doog442

For the benefit of the forum I don't cycle in a group. At the moment all I'm doing is pootling down the shop on the odd occasion on a 40 year old Raleigh. When I do head out on my road bike please say hello.

You're wrong. The onus is on the cyclist to only move over when the cyclist thinks its safe. The HC actually states it several times 'if you can do so safely' There's no mention of move over just in case the driver behind thinks its safe and he's done a driving test. This is nothing new and has been practised by responsible cyclists for years. If a cyclist is proceeding normally on the nearside then absolutely the onus is now on the driver to overtake safely but a cyclist can retain primary if he feels its not safe for a vehicle to overtake (car doors, hazards, pot holes - all those things you might not see from behind) These things work in tandem, its a joint process just not down to you barrelling up from the rear and drawing your own conclusion . The Dutch Reach is advisory but not law. There's nothing about opening the door from the outside as you state, its about using your far hand to release the handle from the inside and applies to drivers and passengers .Perhaps do your research first ? As for door zones, there are numerous vehicles where its impossible for a cyclist to see if someones in the drivers seat ...the onus is on drivers not to open their doors into cyclists or vehicles. For cyclists its best practice and a preventative measure to avoid it because its hurts quite frankly.

New found freedom ? Yep she looks dressed for a late January day in the UK That road also looks decidedly dry and devoid of any winter detritus. The grass also appears slightly dried out, well before last weeks rule. You might want to try harder Nothwithstanding the date stamp on the video is 18th September lol

Why would a cyclist unnecessarily impede others if there's no traffic behind ? Who is being impeded here. The rule appears simple, move over if its safe. Are you suggesting cyclist should just move over anyway despite the safety aspect. It's the cyclists decision to determine if they think its safe for them to progress not yours. How can you be in a position to determine what's safe or not when following behind. The Dutch Reach is taught to new drivers in the Netherlands. Its not about mobility or the lack of it its about thinking about cyclists and taking the effort to look behind. Your petition is ill advised. If you can't explain your issue in 300 words then what's the point, it's full of holes and totally reactionary.

I don't agree and I won't sign it Matthew. In your petition you have ignored large parts of S72 in your attempt to get cyclists to move out of your way - are you really that entitled ? Namely if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads. I'm seeing a pattern here which is MOVE OVER TO THE LEFT and OVERTAKE. Why should a cyclist stick to the left of a lane and in the door zone when nothing is behind them ? Surely they have more chance of being seen by oncoming traffic or traffic pulling out of junctions ahead if they are more visible and in the centre of a lane. As you're clearly on a learning curve research Door Zone and the Dutch Reach.

People get upset because its an ES sub forum and they more than likely own an ES. Most people like to think they've made the right choice and probably come here to share in their enjoyment. I appreciate many, if not most Clarkson reviews will invite comment , debate and a bit of controversy however getting it rammed down your throat from non owners would more than likely go down like a lead balloon on any forum anywhere on the planet . I'm amazed the response has been so civil but that's a reflection on the forum and probably why it happens again and again and again . Has Doug DeMuro reviewed it yet

Haha, no worries . I just remember it was a long way from the handlebar down to that gear shifter, they really couldn't have made it more difficult. As you say it looked cool and that was all that counted.

Its called Bikeability now. 3.5 million children and families have undertaken these courses apparently and a further £18 million was granted for further training last April. Likewise I remember doing the cycling proficiency test, I think we got a badge at the end of it but I was let loose long before that, as we all were back then. Raleigh chopper being the weapon of choice

Which really is immaterial in the big scheme of things on this thread. For example your average ES owner probably wants 4 doors, more practicality, lower VED , lower Insurance, bigger bootspace etc. These cars are chalk and cheese, I appreciate it wasn't you but how did an LC or RCF get into this debate. They don't belong on the same discussion other than a non ES owner yet again throwing a curve ball into the thread to try and prove a point. The OP's opening gambit was "Hello ESers " .... not "Hello TossErs" (not aimed at you Arnett)

That's a better post. As I said I didn't misconstrue anything, I simply repeated almost word for word what you said last night. I agree my following post contained a hypothetical situation involving old folk and you now mention blind, deaf, old. mentally incapacitated. So here's an idea. Why don't you (or all of us ) assume that every pedestrian at a junction falls into the vulnerable category. For example we allegedly have over 10 million disabled folk in this country for example and 12 million aged under 16. If we assume this and drive accordingly the country will be a better place. I'm not advocating pausing at every junction just in case, slowing up traffic and taking it to the extreme. I've just driven into town and back to drop someone off. Its Monday the High street is busy and do you know what - the sky didn't fall in. On that trip I thought of this very subject and although it didn't happen I do foresee what you and quite a few have mentioned. Confusion, not really in the fact that 'is that person waiting to cross' more that person / pedestrian having little or no concept of the new rules. As we know pedestrians don't have to read the highway code, its only used for mitigation one way or the other when accidents or Incidents happen and to highlight if they were in the right or wrong (or their actions contributed to the collision). So although I generally agree with the new concept, I agree there has been a lack of publicity that will contribute towards said confusion. Now you may be looking at this from a busy city perspective, where I daresay hordes of pedestrians can make things extremely difficult at uncontrolled junctions or crossings, however in my experience many of these are controlled but appreciate not all are. Football matches and large events will be very Interesting, so yes there will be areas where it just doesn't work where priority will be wrongly assumed and where pedestrians will simply cut corners and take liberties.

Who would say such a thing ..I seriously thought that accolade was reserved for my IS200t. I look at Lexus like a big pink cuddly comfort blanket, a little like my GP told me Tramadol would be (he was wrong ). I don't necessarily agree with the way its gone in the UK with the brand but hopefully it will still be there when I decide I need it again.

I've quoted you word for word dear Linas, no misconstruing. Can you see in the cold light of day how your words look. I think its apt that children should think 'worse case scenario', its just unfortunate that you are coming over as that very scenario. I seriously doubt for a minute that you're like that when driving and you're probably a lovely bloke. These threads always follow the same tired route, a debate starts, you get challenged by a few ,you robustly defend your corner then your views get more extreme. Seriously mate also think of the grannies and grandads out there who simply want to cross the road . Who shouldn't have to presume the speeding motorist they can't see or hear is 'in the right'. They shouldn't have to assume that traffic simply won't slow down on the approach to a junction because they somehow can't convey to you that they're not stood at a junction for any other reason other than to cross the damned thing.

It's usually pretty obvious to tell if a pedestrian is waiting to cross a side road. I've got this great idea for teaching schoolkids. It's called 'Think Linas' before you cross. The guy who by his own words won't slow down, won't bother figuring anything out, thinks you don't exist, won't stop even when you do start to cross and has no comprehension of the Highway code or Road Traffic Act. Remember Linas is protected by 14 airbags and a metal frame (his words), you are simply flesh, bone and someones son or daughter.

You are devolving all responsibility of the driver Linas. You clearly stated It is pedestrian responsibility to make sure it is safe to cross... regardless of speed of the vehicle. This simply isn't true. Pedestrians come in all shapes and forms. The onus is not on the pedestrian to avoid something they cannot see or hear further up the road or out of sight and who's breaking the speed limit, the onus (backed up by the Road Traffic Act) is on the motorist. That's why you do a driving test, why you have Insurance, that's why you have to adhere to a whole raft of road traffic laws.

duplicate

The pedestrian can only do so much. You can only look so far and you're completely ignoring the duty of drivers to keep to the speed limit, not drive dangerously or without due care and attention. When a pedestrian is struck and killed, seriously Injured or just run over resulting in injury, if there's any indication that the vehicle was speeding they are more often than not more culpable than the poor sod they hit. One is guidance (Highway code for pedestrians), the other is law for motorists.

I've seriously avoided meter readings John, I'm not saying the heating hasn't been on, I'm just putting off that massive increase in the direct debit. I think we all have it coming unfortunately. I'm with Octopus and they don't take prisoners

Both my parents were in Suez. Any loss of life has to be regrettable I think we all agree but Its a long reach from 'wiping out civilisations' to these incidents. Lets be honest there have been more so called civilian deaths attributed to the British army in NI since then ...can we expect a lecture when Linas reaches that page in the history book ?

Apologies will look back on the thread. Is it worth a visit? I think we all have a cross to bear as nations in our dim and distant past. Are electric prices high over there as well, I must admit I've avoided meter readings for the last 6 months.

I just thought it was odd you were lecturing on the ills of the British Empire whilst living in and paying taxes to a country who wiped the local indigenous population out.

Who did we massacre between 52 and 63 ?

There are plenty of 30 mph roads with bends, junctions and the like where a vehicle has no appreciable line of site ahead. Many motorists speed. If you haven't come across the same scenario then I'm calling complete BS. However to comment on my own situation when you weren't there is absolutely ridiculous, give your head a shake.

Is it British bashing Sunday per chance Do I bookmark it ? Las Palmas in "Spain" I guess. What do they teach their pupils in an Island off the coast of Africa.

I did but that was back in the school playground of a British Army school in Germany about 50 years ago. Then I saw Donald Sutherland playing Sgt Oddball in "Kelly's Heroes" and realised it wasn't all down to us Don't hit me with them negative waves

You might be surprised. Ask the 54 member states of the British Commonwealth why they choose to remain. They are nearly all ex colonies and comprise most of the ex British Empire. I'm not saying everything under the umbrella of the British Empire was good, it wasn't of course but having visited many they are quite proud of their historic links to the UK.