Police pull over 'two abrest' cyclists - argument ensues

[spookly]

kambites said:

spookly said:

Or perhaps I have somewhere to travel to, and all the hobbyist cyclists snarl up the entire road network in that area and cause big delays.
Maybe they should stick to tracks or velodromes. Or do what I do and use a mountain bike to ride somewhere that I'm not holding anyone up, or likely to get poleaxed by 2 tons of metal.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-cyclist, I'm anti-bell ends who hold me up on the road for their hobby/enjoyment. So the same goes for horses, pedestrians who walk into moving traffic, and HGVs/coaches driving unnecessarily down narrow roads. If you are cycling for transport fine, these people aren't.

I'm not a cyclist, but I do sometimes go out for a drive just for fun... as I'd imagine do most people on Pistonheads. How is that any different?

Do you drive up hills at 5mph with a huge trail of cars behind you, then do 20mph in an NSL, then get to the heady heights of 40mph downhill? No?? So not at all the same then.

ETA: Yes, that makes people in any mode of transport who dawdle at well below the speed limit without good reason just as annoying.

Edited by spookly on Monday 22 May 19:57

[J4CKO]

No need, I cycle a few times a week and even when out with someone else, unless its dead clear, single file or if you are two abreast, just go back to single file, a little wave of acknowledgement and be seen to be making an effort not to be in the way.

That looks like a fast road, why hold people up because it says so in the highway code that you can do, why rub people up the wrong way, next time angry man encounters a cyclist it may be me, with all the pent up frustration and righteous indignation from dealing with you, no thanks you pair of wkers, ditto the Red light Jumpers, I dont want lumping in with you as I do it properly an considerately, or at least I go out of my way to try to, we arent all tossers looking for a debate.

Now, I dont like being treated like st or called names but if people didnt do this then the cyclist wouldnt be so demonised.

I think there is a real fk you mentality in this country, no indicating, shopping trolleys at right angles whilst staring and biscuits like a stunned mullet in the supermarket, there are 60 odd million people in this country, try and go about your business as considerately as you can, you arent fking special !!!

[standards]

sinbaddio said:

spaximus said:

What got up my nose on this is the cyclist was spoiling for a fight. He says I am going to enjoy this, or words to that effect before the officer had said a word.

They then start trading comments, the cyclist, "I have read the law"

Highway code 66 does say "you should not ride two abreast on narrow or busy roads" , the cyclist said it was not a "B Road". I cannot see a mention of the B road being an issue.

The problem is the Highway code is advisory in many areas so legally I think the cyclist was correct in they were within the law. The policeman was correct in saying that drivers do take risks to pass and perhaps a better idea to ride in single file said nicely might have been better.

To me it was two wrongs, but with helmet cams and attitudes no one looks good in this.

Agree totally. The cyclist was after a barney, and the copper isn't going to back down is he? Only thing I would add is that it looked like a fairly busy road to me, but how do you quantify that?

As someone who tries hard to be civilised towards vulnerable road users such as cyclists in this case I was pleased to see them spoken to. In answer to your question-one with cars travelling at 60mph would definitely qualify...?

On a personal note is it just me that finds both their attitude and tone annoying? Disengage snob mode.

[hashtag]

venquessa said:

Just to be clear the Highway Code currently says:

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

Being a cyclist, a pedestrian, a car driver and a motorbiker, the one thing that annoys me more than anything with cyclists like those in the video is this....

You are a vulnerable road user. Act like it. Ride defensively.

Stop pushing your safety into the hands of others and then whining when it get endangered.

Stop looking for confrontation and start looking for cooperation.

You can know the highway code line for line, but never forget the rule that comes above all of it. "Don't be a dick."... and "Don't hit anything / get hit by anything." Doesn't matter which line of the highway code the other driver forgot if you have to try and explain it to him from a hospital bed.

This totally well written

[venquessa]

plasticpig said:

Either that or a driver who likes trying to wind cyclists up.

I've done this once, it was fun, silly childish fun, like cow tipping, but still... It's amazing how you can motivate the slower ones to get up that hill faster.

[poing]

NinjaPower said:

kambites said:

swisstoni said:

I'm with the policeman on this. Cycling in line is clearly the most considerate way, if not illegal.

Why? Yo need a bigger gap to overtake two cyclists who are line-astern than two who are side-by-side.

+1

If you pass cyclists, you should pretty much end up on the other side of the road anyway if you give them the correct amount of room, which means you can only pass when there is no incoming traffic.

You will be on the wrong side of the road for less time passing two abrest than two in a line.

If you try to pass them without crossing over the line, then the chances are you aren't leaving them enough room.

I'm with you guys on this one. The people that think it's easier to pass 2 cyclists in a line are also likely the same people that don't give enough room.

The cyclist was being a tiny bit of an idiot but the policeman should have very clearly known the law the before he stopped them. I'd rather not be stopped then have to wait for the cop to read up on the reason he's stopped me, especially when the book he gets out is a bloody highway code!

That wasn't a good use of police resources.

Edited by poing on Monday 22 May 20:07

[Hungrymc]

hashtag said:

venquessa said:

Just to be clear the Highway Code currently says:

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

Being a cyclist, a pedestrian, a car driver and a motorbiker, the one thing that annoys me more than anything with cyclists like those in the video is this....

You are a vulnerable road user. Act like it. Ride defensively.

Stop pushing your safety into the hands of others and then whining when it get endangered.

Stop looking for confrontation and start looking for cooperation.

You can know the highway code line for line, but never forget the rule that comes above all of it. "Don't be a dick."... and "Don't hit anything / get hit by anything." Doesn't matter which line of the highway code the other driver forgot if you have to try and explain it to him from a hospital bed.

This totally well written

But, but, what about risk compensation? The safer you try to be, the more danger you are actually in (or some such bks).

Absolutely agree, you have to look after yourself first and foremost.

[CrgT16]

I like cycling but a great % of cyclist are right picks!! Self righteous, tts!! It comes not be doing anything illegal. It comes to common courtesy towards others. Simple as that. It's a simple concept that has been lost over the ages!

Now I do get that a massive % of driver's are so poor and also are ducks when encountering other road users so it's a 2 way street.

I tend to cycle at hours where roads are not as busy for my own safety and to not interfere with normal road traffic. I would be mortified if I was cycling and I would be the reason of a long queue of traffic... a lot of lorry drivers or tractors pull to the side of the road to let faster traffic go past. I don't pretend to be a professional cyclist so as a hobbyist I can see the problem of pulling to the side if necessary... I have done that a few times and driver's were appreciative, my pride remained unaffected.

Said angry birds, I mean cyclists, would be fuming if they had to follow a slow lorry on a narrow road without chance to overtake. They would not stand being slowed down!! That's what's ironic in a similar situation they would probably be worse than the driver's they complain about.

Anyway good for them who ever they are on the road be courteous and treat others like you want to be treated and driver/pedestrian/cyclist road user just stop being wkers.... you know who you are!

[Antony Moxey]

spookly said:

Antony Moxey said:

spookly said:

Up in the Mendip hills you see hundreds of cyclists getting in the way in big groups, and as soon as you pass one group you'll find another within a minute or two. They never do anything to let traffic pass. I get that it is a nice place to ride, walk, or drive, but they can be a menace in some areas.
I never get annoyed by a single cyclist, but when they are unnecessarily two abreast, or in a big pack, it's just antisocial.

So 'hundreds of cyclists' is antisocial? That's a bit ironic isn't it? How about never letting traffic past - has it occured to you that they ARE the traffic? Perhaps it's you who is being antisocial considering them to be a 'menace' that you desperately need to pass?

Or perhaps I have somewhere to travel to, and all the hobbyist cyclists snarl up the entire road network in that area and cause big delays.
Maybe they should stick to tracks or velodromes. Or do what I do and use a mountain bike to ride somewhere that I'm not holding anyone up, or likely to get poleaxed by 2 tons of metal.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-cyclist, I'm anti-bell ends who hold me up on the road for their hobby/enjoyment. So the same goes for horses, pedestrians who walk into moving traffic, and HGVs/coaches driving unnecessarily down narrow roads. If you are cycling for transport fine, these people aren't.

Of course on you will know the purpose of your trip, but even so I'd guess it wasn't desperate and I'd also guess most of the other motorists' weren't either. And even if you did have somewhere to be, so what, just because you're in your car it doesn't make you any more important than any other road users who don't share your mode of travel. If, and it's only an if, the majority of motorists were just out for bimble, albeit a slightly faster one than the cyclists, then why should the cyclists stick to tracks, why don't the motorists instead?

[saaby93]

Oh for goodness sake
I'm just listening to the 2 abreast isn't single file argument
Why is the radio blaring too?
There was a huge queue of traffic causing people queue
Didn't seem to be much when they were pulled over

So long as theyre in single file when there is a bunch of traffic no probs

Edited by saaby93 on Monday 22 May 20:19

[anonymous-user]

ash73 said:

NinjaPower said:

did you even watch the video? The officer tried to tell them they were committing an office (which they weren't) and then unsurprisingly couldn't find the relevant legislation to back up his claim, so the cyclists were legally correct.

Yes I did, and unlike you I understood it. The highway code says single file on busy roads, and they were on a busy road riding two abreast, end of discussion. Yes he took too long to find it, but his advice was correct, and they didn't listen. Who'd want his job these days, having to deal with idiots all the time. It would drive me mad.

Are you sure about that?

The Highway Code says 'should' ride single file on a busy road, not 'must'.

As you are well aware, the instruction 'must' is the one that has to be obeyed.

'Should' is optional but recommended.

The officer was trying to tell them they were committing an offence when they weren't.

[Fastpedeller]

J4CKO said:

why hold people up because it says so in the highway code that you can do, why rub people up the wrong way, you arent fking special !!!

Hmm, so in every town across the country all motorists who are blocking the road and are a lot slower should pull into the nearest car park to show consideration to cyclists and let them pass? No I thought not somehow! But of course cars are special and should be at the front, and (despite the reasons demonstrating that 2 abreast is safer) they are also correct, even if the constable thinks (more than 2 abreast means more than single file) I despair

[TooMany2cvs]

spookly said:

Or perhaps I have somewhere to travel to, and all the hobbyist cyclists snarl up the entire road network in that area and cause big delays.

Or perhaps you're just out for a drive, and the people on bikes are travelling to somewhere?

[spookly]

TooMany2cvs said:

spookly said:

Or perhaps I have somewhere to travel to, and all the hobbyist cyclists snarl up the entire road network in that area and cause big delays.

Or perhaps you're just out for a drive, and the people on bikes are travelling to somewhere?

f I was just out for a drive it wouldn't really bother me, I also would never be in someone's way when the road ahead is clear... so it isn't at all comparable.
I don't go out for a hoon in a slow moving vehicle that will cause queues to form behind me.

[jjr1]

As a cyclist, a motorcyclist and a car driver, I think the Policeman was a .......

They were just riding two abreast as allowed in the highway code and making sure that the cars had to consider overtaking them as opposed to skimming them. This is their right and is also a good way of defensive riding. The policeman on the other hand was a clueless trying to read from his copy of the highway code and telling them they were wrong, when they were not.

As a motorcyclist I am embarrassed most about the Policeman as he should have had empathy for fellow two wheeled riders knowing how dangerous it is to be out there with the average car driver not giving a fk about anyone, other than their next text message......

[Hackney]

Just because you're *allowed* to ride two abreast doesn't mean you should.

(as with many "rules" both on the roads and in general)

The road, despite not much traffic on it is a "busy road" it also has a central reservation. Passing single file cyclists would be easy and would not require going right over to the other lane, passing two cyclists side by side would possibly require crossing the whole central area.

So, basically, be polite, don't be a dick.

[standards]

J4CKO said:

No need, I cycle a few times a week and even when out with someone else, unless its dead clear, single file or if you are two abreast, just go back to single file, a little wave of acknowledgement and be seen to be making an effort not to be in the way.

That looks like a fast road, why hold people up because it says so in the highway code that you can do, why rub people up the wrong way, next time angry man encounters a cyclist it may be me, with all the pent up frustration and righteous indignation from dealing with you, no thanks you pair of wkers, ditto the Red light Jumpers, I dont want lumping in with you as I do it properly an considerately, or at least I go out of my way to try to, we arent all tossers looking for a debate.

Now, I dont like being treated like st or called names but if people didnt do this then the cyclist wouldnt be so demonised.

I think there is a real fk you mentality in this country, no indicating, shopping trolleys at right angles whilst staring and biscuits like a stunned mullet in the supermarket, there are 60 odd million people in this country, try and go about your business as considerately as you can, you arent fking special !!!

Enjoyed that rant. Trouble is I think some of the people you describe are 'special'...

[CoolC]

'causing other drivers to drive carelessly'

Nobody causes other drivers to drive carelessly, careless drivers decide to drive carelessly.

[J4CKO]

Fastpedeller said:

J4CKO said:

why hold people up because it says so in the highway code that you can do, why rub people up the wrong way, you arent fking special !!!

Hmm, so in every town across the country all motorists who are blocking the road and are a lot slower should pull into the nearest car park to show consideration to cyclists and let them pass? No I thought not somehow! But of course cars are special and should be at the front, and (despite the reasons demonstrating that 2 abreast is safer) they are also correct, even if the constable thinks (more than 2 abreast means more than single file) I despair

Oh give over, a bike is two feet wide, maneuverable and weighs 20 pounds or so, I should know as I ride one, and I drive a car, rarely do cars get in my way on the bike given they go much faster 99 percent of the time and when they dont I just ride round them.

2 abreast safer, riding along with a tailback of pissed off drivers, perhaps revert to single file occasionally and show willing to not get int he way, instead of doggedly quoting the highway code, a bit of give and take ?

And like the selective quoting to make my "you arent special comment" look like I am applying it only to cyclists, I was suggesting it is endemic to this country where people go round oblivious to anyone else but themselves and their needs.

I am a cyclist and normally am advocating the cyclists angle but why piss people off and come across like that, if a cyclist is coming across as annoying to another cyclist who understands what it is like, what chance do we stand with Mr or Mrs angry hate everybody looking for something to be offended about ?

If its so safe two abreast, do you not go out on your own ?

[GetCarter]

According to the Highway Code, cyclist should “never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends”.

Blimey, in your dreams round here. Four abreast on a single track road today.