Careless drivers overtaking cyclists in Cambridge face fines

[DonkeyApple]

Hoofy said:

Well, I for one will be stopping cyclists to measure the distance before I overtake them. I will also ask them to keep still so they don't close the distance.

I tend to imagine cyclists are in their own cycle lane of a width I'm used to seeing around SW London. Assuming they're not actually in a marked cycle lane already. I've yet to clip a cyclist or have them cycle into me in 20+ years of driving.

Waste of time. Makes more sense to stick a broom 1.5m out of the passenger window to ensure proper judgement?

[Antony Moxey]

Toltec said:

Pistonheader101 said:

im almost certain bike lanes aren't 1.5m wide

They do not need to be, but the traffic lane next to it should be wide enough so you can pass a cyclist in the cycle lane at the requisit spacing without needing to leave yours.

Why?

[JuniorD]

What a refreshing thread so far; most respondents are pro enforcement of safe driving

[markymarkthree]

For those that couldn't be arsed to read the BBC story, it does say this.

"We will also be taking action with cyclists who take risks.
"We must respect each other when driving and riding, and we all have a responsibility to ensure the safety of others."
Officers will also be targeting cyclists who disobey traffic signs and lights, display reckless behaviour and fail to use lights in the dark.

[DaveH23]

JordanM200 said:

So basically, motorists will sit behind slow travelling cyclists for ages waiting for a safe pass, causing even more chaos and traffic in Cambridge. Just what the place needs, more traffic

The only alternatives I can think of is to pass dangerously or mow them down.

Am I missing something here but what are you suggesting otherwise?

Genuine question.

[DoubleD]

The police need to target bad road use by any road user.

[JordanM200]

DaveH23 said:

The only alternatives I can think of is to pass dangerously or mow them down.

Am I missing something here but what are you suggesting otherwise?

Genuine question.

Well the article is suggesting people are currently not giving enough room, correct? Not enough room = dangerously passing?

As others have said, it is OK for cyclists to run red lights, but if motorists would do this, it would be done with a bat of an eyelid? I think not. They don't pay roadtax, think they own the roads.

[JuniorD]

JordanM200 said:

DaveH23 said:

The only alternatives I can think of is to pass dangerously or mow them down.

Am I missing something here but what are you suggesting otherwise?

Genuine question.

Well the article is suggesting people are currently not giving enough room, correct? Not enough room = dangerously passing?

As others have said, it is OK for cyclists to run red lights, but if motorists would do this, it would be done with a bat of an eyelid? I think not. They don't pay roadtax, think they own the roads.

"They don't pay roadtax, think they own the roads".

With that you have just given the most perfect description of the average wky motorist.

[G321]

JordanM200 said:

As others have said, it is OK for cyclists to run red lights, but if motorists would do this, it would be done with a bat of an eyelid? I think not. They don't pay roadtax, think they own the roads.

Possibly the most uninformed stupid post I've read on here for a while

[WinstonWolf]

DaveH23 said:

JordanM200 said:

So basically, motorists will sit behind slow travelling cyclists for ages waiting for a safe pass, causing even more chaos and traffic in Cambridge. Just what the place needs, more traffic

The only alternatives I can think of is to pass dangerously or mow them down.

Am I missing something here but what are you suggesting otherwise?

Genuine question.

In Cambridge bicycles are *much* faster than cars, I take it you've never been there?

[DoubleD]

WinstonWolf said:

DaveH23 said:

JordanM200 said:

So basically, motorists will sit behind slow travelling cyclists for ages waiting for a safe pass, causing even more chaos and traffic in Cambridge. Just what the place needs, more traffic

The only alternatives I can think of is to pass dangerously or mow them down.

Am I missing something here but what are you suggesting otherwise?

Genuine question.

In Cambridge bicycles are *much* faster than cars, I take it you've never been there?

At certain times 1 is faster than the other

[JordanM200]

WinstonWolf said:

In Cambridge bicycles are *much* faster than cars, I take it you've never been there?

Only 5 days a week.

[WinstonWolf]

DoubleD said:

WinstonWolf said:

DaveH23 said:

JordanM200 said:

So basically, motorists will sit behind slow travelling cyclists for ages waiting for a safe pass, causing even more chaos and traffic in Cambridge. Just what the place needs, more traffic

The only alternatives I can think of is to pass dangerously or mow them down.

Am I missing something here but what are you suggesting otherwise?

Genuine question.

In Cambridge bicycles are *much* faster than cars, I take it you've never been there?

At certain times 1 is faster than the other

I live fairly close, I've yet to go there and not think FFS I wish I was on my bike. A car might be quicker when everyone is in bed, the rest of the time it's perpetual gridlock.

[captain_cynic]

JuniorD said:

"They don't pay roadtax, think they own the roads".

With that you have just given the most perfect description of the average wky motorist.

Except that a motorist, wky or otherwise, pays road tax (and fuel excise). And seeing as they're paying... doesn't that grant a measure of ownership?

[heebeegeetee]

captain_cynic said:

JuniorD said:

"They don't pay roadtax, think they own the roads".

With that you have just given the most perfect description of the average wky motorist.

Except that a motorist, wky or otherwise, pays road tax (and fuel excise). And seeing as they're paying... doesn't that grant a measure of ownership?

Send me a flock of whoosh parrots if I'm falling for the usual, but do I need to point out that road tax was abolished in 1937 by Winston Churchill?

The roads are funded by general taxation and council tax, so the more tax overall and the more council tax you pay, the more you pay for the roads.

[DonkeyApple]

captain_cynic said:

Except that a motorist, wky or otherwise, pays road tax (and fuel excise). And seeing as they're paying... doesn't that grant a measure of ownership?

Nope. VED is just a fee to use a car on the road. Fuel duty is just a tax on how much fuel you use.

The basic road itself is there for any number of legitimate uses and has nothing to do with what mode of transport you are personally choosing to use on it. And usage is certainly not linked in any way by the amount of tax an individual contributes to the system.

Can you imagine a system whereby priority usage of the roads was defined by how much tax you paid?

[TooMany2cvs]

captain_cynic said:

Except that a motorist, wky or otherwise, pays road tax (and fuel excise). And seeing as they're paying... doesn't that grant a measure of ownership?

Many cyclists will, of course, pay VED...
But VED isn't paid on a personal basis - it's paid per-vehicle, and many cars are £0.

It's perfectly legal to run a £0 VED car on £0 excise fuel, too.

[Rawwr]

I've been held up by a cyclist on occasion. Some times its been for as much 20 seconds but I came to the conclusion it was better to take 20 seconds out of my driving than risk putting a complete stranger in a wheelchair. Then again, I have decent senses of perspective, rationality and consideration.

[bigdom]

It's obviously taken a while to get to that part of the country, it's nothing new.

https://www.hampshire.police.uk/news/general/give-...

[Scottie - NW]

Rawwr said:

Then again, I have decent senses of perspective, rationality and consideration.

But don't the vast majority also think that of themselves?

I don't disagree with the rest.