Driver clips cyclist, doesn't tweet about it

[BMWBen]

aizvara said:

simoid said:

Shouldn't the cyclist afford the other cyclist the same space as if he were overtaking a car? Seems a bit hypocritical...

Only if cars and bicycles pose an equivalent risk to the cyclist when overtaking. I would argue that they don't.

Also the cyclist is normally aware of what matters to a bike, so may be able to accurately judge whether or not it is safe to pass close.

Additionally, when people are riding in a group there are formal methods and mechanics that make riding close safer that everyone follows.

[Mill Wheel]

Parsnip said:

Don't take my word for it.

That picture is obviously not taken in the real world... note the complete absence of any potholes, which force cyclists to ride further out than would be necessary!

I don't mind vehicles passing close if not too fast - but feel they are taking a liberty since they don't know if I am OK with it or not - and really should be more considerate.

Cyclists too need to be more considerate - when riding two abreast, they should not be wandering over the road as some seem to do, and should not inconvenience other road users without good reason.
Why not ease up if you know vehicles wish to pass, and a good opportunity presents itself!

[mybrainhurts]

Dippy bird driver and a bloody bicyclist...

Let them fight for it, I say...

[T0nup]

Parsnip said:

I have already paid the VED for all the bikes on PH, so we are all good - could expand it to everyone in the UK - will have to have a dig in my wallet for £0 again.

How do you propose the licencing? Imagine the scene: Little Timmy (aged 7) runs downstairs on christmas morning to find Santa has left a nice, shiny new bike under the tree, only little he can't ride it, because the DVLA is shut till Tuesday and he needs to wait while he sends off a load of forms. It would cost a fortune to implement and where would it lead? People having to register and fit a ID plate to every crappy rustbucket bike they have in their garage? Unless of course that 1991 Raleigh mountain bike in your garage is SORNed?

Road cycling proficiency test... Make it compulsory. And if little Timmy is allowed on a public road at the age of 7 I'd have a serious talk with his parents, though I see where you are coming from.

I never said any of this would happen... It's just my opinion that if a bicycle is capable of breaking a posted 30 speed limit on a public road, and an experienced biker going through the umpteen dozen gears in a road race can certainly achieve that, they should at least be forced to have insurance which covers not just their sorry asses, but everyone elses and third party property as well. (And no I am not aware of how few accidents are actually caused by cyclists, I don't give a st)

If many of you disagree, then that is fine, disagree. I just get pissed off when cyclists who 9 times out of 10 are on the road out and about for their own enjoyment, bash the motorist who most of the time is trying to get somewhere not because they want to, but because they have to.

Bite me.

[MrTrilby]

T0nup said:

And if little Timmy is allowed on a public road at the age of 7 I'd have a serious talk with his parents


.

What would you say to his parents? I'm just curious because I routinely cycle on the road with my 6 and 9 year old - we cycled into town for some shopping this afternoon: quicker and more pleasant than messing with the car.

[Seight_Returns]

MrTrilby said:

What would you say to his parents? I'm just curious because I routinely cycle on the road with my 6 and 9 year old - we cycled into town for some shopping this afternoon: quicker and more pleasant than messing with the car.

Mine are 5 and 7 - and albeit only on carefully chosen roads and then with both appropriate protective positioning from me - I do the same.

[T0nup]

Remember, you asked...

At age 5 and 7... On bikes, on public roads? And the thread is discussing the misgivings or otherwise of a cyclist that was clipped by a bint on a COUNTRY road?... Very brave, or very stupid parents in my view.

I have no idea what it feels like to lose a child, but I do know that it would destroy me to know that I might have been at least half way responsible for my childs death or serious injury by allowing them to ride on the roads as they are. Yeah sure, let em eat dirt climb trees and scrape their knees and do all the other stuff that kids are supposed to do... But for crying out loud do they really NEED to be on the road at that age?

Just my opinion, you do as you see fit.

[hadenough!]

I rode my bike on the road at that age and didn't die...

[T0nup]

Lucky you.

[MrTrilby]

T0nup said:

Remember, you asked...

At age 5 and 7... On bikes, on public roads?

Shock horror phone the Daily Mail! Fortunately I'm able to differentiate between roads that I don't think are safe enough for a competent adult to cycle on, those that are, and those that are safe enough for an accompanied competent child to cycle on. As you point out there are risks associated with everything we do. Kids *need* to do very little, but life would be pretty tedious if we only did what they *need*. Plus, I like to think that by giving my kids lots of practice under my supervision on relatively safe roads, when the time comes that they fly the nest and begin cycling on their own, they're less likely to become a KSI statistic and more likely to enjoy a fun activity.

Out of interest, you suggest mandatory cycling proficiency would be good, yet you don't think children should be on the road. Isn't that a bit of a contradiction? What used to be called "Cycling Proficiency" is aimed at 9-11 year olds, and takes place on the road.

[T0nup]

MrTrilby said:

...Fortunately I'm able to differentiate between roads that I don't think are safe enough for a competent adult to cycle on, those that are, and those that are safe enough for an accompanied competent child to cycle on...

Out of interest, you suggest mandatory cycling proficiency would be good, yet you don't think children should be on the road. Isn't that a bit of a contradiction? What used to be called "Cycling Proficiency" is aimed at 9-11 year olds, and takes place on the road.

Good for you

Yep, 9 to 11 year olds... Not 5 or 7. How is that a contradiction? By 9 most kids have woken up to the fact that thier actions have consequences, and that they will (If they aren't already) be expected to brunt some responsibilities. At 7 typically most kids just wanna play, have fun and push the limits, and are still throwing tantrums in the supermarket isle when you deny them sweets. I generalise of course, and I have no doubt someone will spike up how their kid was doing MENSA tests at 4 years or something.

The cycling proficiency test when I was a kid, was everyone expecting to take the test got a copy of the Highway code (Actally I think it was an abridged version made more relevant to cycle riding... Dunno if they still do that) Then a local bobby used to assess all the kids in the play ground to ensure they could control thier bikes, start stop, indicate using a hand signal without falling off etc. I remember our school had a mock road marked out around the edge with left and right junctions and a mini round about. A teacher used to stand with red amber and green boards to simulate traffic lights. That was funny, but it gave us all the general idea (As if many of us hadn't see our dads drive and already knew red meant stop) before we were allowed anywhere near the road... And you got a certificate.

Pretty much none of the above is likely happen now I guess, the bean counters wouldn't allow it, which is a great shame.

[IanMorewood]

Doh so you hit someone, don't stop and then tweet about it? Silly woman throw the book at her (and bookcase too).

[MrTrilby]

T0nup said:

The cycling proficiency test when I was a kid, was everyone expecting to take the test got a copy of the Highway code ... ...And you got a certificate.
Pretty much none of the above is likely happen now I guess, the bean counters wouldn't allow it, which is a great shame.

Actually it does happen, pretty much as you remember, in pretty much every school (speaking for my county, most of London, and most of Scotland). And the reason schools pick a minimum age of 9 is because that's the age when you can reasonably safely assume the entire class is up to it, and you only need 2 adults for a dozen kids, on the road. It's simply not economical to pay a couple of adults to offer cycle training to only a couple of kids in an entire class. However, it's a bit different when an unpaid parent can make an informed decision on the behaviour of a single child, on a much quieter road, with 1:1 supervision - generalising to say that because some 7 year olds cannot cope then none can is pretty unhelpful, wrong, and takes away individual responsibility from the parent moving us closer to a nanny state.

[T0nup]

MrTrilby said:

Actually it does happen, pretty much as you remember, in pretty much every school (speaking for my county, most of London, and most of Scotland).

Good, pleased to hear it... Perhaps some adults could learn some lessons from the kids and younger riders then.

[BMWBen]

T0nup said:

Parsnip said:

I have already paid the VED for all the bikes on PH, so we are all good - could expand it to everyone in the UK - will have to have a dig in my wallet for £0 again.

How do you propose the licencing? Imagine the scene: Little Timmy (aged 7) runs downstairs on christmas morning to find Santa has left a nice, shiny new bike under the tree, only little he can't ride it, because the DVLA is shut till Tuesday and he needs to wait while he sends off a load of forms. It would cost a fortune to implement and where would it lead? People having to register and fit a ID plate to every crappy rustbucket bike they have in their garage? Unless of course that 1991 Raleigh mountain bike in your garage is SORNed?

Road cycling proficiency test... Make it compulsory. And if little Timmy is allowed on a public road at the age of 7 I'd have a serious talk with his parents, though I see where you are coming from.

I never said any of this would happen... It's just my opinion that if a bicycle is capable of breaking a posted 30 speed limit on a public road, and an experienced biker going through the umpteen dozen gears in a road race can certainly achieve that, they should at least be forced to have insurance which covers not just their sorry asses, but everyone elses and third party property as well. (And no I am not aware of how few accidents are actually caused by cyclists, I don't give a st)

If many of you disagree, then that is fine, disagree. I just get pissed off when cyclists who 9 times out of 10 are on the road out and about for their own enjoyment, bash the motorist who most of the time is trying to get somewhere not because they want to, but because they have to.

Bite me.

If they're going through umpteen dozen gears in a road race then they're a member of British Cycling and therefore have 3rd party insurance.

Pistonheads: Ignorance matters.

[anonymous-user]

T0nup said:

I never said any of this would happen... It's just my opinion that if a bicycle is capable of breaking a posted 30 speed limit on a public road, and an experienced biker going through the umpteen dozen gears in a road race can certainly achieve that, they should at least be forced to have insurance which covers not just their sorry asses, but everyone elses and third party property as well. (And no I am not aware of how few accidents are actually caused by cyclists, I don't give a st)

Yes you don't give a st, why would you? I mean its not as if cyclists being knocked off really matter unless they dare to get in your way, have I got that wrong?

T0nup said:

If many of you disagree, then that is fine, disagree. I just get pissed off when cyclists who 9 times out of 10 are on the road out and about for their own enjoyment, bash the motorist who most of the time is trying to get somewhere not because they want to, but because they have to.

Bite me.

....no it seems I haven't Bite you, why because you think the average cyclist will lose it reading your silly opinions, nope you must try harder. Anger management would be your best bet then perhaps a spot of cycling to relax.

[Neonblau]

T0nup said:

It's just my opinion that if a bicycle is capable of breaking a posted 30 speed limit on a public road,

Speed limit applies to motor vehicles, not bikes.

[andy118run]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000...

Convicted her of failing to stop after an accident and failing to report it but acquitted of driving without due care and attention.
She was ordered to pay a £337 fine, £300 in costs and was given seven points on her licence.

[budgie smuggler]

andy118run said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-25000...

Convicted her of failing to stop after an accident and failing to report it but acquitted of driving without due care and attention.
She was ordered to pay a £337 fine, £300 in costs and was given seven points on her licence.

So she overtakes on a blind corner and hits somebody in the oncoming carriageway and that is not driving without due care?

What annoys me is that in the TV interviews I've seen she only seems to show remorse for the tweet, not the actual incident.

@benjkendall said:

Emma Way refused to comment as she left court, saying she had signed an exclusive TV deal.

Piss is boiling...

Edited by budgie smuggler on Tuesday 19th November 13:34

[CAPP0]

TheEnd said:

Kinda cute though...

They've obviously changed the picture on the link above since you wrote that.