Do you condone cycling on pavements? Many cyclists have put their 'self-preservation' skills into effect and decided that they would be better off there. Indeed, I believe that fear of injury is a defence for people charged with pavement cycling. [1]
Fear of injury would be just as "good" a defence for the shooting dead of an armed police officer by the criminal he is confronting. Or of the murder of the victim of a mugging "just in case" he or a member of his family comes after the mugger.
Quoted message said:
Cheers, Luke [1] As with so many things, I cannot provide a source for that.
Of course you can't.
Well I can. It was a comment in 1999 from then Home Office minister Paul Boateng. 'In a letter to cycling MP Ben Bradshaw Home Office Minister Paul Boateng wrote "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users."
So not strictly a defence, but it is clear that the intention of the FPN system for pavement cycling was NOT to penalise 'responsible cyclists' but those who cause a danger to pedestrians. This, of course, has been completely forgotten or ignored by councils and Police. I don't know if anyone has challenged a FPN and used this in their argument...
Indeed. I think it's fair to say that a lot of the heat from the cycling side has come solely from the suggestion in Brimstone's post that we should just avoid lorries, period.
You may continue to mix it with trucks as you like.
Since the trucks are on the roads and no amount of wishful posting will change that, you would seem to be advocating cyclists only ride around the inside of their houses. It's not a very practical recommendation, is it?
As a driver who has passed the IAM, DSA and RoSPA advanced driving tests, I can assure you I know my, and other road users, responsibilities. However, I stay away from large vehicles where I possibly can - because they are bigger than me and I will come off worse in a collision.
If you are in a small car (a mini for example) do you stay away from Transit sized vans? It is the same principle you espouse above.
As a cyclist that principle would mean me staying away from roads where I possibly can because all cars (as well as lorries) are bigger than me. This just isn't practicable.
-- Andy Leighton => [email hidden] "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
You may continue to mix it with trucks as you like. And you may continue to run the risk of beign squashed in consequence.
Much as I (and you) do in cars, and still much the case that getting out on the roads /at all/ will involve mixing it with trucks, whatever my likes.
Quoted message said:
If you don't have an instinct for self-preservation feel free to die in whatever manner you choose.
Still too dumb to realise a lot of accidents involve little in the way of choice for the deceased, I see.
Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
"Nick" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
The most stupid actions were those that would squeeze down the side of the bus at junctions - even when I was signalling to turn left! They would put themselves straight into the blindpot and sit there. I never collided with one as I always spotted them early, but I am never surprised when I hear of a cyclist being run down.
So you felt it was OK to continue driving in a way that put other road users lives at risk. Presumably this is because you felt it would be their fault if you did kill them?
I realise that professional drivers come from the lower end of the intelligence scale but can you not see this was exactly my point.
I think you have demonstrated by that non sequiter that it is you who comes from the lower end of the intelligence scale: the cyclists were putting themselves in danger by their positioning and the driver was observing and behaving correctly.
"Nick" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
The most stupid actions were those that would squeeze down the side of the bus at junctions - even when I was signalling to turn left! They would put themselves straight into the blindpot and sit there. I never collided with one as I always spotted them early, but I am never surprised when I hear of a cyclist being run down.
So you felt it was OK to continue driving in a way that put other road users lives at risk. Presumably this is because you felt it would be their fault if you did kill them?
I realise that professional drivers come from the lower end of the intelligence scale but can you not see this was exactly my point.
I think you have demonstrated by that non sequiter
Can you point out where you think the non sequitur occurs?
Quoted message said:
that it is you who comes from the lower end of the intelligence scale: the cyclists were putting themselves in danger by their positioning and the driver was observing and behaving correctly.
Clearly you are just trying to trade insults.
However we can't really get away from the fact that professional drivers do tend to be unskilled and not very clever. A rough proxy for how society values the talents of a professional driver can be seen by the relatively low pay that the job commands.
The other interesting fact is that despite the risks cycling does on average increase ones lifespan.
VERY VERY few collisions have just one participant at fault.
That is a fair comment, but of course what I'm actually getting at primarily is the simple /existence/ of lorries in my space. They're often there and I really can't help that, and Brimstone's "just don't be near lorries" misses that completely.
Which isn't what I said.
Quoted message said:
I can choose not to steer close to them, but I can't choose whether they steer close to me because I'm not at the controls of the lorry.
How is that at variance with what I actually posted?
"Nick" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
> The most stupid actions were those that would squeeze down the side > of the bus at junctions - even when I was signalling to turn left! > They would put themselves straight into the blindpot and sit > there. I never collided with one as I always spotted them early, > but I am never surprised when I hear of a cyclist being run down. >
So you felt it was OK to continue driving in a way that put other road users lives at risk. Presumably this is because you felt it would be their fault if you did kill them?
I realise that professional drivers come from the lower end of the intelligence scale but can you not see this was exactly my point.
I think you have demonstrated by that non sequiter
Can you point out where you think the non sequitur occurs?
Quoted message said:
that it is you who comes from the lower end of the intelligence scale: the cyclists were putting themselves in danger by their positioning and the driver was observing and behaving correctly.
Clearly you are just trying to trade insults.
However we can't really get away from the fact that professional drivers do tend to be unskilled and not very clever.
How many lorry drivers have you met and had conversations with, how many have you studied at their work?
Quoted message said:
A rough proxy for how society values the talents of a professional driver can be seen by the relatively low pay that the job commands.
Only in the UK where it is customary to denigrate anyone who does a useful job. In other European countries drivers are treated with the respect the relative importance of the job deserves.
Quoted message said:
The other interesting fact is that despite the risks cycling does on average increase ones lifespan.
Only if one behaves appropriate whilst on the road.
Peter Clinch (Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>😉 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
To try to pretend otherwise suggests that there's absolutely no point whatsoever to defensive road use.
Quoted message said:
But I'm not pretending any such thing, just pointing out I can't simply stay a wide berth clear of lorries because they are prone to driving past me and behind me where there's little I can do but hope the driver is on the ball.
Very true. But what you CAN do is to minimise the chance that a driver who is sort of wavering around near the ball doesn't just blither past you. MAKE him see you. MAKE him think about you. GET in his face a bit.
That's what's we're trying to emphasise. Just sitting there like a lemon whinging about it being inevitable that cars squeeze past your bike when there isn't really space just shows that your road positioning is wrong. But that doesn't mean that where there IS space you can't help them past you easily and safely. Just vary your road positioning. Traffic island coming up? Move out from the kerb a bit so they CAN'T squeeze past. Past the island? Move back in, and wave a thank you.
The same is easy to apply at junctions. You're there first? Get in the middle of the lane. Then they CAN'T pull alongside and turn left without indication.
They've seen you, they've thought about you - because you took ownership of the space around you.
Peter Clinch (Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>😉 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
To try to pretend otherwise suggests that there's absolutely no point whatsoever to defensive road use.
Quoted message said:
But I'm not pretending any such thing, just pointing out I can't simply stay a wide berth clear of lorries because they are prone to driving past me and behind me where there's little I can do but hope the driver is on the ball.
Very true. But what you CAN do is to minimise the chance that a driver who is sort of wavering around near the ball doesn't just blither past you. MAKE him see you. MAKE him think about you. GET in his face a bit.
That's what's we're trying to emphasise. Just sitting there like a lemon whinging about it being inevitable that cars squeeze past your bike when there isn't really space just shows that your road positioning is wrong. But that doesn't mean that where there IS space you can't help them past you easily and safely. Just vary your road positioning. Traffic island coming up? Move out from the kerb a bit so they CAN'T squeeze past. Past the island? Move back in, and wave a thank you.
The same is easy to apply at junctions. You're there first? Get in the middle of the lane. Then they CAN'T pull alongside and turn left without indication.
They've seen you, they've thought about you - because you took ownership of the space around you.
"Brimstone" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Adrian said:
Peter Clinch (Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>😉 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Quoted message said:
> To try to pretend otherwise suggests that there's absolutely no > point whatsoever to defensive road use.
Quoted message said:
But I'm not pretending any such thing, just pointing out I can't simply stay a wide berth clear of lorries because they are prone to driving past me and behind me where there's little I can do but hope the driver is on the ball.
Very true. But what you CAN do is to minimise the chance that a driver who is sort of wavering around near the ball doesn't just blither past you. MAKE him see you. MAKE him think about you. GET in his face a bit.
That's what's we're trying to emphasise. Just sitting there like a lemon whinging about it being inevitable that cars squeeze past your bike when there isn't really space just shows that your road positioning is wrong. But that doesn't mean that where there IS space you can't help them past you easily and safely. Just vary your road positioning. Traffic island coming up? Move out from the kerb a bit so they CAN'T squeeze past. Past the island? Move back in, and wave a thank you.
The same is easy to apply at junctions. You're there first? Get in the middle of the lane. Then they CAN'T pull alongside and turn left without indication.
They've seen you, they've thought about you - because you took ownership of the space around you.
DING!!!!
Bugger me, that makes two of you who've just caught up with the rest of uk.rec.cycling.
"Brimstone" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Adrian said:
Peter Clinch (Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>😉 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
>> To try to pretend otherwise suggests that there's absolutely no >> point whatsoever to defensive road use.
> But I'm not pretending any such thing, just pointing out I can't > simply stay a wide berth clear of lorries because they are prone to > driving past me and behind me where there's little I can do but > hope the driver is on the ball.
Very true. But what you CAN do is to minimise the chance that a driver who is sort of wavering around near the ball doesn't just blither past you. MAKE him see you. MAKE him think about you. GET in his face a bit.
That's what's we're trying to emphasise. Just sitting there like a lemon whinging about it being inevitable that cars squeeze past your bike when there isn't really space just shows that your road positioning is wrong. But that doesn't mean that where there IS space you can't help them past you easily and safely. Just vary your road positioning. Traffic island coming up? Move out from the kerb a bit so they CAN'T squeeze past. Past the island? Move back in, and wave a thank you.
The same is easy to apply at junctions. You're there first? Get in the middle of the lane. Then they CAN'T pull alongside and turn left without indication.
They've seen you, they've thought about you - because you took ownership of the space around you.
DING!!!!
Bugger me, that makes two of you who've just caught up with the rest of uk.rec.cycling.
VERY VERY few collisions have just one participant at fault.
That is a fair comment, but of course what I'm actually getting at primarily is the simple /existence/ of lorries in my space. They're often there and I really can't help that, and Brimstone's "just don't be near lorries" misses that completely.
Which isn't what I said.
What you actually said was:
"But the general thrust is quite simple. The lorry is bigger than the cyclist. Keep clear."
Perhaps you would explain how that's different from what I read it as?
Quoted message said:
How is that at variance with what I actually posted?
You said "keep clear". I can't guarantee to keep clear because I can't guarantee that an HGV won't come close.
Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Very true. But what you CAN do is to minimise the chance that a driver who is sort of wavering around near the ball doesn't just blither past you. MAKE him see you. MAKE him think about you. GET in his face a bit.
That's what's we're trying to emphasise. Just sitting there like a lemon whinging about it being inevitable that cars squeeze past your bike when there isn't really space just shows that your road positioning is wrong. But that doesn't mean that where there IS space you can't help them past you easily and safely. Just vary your road positioning. Traffic island coming up? Move out from the kerb a bit so they CAN'T squeeze past. Past the island? Move back in, and wave a thank you.
The same is easy to apply at junctions. You're there first? Get in the middle of the lane. Then they CAN'T pull alongside and turn left without indication.
They've seen you, they've thought about you - because you took ownership of the space around you.
We know this. Read the archive of URC and you will see that. It is not the point Peter C has made ad nauseum.
Very true. But what you CAN do is to minimise the chance that a driver who is sort of wavering around near the ball doesn't just blither past you. MAKE him see you. MAKE him think about you. GET in his face a bit.
That's what's we're trying to emphasise.
And in turn I'd say that's what I have no issue with whatsoever.
Quoted message said:
Just sitting there like a lemon whinging about it being inevitable that cars squeeze past your bike when there isn't really space just shows that your road positioning is wrong.
On the one hand, yes, but on the other, have I actually whinged any such whinge? Not that I can see.
My point was very uncomplicated, and was that cyclists cannot guarantee being well clear of lorroes, period, by their own actions. Nothing more than that.
Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Clive George ("Clive George" <[email hidden]>😉 gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Mostly you'll find they're arguing with Brimstone and his daft assertions.
The daft assertions that are shared with u.r.c?
No, the daft assertion that:
"The lorry is bigger than the cyclist. Keep clear"
is actually all there is to avoiding unpleasant entanglements with lorries.
Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
I stay away from lorries as a car driver. I do so because they are bigger than me and I am likely to come off worst in a collision.
I'll give you an example.
On a motorway I will not position myself to the side of a lorry, if there is not space ahead of it for me to move into. The lorry driver is supposed to stay in his lane, but what if he nods off? What if he veers into my lane because he is reading or lighting a [censored]? What about the safety issues - tyre blowouts, heart attack etc?
But what if a lorry positions itself to the side of you? You don't always get the choice.
If, on a motorway, a lorry positions itself to the side of me, I slow down enough to give it space to pull in. I might well also pull in at the next services to try to find out why my car was unable to travel more swiftly than the lorry.
I recall seeing something on Top Gear (in the days before the entire staff who weren't called Clarkson moved to Five) about lorry side-swipes being a significant factor in accidents on motorways and dual carriageways, sometimes resulting from a car spending too long [1] in the lorry driver's blind spot.
