|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 10, 2013 15:15:21 GMT
Ok, then I will try again with local groups here. I have a bee in the bonnet about this subject, as I am daily harassed by Cyclists being Richards....(D-1-ck's) They blame traffic, and then go on to bang on about that roadas are for all road users.... Whilst blatantly supporting those who ignore traffic rules. Traffic rules are for cars not Cyclists..... Yes I hear that excuse used frequently. Anyone remember an argument on the old boards where some punk with a skateboard tried to argue he was right to "Ride" dangerously on pavements?.... This is the same thing. I want investigation now, in my local area, as what is causing these accidents... Is it Cyclists or Trucks. ]If we are being blamed, then lay the blame at the feet of those who cause the accidents... If it is Trucks, then I ask for better education for all truck drivers. Who I am assuming WILL take note of what is happening... If it is cyclists, then Caveat Emptor. Buyer beware. Yes I just did say that. If you buy a bike, BEWARE!. Either get with the plan and adhere to traffic rules or become a statistic. I am more interested in road safety than playing the blame game, but as Cyclists are banding together to blame Trucks alone, I want the proof.... in the US, the burden of proof lies with the accuser... here, the big adjustment came with the light scooter. (electric or sometimes gas powered motor scooters too small to be what you would consider a moped) In the space of about a year, they went from a novelty toy to flocks of schoolkids bumbling along the shoulders of the roads, and on the sidewalks, on them. the final ruling of the state courts was "if it is a vehicle and has a motor, that makes it a motor vehicle. therefore it is subject to motor vehicle laws" this included age requirements for riding it on public thoroughfares. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 10, 2013 15:18:24 GMT
I've been thinking about this some. It may not be all the fault of the cyclists. We all know large/long trucks don't turn like a passenger vehicle and must be "swung out" further from the curb to make a turn. The intersection and the driver dictates how much swing is needed to go into a turn. Often times in town, with narrow streets, this swing out May be nearly all the way into the straight lane, OUT OF THE TURNING LANE. So now, you have a bicyclists, who sees a truck moving into the straight lane, out of the turning lane, not realizing the truck is going to make a turn.... We know what could happen next.... So, is it ALL the fault of the bicyclists, or can the blame be spread around some to include the infrastructure design, vehicle design as well as drivers who may not correctly signal their intent to turn? I think the blame can be spread around. yes, there have been drivers who have done wrong. However, there have also been bicyclists who have done wrong, and to blame one unconditionally for all incidents is unfair to those of both sets who are conscientious and obey the common rules of traffic. |
|
|
|
Post by User Unavailable on Dec 10, 2013 16:57:16 GMT
I've been thinking about this some. It may not be all the fault of the cyclists. We all know large/long trucks don't turn like a passenger vehicle and must be "swung out" further from the curb to make a turn. The intersection and the driver dictates how much swing is needed to go into a turn. Often times in town, with narrow streets, this swing out May be nearly all the way into the straight lane, OUT OF THE TURNING LANE. So now, you have a bicyclists, who sees a truck moving into the straight lane, out of the turning lane, not realizing the truck is going to make a turn.... We know what could happen next.... So, is it ALL the fault of the bicyclists, or can the blame be spread around some to include the infrastructure design, vehicle design as well as drivers who may not correctly signal their intent to turn? I think the blame can be spread around. yes, there have been drivers who have done wrong. However, there have also been bicyclists who have done wrong, and to blame one unconditionally for all incidents is unfair to those of both sets who are conscientious and obey the common rules of traffic. Like I said, I think the blame can be spread around. It's not all the bicyclists, not all the drivers, not all the vehicle design, not all the design of the infrastructure of roads and intersections. There is plenty of blame to go around. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 11, 2013 7:37:34 GMT
This has been "Cited" by stupid-cyclist...
Truck Swings right to make left turn, or swings left to make right turn in USA, with turn indicator on, by daft-peddlar thinks he has put wrong indicator on....
Erm...
Like how?...
Did they forget that unlike them we are HIGHLY trained and dont forget which way we are turning?...
Anyway, numpty-haed then decides to overtake on the "Inside" anyway....
Like this is a good idea...
And gets crushed by a wagon that can no longer see them as the mirrors are now full of trailer because the cab unit has turned.
Who's fault is that?...
Following cars do not try this indescribable stupidity move, they hang back.
But only the terminally silly death wish id-10-t would try to overtake a turning truck.
As Cars, who have seen and understand what the truck is doing, because they have the common sense, do not try to overtake the turning truck, one can only argue that the cyclist is as accused.
Change the infrastructure...
You can not.
I have seen the exact same thing happen where corners have been widened to cut down accidents...
All you do is create more space so the cyclist can be silly in.
Education?...
This you can do.
But the blatant wanna-be-a-statistic will give it the i-know-what-i-am-doing and refuse to be educated.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 11, 2013 7:46:20 GMT
We have had those here.
The law now states, after light debate on how stupid are the users, if they are capable of anything more than pedestrian 4mph, they are subject to licence.
If used on the road, they MUST adhere to road laws.
As a motorised vehicle, they are also subject to safety checks.
No insurance no licence and no sense, they can be confiscated roadside with immediate crush /destruction orders.
They can not be used on Pavement(sidewalk) but may be used on private land (With permission from land owner) as long as no public persons can be injured by their use.
However...
I witnessed a collision between a 4-yr-old or thereabouts in his giant toy 4x4 look-alike, about 4ft long 4ft wide and battery powered, and a pedestrian...
Parents are 'in demand' that as its only a toy no injury occurred....
She with the badly bruised shin is adamant that it bloody well hurts.
These kids toys, where are they supposed to be used?...
The shops do not specify laws when they sell them to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 11, 2013 14:53:52 GMT
This has been "Cited" by stupid-cyclist... Truck Swings right to make left turn, or swings left to make right turn in USA, with turn indicator on, by daft-peddlar thinks he has put wrong indicator on.... Erm... Like how?... Did they forget that unlike them we are HIGHLY trained and dont forget which way we are turning?... Anyway, numpty-haed then decides to overtake on the "Inside" anyway.... Like this is a good idea... And gets crushed by a wagon that can no longer see them as the mirrors are now full of trailer because the cab unit has turned. Who's fault is that?... Following cars do not try this indescribable stupidity move, they hang back. But only the terminally silly death wish id-10-t would try to overtake a turning truck. As Cars, who have seen and understand what the truck is doing, because they have the common sense, do not try to overtake the turning truck, one can only argue that the cyclist is as accused. Change the infrastructure... You can not. I have seen the exact same thing happen where corners have been widened to cut down accidents... All you do is create more space so the cyclist can be silly in. Education?... This you can do. But the blatant wanna-be-a-statistic will give it the i-know-what-i-am-doing and refuse to be educated. you are wrong in this. my grandfather, when he was my age or younger, towed a loaded trailer over the hood of a car where the driver had attempted to pass him on the right while he was making a right turn. |
|
|
|
Post by User Unavailable on Dec 11, 2013 17:39:59 GMT
This has been "Cited" by stupid-cyclist... Truck Swings right to make left turn, or swings left to make right turn in USA, with turn indicator on, by daft-peddlar thinks he has put wrong indicator on.... Erm... Like how?... Did they forget that unlike them we are HIGHLY trained and dont forget which way we are turning?... Anyway, numpty-haed then decides to overtake on the "Inside" anyway.... Like this is a good idea... And gets crushed by a wagon that can no longer see them as the mirrors are now full of trailer because the cab unit has turned. Who's fault is that?... Following cars do not try this indescribable stupidity move, they hang back. But only the terminally silly death wish id-10-t would try to overtake a turning truck. As Cars, who have seen and understand what the truck is doing, because they have the common sense, do not try to overtake the turning truck, one can only argue that the cyclist is as accused. Change the infrastructure... You can not. I have seen the exact same thing happen where corners have been widened to cut down accidents... All you do is create more space so the cyclist can be silly in. Education?... This you can do. But the blatant wanna-be-a-statistic will give it the i-know-what-i-am-doing and refuse to be educated. you are wrong in this. my grandfather, when he was my age or younger, towed a loaded trailer over the hood of a car where the driver had attempted to pass him on the right while he was making a right turn. Yep, it happens pretty regularly and truck drivers are human just like everyone else, trained professional or not, they don't all use their turn indicators correctly. Like I said, their is plenty of blame to spread around. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 13, 2013 9:36:28 GMT
Yes it may happen, anecdotal once-in-a-lifetime and almost as rare as all the holes lining up in a Swiss cheese....
But once a day (Or more) in every city in the UK there is a serious incident between Cyclists and Large vehicles.
Some get more than serious and create injury.
Most get a LOUD horn and some screaming as the cyclist wakes up.
Sometimes it because the vehicle has just NOT seen the cyclist.
There is now a NEW suggestion being passed about that all motorists should check their left hand side (Would be right in the USA) for Cyclists before moving away from a set of lights.
Especially if you are in a turn lane and about to turn.
May the Gods be my witness, but I see this EVERY DAY...
A vehicle Indicating and turning at a set of lights has a cyclist alongside who intends to go straight ahead.
The lights change, what happens next?...
The Cyclists believe they have the RIGHT to be alongside you at the lights, and they believe you should wait until they have gotten past you before you turn.
Now be honest, when did that become common sense?...
Using USA references, If you are in the right turn lane, then that whole lane is turning Right, just when did it become anyone's "Right" to change that and wobble straight ahead as you turn?...
If you had seen them, alongside you, in a right turn lane, would you not have expected them to turn right as well?...
There is a road in Manchester where there is a left hand lane that filters that I travel down on a regular basis, where "Stupid" cyclists cross the road in front of the traffic turning.
There is a Cycle lane along the left hand pavement, which is used.
It has LIGHTS on it to let the cyclists know when its safe to proceed....
The lights are even Cycle shaped so you shouldnt be confused....
All regular users of that junction know to proceed with care and one finger on the horn as Cyclists will ignore the lights.
All vehicles crossing that road to go down that way will slow as they cross the junction to check for stupid-on-two-wheels, the Lycra lunatic.
The road in question is actually an entrance to a Motorway, so is well designed, clearly marked, and laid out in a way where EVERYONE has good vision of the whole area.
Except maybe the cyclists...
Perhaps its that pole that obscures the view?... you know the one, the one with a
.....As shouted out of a window by the truck in front of me that had to emergency brake to avoid getting a new bumper ornament.....
He wasnt pleased with that cyclist...
"What light..?..." was about the only reply I heard.
There is blame to spread around.
Yes.
Mostly its Cyclist shaped.
Or was, that is, until it got run over....
This is why I am DESPERATE for my anecdotal evidence to be tested.
This is why I NEED an independent examination.
I need non biased evaluation of the situation.
What I see, and I am looking for it, is not unbiased.
The word is out that Trucks have a blind spot.
Everyone I know that I have asked KNOWS this.
So why when I drive a truck do I get Cyclists in my blind spot?...
My truck is modern.
It has more mirrors that a mod scooter with paranoia...
The only mirror it DONT have is one for the Hubble space telescope...
I can now, when in a straight line, see almost everything in front and alongside my truck.
And its FULL of Fools on two wheels...
Yes, Trucks are involved in incidents where they did not see and ran over a Cyclist.
I do not deny that.
But if I cant see you, when do I become responsible?...
I may be watching out for that OTHER idiot about to grab hold of one of the tie-down straps for a free tow along the high street as you creep up alongside....
If I can see you, who's fault is that?...
Mine for missing you creeping into that blind spot at a set of lights , or you for knowing I cant see you and being where you cant be seen?...
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 13, 2013 16:42:14 GMT
you guys have traffic bollards over there, don't you? you know the ones I am talking about? they rise up out of the pavement to tell you you shouldn't go there. maybe they should install them at bicycle lanes, with message on them saying "if you pass this bollard it is at your own risk and liability"
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 14, 2013 9:03:58 GMT
Stupid cyclist does not read.
And yes, that is all I need to say about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 14, 2013 11:13:04 GMT
Stupid cyclist does not read. And yes, that is all I need to say about that. refusal to read the sign is no excuse - but the bollard will at least stop him interfering with your truck, if installed properly. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 14, 2013 11:21:59 GMT
pass a law that makes it the harshest form of driving infraction for one vehicle to pass another vehicle while either is preparing to turn towards the other.
also pass a law that defines it as attempted suicide for a bicycle to be within the same traffic lane as a vehicle above 2 tons curb weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 15, 2013 10:04:58 GMT
There ARE laws that prevent "Undertaking".
Unfortunately, to be prosecuted, you must first hold a licence................
Hold on, let me fix that for you...
Unless the cyclist has done the part one theory or actually holds a licence, in fact, make them subject to the same laws as all scooters or any other low powered machine.
Licence plates, registration, INSURANCE....
Now we are getting somewhere...
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 15, 2013 15:54:25 GMT
There ARE laws that prevent "Undertaking". Unfortunately, to be prosecuted, you must first hold a licence................ Hold on, let me fix that for you... Unless the cyclist has done the part one theory or actually holds a licence, in fact, make them subject to the same laws as all scooters or any other low powered machine. Licence plates, registration, INSURANCE.... Now we are getting somewhere... here, not having a license is irrelevant. there have even been instances of bicyclists receiving citations for violating the posted speed limit. |
|
|
|
Post by craighudson on Dec 15, 2013 17:44:21 GMT
...but they can't get points on their licence, can they? Or do they get points on their licence when they get one, and therefore get it suspended immediately?
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 15, 2013 22:58:16 GMT
...but they can't get points on their licence, can they? Or do they get points on their licence when they get one, and therefore get it suspended immediately? well, no, they can't suspend a license you don't have - but the driving record is independent of the license; so if you get pulled over for speeding and don't have a license, you will still have a speeding citation on your record - as well as driving without a license. (here, I don't think it is points - it is number and severity of infractions.) |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Dec 16, 2013 12:43:37 GMT
To make it even worse, there may often be no way to prove the identity of a cyclist, we have no law that says we need to carry proof of ID, (this can cause problems sometimes when we go abroad carrying your passport around all the time). There is also no need to have a driving license to ride a cycle, so a person could commit any offense and give a false name.
A driving licence in it`s paper form will show the endorsements on it, it is currently mandatory to have both though in 2015 only the Photocard form will be needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 16, 2013 14:44:12 GMT
To make it even worse, there may often be no way to prove the identity of a cyclist, we have no law that says we need to carry proof of ID, (this can cause problems sometimes when we go abroad carrying your passport around all the time). There is also no need to have a driving license to ride a cycle, so a person could commit any offense and give a false name. A driving licence in it`s paper form will show the endorsements on it, it is currently mandatory to have both though in 2015 only the Photocard form will be needed. around here, those kind of people usually end up on a first name basis with the police. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 19, 2013 8:08:07 GMT
...but they can't get points on their licence, can they? Or do they get points on their licence when they get one, and therefore get it suspended immediately?
Yes that CAN happen.
But what is the case when the reason you are riding a bike is that you have had your driving licence taken away from you?...
What have it suspended even MORE?....
I did hear a case of a local plank who was noted as "Arrest on sight" if seen riding a bike, because he had got too many complaints of riding dangerously.
But then again, I wonder how many it is now, the record "was" 47 points on the licence....
Yes one person in the UK has managed to accrue 47 or more points on a licence.
Yes its still 12 points and you are banned... its just this twit didnt see why that means they cant drive, and continued driving.
One of the worst cases of stupid got to the court case for one of his driving infractions, was handed points and a fine, which took them to a total over 12, so had his licence confiscated on the spot, and then arrested in the car park again, because he tried to drive home.....
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 19, 2013 14:58:28 GMT
...but they can't get points on their licence, can they? Or do they get points on their licence when they get one, and therefore get it suspended immediately? Yes that CAN happen. But what is the case when the reason you are riding a bike is that you have had your driving licence taken away from you?... What have it suspended even MORE?.... I did hear a case of a local plank who was noted as "Arrest on sight" if seen riding a bike, because he had got too many complaints of riding dangerously. But then again, I wonder how many it is now, the record "was" 47 points on the licence.... Yes one person in the UK has managed to accrue 47 or more points on a licence. Yes its still 12 points and you are banned... its just this twit didnt see why that means they cant drive, and continued driving. One of the worst cases of stupid got to the court case for one of his driving infractions, was handed points and a fine, which took them to a total over 12, so had his licence confiscated on the spot, and then arrested in the car park again, because he tried to drive home..... which brings it back to the arraignment of the town drunk several years back: "officer, what cause did you have to suspect this man was driving drunk?" "I recognized him, your honor." |
|
