *must* stop at red traffic lights, but many don't. (That'll put
the cat amongst the pigeons ;-) )

> It is good practice for vulnerable road users to make themselves more
> visible

Yes, I agree with that (with my cycling head on), although some cyclists
don't.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

 

[Conor]

In article <[email protected]>, Art says...

> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
> Highway Code as car drivers.
>
>
Fact of life is they don't so you drive accordingly.

--
Conor

"You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen
Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart

 

[Elder]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk,
>
Where was "at dusk" mentioned.
The only way we know that the rider wasn't seen was because the OP says
he was so close he couldn't see the lights. We don't even know if it was
dark enough to have required lights, only that the OP driver was in a
half blind haze.
--
Carl Robson
Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest
Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com

 

[Elder]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
> HC 45 gives clear guidance:
> You should wear Light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other
> road users to see you in daylight and poor light
>
*should* or *must*
--
Carl Robson
Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest
Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com

 

[Ian]

"p.k." wrote in message
> Señor Chris wrote:
>> p.k. wrote:
>>>
>>> a contributing factor was
>>> wearing dark clothing.
>>>
>>
>> Would that be in the same way that cars contribute to accidents by
>> being painted a dark colour ?
>
> No the clothing advised in the highway code, if the motorist is being
> criticised for not following the HC, so should be the cyclist.
>
> 45: Clothing. You should wear
>
> a.. a cycle helmet which conforms to current regulations
> b.. appropriate clothes for cycling. Avoid clothes which may get tangled
> in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights
> c.. light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users
> to see you in daylight and poor light
> d.. reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in
> the dark.
> If as a cyclist, I wear inappropriate clothing in poor light and position
> myself incorrectly then any accident is partly my fault.
>

That's most of the cyclists in my area partly responsible for any accident
in which they are involved. Most don't wear safety helmets, some don't wear
appropriate clothing (had to phone for an ambulance after one fell off her
bike due to her scarf getting wrapped in the front wheel), most wear dark
clothing and no reflective clothing. To which must be added not having
lights on or even fitted at night. But I bet if I knocked one off their bike
I would be held mostly to blame and they would claim on my insurance.

Ian

 

[Ian Smith]

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Ian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> That's most of the cyclists in my area partly responsible for any
> accident in which they are involved. Most don't wear safety
> helmets,

You seem to think failing to wear a particular sort of hat makes a
cyclist responsible for an accident that occurs. Do you also believe,
for example, that carrying a rabbits foot will prevent unpleasant
occurrences?

> But I bet if I knocked one off their bike I would be held mostly to
> blame and they would claim on my insurance.

If you are responsible, certainly. If you are not responsible, your
insurance company will simply point this out and decline to pay, won't
it. Your objection to this is...?

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[Ian]

"p.k." wrote in message
> Señor Chris wrote:
>> The HC is rendered completely irrelevant when someone is unable to see
>> what is right in front of their eyes (or was he looking elsewhere ?).
>> Everything else is just a smoke-screen for the driver's glaring
>> incompetence.
>
> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk, was
> further at fault by failing to approach a roundabout correctly positioned
> in the Primary position, was further at fault for undretaking on the
> inside of a stationary vehicle waithing to enter the roundabout.
>
> The driver was at fault for failing to observe fully.
>
> Who was the more incompetent?

The driver as he had only just passed the cyclist and should know that they
are very likely to pass on the inside to get close to the roundabout. If he
had really passed the cyclist only 15 metres before the roundabout, as was
mentioned by the OP, the car should still allowing extra space for the
cyclist or he cut the cyclist up.

What the rider was wearing is irrelevant as the OP saw the cyclist.

>
> If each were taking a driving or cycling competncey test both would fail.
>

The car driver must pass a test before being allowed to drive on the road
unsupervised. There is no such requirement for the cyclist.

Ian

 

[Paul Boyd]

On 18/12/2006 19:33, Ian said,

> Most don't wear safety helmets

URCers - don't bite!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

 

[Ian]

"Art" wrote in message
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:22:54 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, p.k. says...
>>
>>> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk,
>>
>>Nope
>>
>>> was
>>> further at fault by failing to approach a roundabout correctly
>>> positioned in
>>> the Primary position, was further at fault for undretaking on the inside
>>> of
>>> a stationary vehicle waithing to enter the roundabout.
>>>
>>> The driver was at fault for failing to observe fully.
>>>
>>> Who was the more incompetent?
>>
>>The car driver. A cyclist may not have a car licence so may not
>>actually know. As a car driver, like 99% of other car drivres, he would
>>have experienced cyclists doing this before and should be aware of it.
>
> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
> Highway Code as car drivers.
>

No they don't. A car driver must pass a test proving that they have
knowledge of the Highway Code. A cyclist or a pedestrian don't need to have
ever seen or heard of the Highway Code before venturing on to the road.

Ian

 

[p.k.]

Ian wrote:
>>
>> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
>> Highway Code as car drivers.
>>
>
> No they don't. A car driver must pass a test proving that they have
> knowledge of the Highway Code. A cyclist or a pedestrian don't need
> to have ever seen or heard of the Highway Code before venturing on to
> the road.


True, but if they act against the recommendations of the Code or the law
from which some of it derives, ignorance would be no defence.

pk

 

[Abo]

Art wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:22:54 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>, p.k. says...
>>
>>> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk,
>> Nope
>>
>>> was
>>> further at fault by failing to approach a roundabout correctly positioned in
>>> the Primary position, was further at fault for undretaking on the inside of
>>> a stationary vehicle waithing to enter the roundabout.
>>>
>>> The driver was at fault for failing to observe fully.
>>>
>>> Who was the more incompetent?
>> The car driver. A cyclist may not have a car licence so may not
>> actually know. As a car driver, like 99% of other car drivres, he would
>> have experienced cyclists doing this before and should be aware of it.
>
> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
> Highway Code as car drivers.
>

It's not a matter of observing the highway code; this is down to having
the wit to read what is going on around you (including what has just
happened) and applying that knowledge through experience.

If I'd have overtaken the cyclist as the OP did, I'd have expected him
to cycle up the inside of my car. In fact, I'd have been more shocked if
the cyclist had *not* done it!

--
Abo

BATracer: Browser Based Racing Simulation:

http://batracer.com/-1FrontPage.htm?6q0

 

[Ian]

"Conor" wrote in message
> In article <[email protected]>, p.k. says...
>
>> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk,
>
> Nope
>
>> was
>> further at fault by failing to approach a roundabout correctly positioned
>> in
>> the Primary position, was further at fault for undretaking on the inside
>> of
>> a stationary vehicle waithing to enter the roundabout.
>>
>> The driver was at fault for failing to observe fully.
>>
>> Who was the more incompetent?
>
> The car driver. A cyclist may not have a car licence so may not
> actually know. As a car driver, like 99% of other car drivres, he would
> have experienced cyclists doing this before and should be aware of it.
>

I agree. A cyclist is not required to have any training before venturing on
to the road, and so must be assumed to be incompetent. The car driver must
pass a driving test proving that they are competent. The responsibility
therefore rests much more with the car driver.

Ian

 

[Don Whybrow]

Art wrote:
>
> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
> Highway Code as car drivers.

Since the HC also covers pedestrians, lets make everyone pass a test
before they can leave their house.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"My God! The thought of that evil man, loose in London--with money, from
God only knows what source--fomenting riot and rebellion during a public
emergency--and in control of an Engine-driven press! It's nightmarish!"
(Gibson-Sterling, "The Difference Engine")

 

[Brimstone]

Don Whybrow wrote:
> Art wrote:
>>
>> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
>> Highway Code as car drivers.
>
> Since the HC also covers pedestrians, lets make everyone pass a test
> before they can leave their house.

Seeing as more people die and are injured at home, e.g. by falling down
stairs, tripping on carpets etc, perhaps we should extend the Highway Code
into the home?

 

[Don Whybrow]

Brimstone wrote:
> Don Whybrow wrote:
>
>>Art wrote:
>>
>>>As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
>>>Highway Code as car drivers.
>>
>>Since the HC also covers pedestrians, lets make everyone pass a test
>>before they can leave their house.
>
>
> Seeing as more people die and are injured at home, e.g. by falling down
> stairs, tripping on carpets etc, perhaps we should extend the Highway Code
> into the home?

Indeed!, I would go further and mandate the in-house use of hi-vis
clothing and h{CLICK ... NO CARRIER}

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Some people have one of those days. I have one of those lives.

 

[James Grabowski]

Ian wrote:
>
> "p.k." wrote in message
> > Señor Chris wrote:
> >> p.k. wrote:
> >>>
> >>> a contributing factor was
> >>> wearing dark clothing.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Would that be in the same way that cars contribute to accidents by
> >> being painted a dark colour ?
> >
> > No the clothing advised in the highway code, if the motorist is being
> > criticised for not following the HC, so should be the cyclist.
> >
> > 45: Clothing. You should wear
> >
> > a.. a cycle helmet which conforms to current regulations
> > b.. appropriate clothes for cycling. Avoid clothes which may get tangled
> > in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights
> > c.. light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users
> > to see you in daylight and poor light
> > d.. reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in
> > the dark.
> > If as a cyclist, I wear inappropriate clothing in poor light and position
> > myself incorrectly then any accident is partly my fault.
> >
>
> That's most of the cyclists in my area partly responsible for any accident
> in which they are involved. Most don't wear safety helmets

Do you wear a helmet in your car?

--
James

 

[Art]

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 19:12:45 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Art says...
>
>> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
>> Highway Code as car drivers.
>>
>>
>Fact of life is they don't so you drive accordingly.

Most of them don't even seem to know what a traffic light at red
means.

 

[Art]

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 19:46:17 GMT, "Ian" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Art" wrote in message
>> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:22:54 -0000, Conor <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>, p.k. says...
>>>
>>>> The cyclist was at fault for failing to wear light clothing at dusk,
>>>
>>>Nope
>>>
>>>> was
>>>> further at fault by failing to approach a roundabout correctly
>>>> positioned in
>>>> the Primary position, was further at fault for undretaking on the inside
>>>> of
>>>> a stationary vehicle waithing to enter the roundabout.
>>>>
>>>> The driver was at fault for failing to observe fully.
>>>>
>>>> Who was the more incompetent?
>>>
>>>The car driver. A cyclist may not have a car licence so may not
>>>actually know. As a car driver, like 99% of other car drivres, he would
>>>have experienced cyclists doing this before and should be aware of it.
>>
>> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
>> Highway Code as car drivers.
>>
>
>No they don't. A car driver must pass a test proving that they have
>knowledge of the Highway Code. A cyclist or a pedestrian don't need to have
>ever seen or heard of the Highway Code before venturing on to the road.

A pedestrian doesn't use the highway in the same way a bicycle or car
does.

 

[Art]

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 21:19:52 +0000, Don Whybrow
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Art wrote:
>>
>> As road users, cyclists have as much responsibility to know the
>> Highway Code as car drivers.
>
>Since the HC also covers pedestrians, lets make everyone pass a test
>before they can leave their house.

Pedestrians don't ride/drive.