Safe Speed Forums

Damn it! There you go again, telling me stuff I thought I knew about, although I did say I haven't tried one yet in my defence

I thought they were so bendy and softy/plasticy you could just dodge 'till your heart's content and they would only stroke cars like a feather? Or do they act like a clacker as you slap all the cars racing past the queue

Sorry, I shouldn't laugh.

I think this thread has had everything from factual, informative, good debate to anger, hatred and strawman, (sorry about my input there btw). All that's left is love. Any offers?

I forgot to welcome Grumps and Mag, if I may use the short version. & Always nice to have people on board from the cycling area so we can thrash out these and other issues

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Nonsense indeed!


Why are you so selective with what you respond to, weepej?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Like I said, absolute nonsense.

Steve. You have highlighted a situation where obeying the law puts life at risk. Do you think that that excuses lawbreaking in those circumstances?

Also, to me, it beggars belief that vehicles with such large and dangerous blind spots should be plying the roads at all. It is not as if the technology, in the way of quite cheap cameras didn't exist. Damn it, a suitably positioned piece of pre Christian technology would enable the driver to see a cyclist on his near side.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Nope. That is a great big, bloody massive strawman on your part!

Some of those links clearly show how cyclists can remain within the law without putting their lives at risk.
One can avoid a blind spot without breaking the law: pass on the right (if safe), or simply don't pass at all; why risk your life "for the sake of a few seconds"? It's not a race.


Nope!

Please remember, I have already stated earlier in this thread, that PP in certain circumstances is OK; this is one of them!
Again, I would like to point out that this particular use of PP was not in question.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

I have been cycling to work for 6 months now, not far admittedly. Most drivers are ok, there are a few cretins that don;t give me much room and will happliy (not for me) pass me next to a traffic island and one dipstick that overtook me when I was clearly signalling right . I still have more trouble with cyclists when I am running than drivers when I am cycling.

Any cyclist that undertakes a large vehicle without making eye contact with the driver will get the Darwin Award they deserve

For the top ten search results: where a cause was stated:
"wait at junctions in the driver’s blind spot"
"Cemex lorries now have extra mirrors that dramatically reduce the drivers' blind spots, "
"caught in a lorry driver's blind spot"
"wait at junctions in the driver's blind spot. "
"wait at junctions in the driver’s blind spot"
"wait in drivers' blind spots."

Well that must be so coincidental, especially considering these was not used for any of the search terms (women+cyclists+killed+site:uk)

Are you going to continue to dispute the reported facts, especially without any counter facts to support your dispute?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Hi Safespeedv2,

Wow! That's a detailed reply! Unfortunately I'm only passing through at the moment, but I should have a chance tomorrow to go through it and answer as much as I can.

Two things I'll say just now, first off, I'm certainly not perfect. Perhaps there was something I could have done that would have mitigated the situation....

..but that kind of leads on to my second point....I have a signature which I use on another forum, I'll adjust it a little ' Hindsight: Turns average road users into perfect road users.'

Just got fed up of trying to finish the work that has to be done for tomorrow, and thought I'd pop by and see what's happened to this discussion.

I see that Magnatom has come by and given an account of what happened in the tanker incident. I actually found I disagreed with a lot of SafeSpeedv2's response, even though I found some of his/her earlier comments quite refreshing, but I'll leave it to Magnatom himself to comment. Regarding the topic of the thread (cameras), I was about to quote Magnatom's signature, but I see he has mentioned it.

What I was surprised about is that I find I actually agree with pretty much everything in Steve's last two posts! I think the best policy if there is a truck at the head of the queue at a junction is to take primary position behind the truck and let it go first.

The issue of men vs. women at red lights is an interesting one, though. I never jump a red light myself, but I find it interesting to take Big Tone's signature and modify it slightly: "You will be branded a threat to society by passing a red light where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society, [especially if you ride a bicycle]." This gives food for thought, because there really are some situations (note: SOME) where it is probably safer to cross at the red light than to wait in the queue with the buses, trucks and loonies, especially if you are turning left. I wouldn't condone it any more than I would condone breaking speed limits, but it's an interesting thought. I understand that there is a campaign to make left-turn-on-red legal for cyclists (but haven't time just now to find the link).

Regarding the whole issue of road position, etc., I wrote last year my "Message to Courteous Motorists", which I moved to my new blog earlier this year. At the risk of starting another flame war, I am interested to hear reactions. I may even modify it in the light of some comments, but I promise I will not respond to any.

OK. Back to work now.

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange

Yeah, 'cept in some cases of lorries turning left the lorry actually arrived after the cyclist at the junction, a classic case of where primary positioning can help, i.e. the lorry can't pull up alongside you at the junction if you're sitting in the middle of it's lane.

I myself have been overtaken by a long lorry that then started signalling left whilst I was still down the side of it, believe it or not I was alerted by a cab driver beeping his horn from behind and stopped to watch the lorry swing left, driver paying not one second of attention to his left mirror, I know, I was watching him in it.

In other cases the cyclist was struck whilst moving, most notably elidah cairns, where the lorry tried to squeeze into a 2 meter gap, but needed 2.5 meters, no turning involved at all, and in one case the lorry pulled up alongside the cyclist and then proceeded to turn left, whilst he checked paperwork on his passenger seat.

This was something that i intended to say myself. Jumping a red light is , like exceeding the speed limit, a crime of absolute liability. But, also like exceeding the speed limit, there are many occasions when it is a perfectly safe and even sensible thing to do. The difference is that jumping a red light on a bicycle ismost unlikely to lead to legal sanctions whereas exceeding the speed limit is very likely to get you into trouble. I suspect that this is the real root of the antipathy that so many motorists have for cyclists. I think that Douglas Bader's maxim about rules, fools and wise men is very apposite

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Not at all. It is a serious question.


The situation which concerns me is when the cyclist arrives first at a red light. He adopts a kerb-side position preparatory to going straight on. Bit then a forty ton truck, intent on turning left, pulls up alongside him and loses sight of him i the "blind spot". In those circumstances I think that the cyclist would be well advised to cross the stop line to bring himself into the lorry drivers field of view even though that action would be illegal. Your thoughts on that please.


Oh sorry. We already have them. You think that the cyclist should die rather than break the law.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Yaaay
Being a London cyclist myself, I do have a bit of an appreciation from a cyclist's POV.


Which means the driver would likely have seen them on approach, where blind spot isn't an issue.

And as for the other cases where the cyclist filtered to the front at the red lights....


Indicators on lorries are plentiful, enough for you to see; didn't you see the indicators? Why did it need the cabbie behind you to alert you?
If you think you are going to be caught in a left-hook, the last thing you should do is simply continue on.


Cherry picking are we?
What is the overall reason?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... t-200.html

I still prefer to be right over (and within cycle lanes) instead of being directly in front of bad HGV (semi-blind?) drivers.


I still prefer to be right over (and within cycle lanes) instead of being directly in front of bad (distracted) HGV drivers.



One more time:
Do you understand the difference between acting as a rolling road block and passing stationary vehicles?

Until you tried to hijack it: this debate was about riding "middle of the lane ALL THE TIME"
Weepej, what I have told you, time and time again, about moving goalposts.....

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Oh Dave, why? I thought you were better than this!

Not only do you continue your blatant strawman, the answer to this is the section of my post that you didn't quote:

This is one thing act that is recommended and indeed in many cases has been encouraged:


My answer to your so-called 'serious' question is still "Nope!", no matter how much you desperately try to prove your "deep seam"

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Who said that cyclists should ride in the middle of the lane all the time on this thread?

The driver had perfectly good eyesight, just not good enough for an HGV driver where the requirement is more stringent than that for a car driver.

You never cross the white line whilst the light is on red?

Oh, and BTW, I'm sure you're aware, not all junctions have ASLs, and quite often those that do are occupied by cars.

Oh, damn. Well it was OK while is lasted.

I am pretty sure I was the first poster who mentioned primary position, when I said this: "Yes I do think it's a great shame that I often feel the need to ride in primary position and hold up the good drivers just to prevent the minority of idiots out there from risking my life." Since when did "often" mean "all the time"?

(OK, gone again now.)

_________________
"That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without argument.” - Julian Assange

Errrm, my obvious response to that:
I still prefer to be right over (and within cycle lanes) instead of being directly in front of bad (however so) HGV drivers.

Either way, you can't use that case to support your stance: "expert analysis ... unclear how the collision occurred."


My point being: there's no need to.
(PS: I'm not about to self-incriminate)


That's funny, because the issue you were referring to, and that I linked to, were regarding HGVs!

Goalposts!




Are you being serious?

viewtopic.php?p=235539#p235539
Follow the link that says "again"

Perhaps if you were to answer the question (addressed to both you and MGC) instead of being so damned selective...

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign