It’s time for another forum cycle/vehicle disagreement

[8Ball]

Equally though, would the driver have turned if that was a bus going down a bus lane?

To be fair a 10 ton red bus is a little bit easier to spot than a cyclist who may have been in the blindspot.

Yeah, that is a fair point and I think the cyclist spent a lot of time in the driver's blind spot

[duncs500]

With that one I have some sympathy for the driver, but it's still shite driving. I'd be willing to bet that pretty much everyone on this forum would have seen that cyclist coming and wouldn't have turned in until the cyclist had either clearly slowed down to allow the turn, or gone past.

[Broccers]

I think you're confused. The law is clear and you're just trolling. Bye then.

I'm not confused - you are a boring cunt. Toodle pip.

Such a disappointment to see you post again after that. What do you think Toodle Pip means? Still confused?

A. You're not disappointed.
B. It means goodbye, but you know that and
C fuck off.

This is a thread for an argument, right?

[tim]

3.2m have now watched that pillock fall off his bike

[duncs500]

It's another example that looks pretty intentional to get views. If I see that indicator there's no way I'm sending it up the inside.

[Swervin_Mervin]

With that one I have some sympathy for the driver, but it's still shite driving. I'd be willing to bet that pretty much everyone on this forum would have seen that cyclist coming and wouldn't have turned in until the cyclist had either clearly slowed down to allow the turn, or gone past.

I'm sure many of us would have, and likely thought to ourselves that this was some sort of c**t looking for trouble and therefore avoided it. But for all we know the driver looked, saw they were far enough back and thought they'd be safe to make the manoeuvre not expecting the lemming to commit to hurtling up the inside.

I just can't get past what it must take to adopt such a mentality where you're willing to put yourself at risk of death for the sake of possibly being right. These people seem determined to be martyrs for the cause. And all they really serve to do is strengthen the divide between the anti-cyclist/anti-car nutters which benefits no one.

Maybe we need to start putting signs up to remind people "try not to get involved in an accident"

[Jobbo]

I'm not confused - you are a boring cunt. Toodle pip.

Such a disappointment to see you post again after that. What do you think Toodle Pip means? Still confused?

A. You're not disappointed.
B. It means goodbye, but you know that and
C fuck off.

This is a thread for an argument, right?

On the sauce on a later summer afternoon again I see. Careful you don't go gammon pink in the sun.

[jamcg]

This won't abate until we get a group of similarly hardline pedestrians, who camera-up and intentionally jump off the pavement in front of moving cyclists based on the fact that they are the most vulnerable road users and therefore have right of way.

I demand we use toddlers instead and strap go pros on them. Really emphasise the vulnerability point.

Just get some of the brilliant mothers around here to do it who happily shove a pushchair halfway into the road when waiting to cross.


That video all comes down to righteousness of cyclists. Yes the Highway Code says the car driver should have seen the cyclist and let him past but the car hasn’t overtook the bike before turning so in theory has right if way to turn without being undertaken but doesn’t have that right because the Highway Code is dumb as fuck.

If I was the cyclist I’d have backed off, let them turn in, then go about my day- because reciting the Highway Code is pretty difficult when you’re dead

[NGRhodes]

I'm going to go 50/50 (I am open to discussion) as the cyclist put themselves in an easily avoidable situation by following rule 66:

"you should.. ..not ride close behind another vehicle in case it stops suddenly".

The cyclist was riding too close to the car in-front (rather than the car driving too close to the bike) and was unable to avoid the car which was doing far less than stopping "suddenly".
If the cyclist was travelling further away from the car, the accident could of easily been avoided.

It could be argued that "not ride close" of rule 66 is sufficient to allow the car to turn without causing the bike to "stop or swerve", therefore no violation of rule H3 putting the cyclist entirely at fault, but I've not got the motivation to dig out what the distance of "not ride close" could be.

[jamcg]

Slightly off topic but I always think of this joke when I see any of these videos where the cyclist is in the right


"i need to inspect your farm for growing illegal drugs." I said "Okay, but don't go in that field over there..." The DEA officer verbally exploded saying, "Mister, i have the authority of the Federal Government with me!" Reaching into his rear pants pocket, the arrogant officer removed his badge and shoved it in my face. "See this fucking badge!? This badge means I am allowed to go wherever i wish... On any land! No questions asked or answers given! Have i made myself clear?... do you understand?!" I nodded politely, apologized, and went about my chores. A short time later, i heard loud screams, looked up, and saw the DEA officer running for his life, being chased by my big old mean bull... With every step the bull was gaining ground on the officer, and it seemed likely that he'd sure enough get gored before he reached safety. The officer was clearly terrified. I threw down my tools, ran to the fence and yelled at the top of my lungs... "Your badge, show him your fucking badge!!"

[Gavster]

I'm going to go 50/50 (I am open to discussion) as the cyclist put themselves in an easily avoidable situation by following rule 66:

"you should.. ..not ride close behind another vehicle in case it stops suddenly".

The cyclist was riding too close to the car in-front (rather than the car driving too close to the bike) and was unable to avoid the car which was doing far less than stopping "suddenly".
If the cyclist was travelling further away from the car, the accident could of easily been avoided.

It could be argued that "not ride close" of rule 66 is sufficient to allow the car to turn without causing the bike to "stop or swerve", therefore no violation of rule H3 putting the cyclist entirely at fault, but I've not got the motivation to dig out what the distance of "not ride close" could be.

Rule 74 also puts the cyclist quite squarely in the wrong.

“Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left.”

[Swervin_Mervin]

I see someone's tried to take out Jeremy Vine again

[dinny_g]

Vine is an utter twat. That entire debacle is his doing for views....

[Gavster]

Oh dear, that driver he utterly messed up that day.

[Simon]

Christ what a pair of twats. Sees van do something stupid, so puts himself behind it where van will need to reverse back. They deserve each other.

[Swervin_Mervin]

Christ what a pair of twats. Sees van do something stupid, so puts himself behind it where van will need to reverse back. They deserve each other.

Yep.

I wonder if he'll have "No, no, no, no, no" on his headstone after he inevitably does come a cropper.

[Simon]

There's just zero fucking road-sense. None at all. The van clearly hasn't got a fucking clue what he's doing - look, he's pulled an illegal right turn! So STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM IT TILL HE'S SORTED HIS SHIT OUT.

Christ, he's a thick twat. What did he THINK the van was going to do after pulling such a stupid move?

[Wilspeed]

The cunt is putting himself in a dangerous position to make a point, one day he won't be as lucky.

[MikeHunt]

It will polish out of the bike

I do cycle, but never on busy city roads so I’m trying to relate to this as a driver. If I saw a truck take a wrong turn, the last thing I’d do is park in his blind stop, unless I had a dash cam

[Simon]

It will polish out of the bike

I do cycle, but never on busy city roads so I’m trying to relate to this as a driver. If I saw a truck take a wrong turn, the last thing I’d do is park in his blind stop, unless I had a dash cam and wanted footage for internet clout.

FTFY.