The War On Britain's Road - Drivers V Cyclists - BBC 1 9PM

Cbr

Id be amazed if this is still the case. My friends and i have tried this on countless occasions whilst cycling, but have found this only antagonises motorists. Im not going to argue if this is this is right or wrong, but will just say that if we, cyclists, use the road while leaving room for motorists then i find my ride is more enjoyable and less confrontational. I think its just being Courteous.

And before some here start telling motorists to slow down, its exactly the same when cycling on byways where pedestrians take up the complete path and antagonise cyclists because they have to slow down to pass.

With the state of British roads these days its more like an off road experience trying to stay close to the curb, but i for one have no issue with motorists passing close to me, i really dont get what the issue is. Yes lorries are a different matter entirely.

.

These may be of interest

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...yclist-take-the-lane

and

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/...oad-positioning-197/

regards

Jim

Better to antagonise a motorist thnt to be killed by them?

On many/most roads there is room for a cyclist to be passed quite safely by a motorist. On some roads the only safe thing for a cyclist to do is to command the middle ground because some motorist will try to overtake a cyclist in circumstances where they would never consider overtaking even a stationary vehicle.

The reason for the stated advice is that many cyclists ride close to the kerb, and this leaves a relatively large space for the cars / other users. Unfortunately this leads to other users just driving past with a disregard for the cyclist and often results in accidents. The full propose of this is to ensure the cyclist is recognised and treated as an equal rights road user, and that overtaking is carried out in a safe and defined action

Again, the blame (or at least the debate) shifts to cyclists' behaviour.

1. They don't ride close enough to the kerb, placing themselves in danger as car drivers become impatient and antagonised and sometimes kill them. Or.....
2. They ride too close to the kerb so cars/trucks/whatever try to squeeze by and sometimes kill them.

The behaviour that has to change is that of the motorists. Motorists need to stop running down cyclists. Simple. But they won't.

Can't argue with that winky; respect is a one way street as far as motorists are concerned.

Winky,

    I think you are misunderstanding my point. I am certainly not blaming cyclists.

Yes car drivers are impatient, but helping to educate them with defined road positioning is IMO better than the alternative.

As a motorcyclists of over 35 years road experience, I think we all need a little help every new and then

Do we need to educate drivers or cyclists? My suggestion is that we educate drivers to not run down cyclists, regardless of said cyclists' road positioning.

Whilst ever drivers cling to the notion that it is "the simple laws of physics" or cyclists running red lights/riding on the footpath (or wearing lycra) that are inevitably and unavoidably causing them to kill cyclists, nothing will change. Motorists will always cling to these notions because it comforts them to do so.

We all live in the same world.

We all use the same roads.

We should all work together for the solution

 I note that the highway code (rules of the road), identifies that cyclists can ride 2 abreast ( which agin creates the greater physical presence.

Agree 100%.

Thank god or that

Now I can leave this thread 

All the best

Paul

Id have thought that causing an obstruction in the road is an offense. I clearly do not come across all these motorists trying to kill me while out cycling. Im very much a recreational cyclist, and do it solely for pleasure, so maybe im not out on the roads as much as some here.

But if im out in a group, and as you do you cycle side by side chatting, we always get into single file to allow other road users to pass. If on a busy road we stayed side by side, we would possibly hold up traffic. I know as a driver that i appreciate other road users being courteous to me and i will repay the compliment.

Ive just found that by staying in the middle of the lane will make motorists overtake me, and maybe in a dangerous position, again not saying what is right or wrong, i just dont want to put myself or a driver in that position.

I cant imagine anything worse than causing an accident by my arrogance or impatience. I think George had a very good point with how he handles things, and i believe this is what the police try to do now with motorists speeding. Rather than just fine you and give you points they send you on a course where im told they basically try to make you think about your actions.

Have been reading this thread without biting until now but can't help but reply to this!

You seem to imply that legally and legitimately occupying the road constitutes obstructing traffic and hence an offense. This is what happens when cars are seen as the legitimate users of roads and cyclists as a lesser species who should defer to the car. Actually the cyclist is just as much a legitimate constituent of 'the traffic' as a car would be and has a right to be there. Of course deliberately holding up cars is inappropriate and should be decried but a mind-set that views cars as the primary owners of roads and cyclists as lower in legitimacy is just wrong.

This is the funny bit. Motorists overwhelming hold each other up, nobody else need be involved. Cyclists' effect on motorists rate of forward progress (averaged out) is trivial.

A cyclist using a lane is just that. It it isn't an obstruction, nor an offence.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment at some level.......So if you are cycling down the middle of the lane, or riding two abreast and a motorist runs you down, you have somehow "caused" the "accident"? Seriously? (apologies of you are speaking as a motorist here).

Then I'll do it for you. If a motorist puts you in danger by overtaking in a place where it is not safe to do so, then the motorist is wrong. This is always true regardless of where you choose to cycle in the lane.

Svetty

I dont see motorists as the legitimate users, i see it more as a hierarchy that goes with the size of vehicle and the damage that vehicle can do. We all know the law of the road, well some, but that does not stop people getting killed.

I want too remain safe not only whilst cycling but whilst driving and as a pedestrian. i would neither put myself in front of a lorry in my car any more than i would in front of a car whilst on my bike, because i know what the outcome can be. To me that is just common sense.

Again im talking reality not what the law states, which wont do me much good if im dead on the floor.

Yes but motorist cant get over can they on a single lane, but how many times have you seen a motorist in the wrong lane on a motorway being flashed up to move over.

I meant as either. And as its been clearly said before both are as bad as each other.

I actually meant putting the motorist, as in himself, in danger not me as a cyclist. You will probably say serves him right for being impatient, but as i said if im in the middle of the lane through my own arrogance then ill be the one feeling guilty if they crash.

Maybe thats just me though

Dear Foxman,

I am all for reality, even if it means not taking the law too literally when it comes to assuming one's rights!

In fact when the traffic gets too oppressive, as it frequently does in the rush hour in Worcester, and the more terrifying in the dark evening ride home, I simply get off and walk the bike on the pavement.

I'd rather be a chicken than dead right!

In reality the proportion of inattentive, impatient, and thoughtless drivers is tiny. It is just that when something goes wrong between a car and a pedestrian or a cyclist the results are always going to be far worse for them than the motorist. Speaking from experience ...

When - on the bike - turning right off a main road, nowadays, I simply tend to signal left, pull over and stop, and then cross the road as a pedestrian. Chicken, maybe? But I don't care if it takes me two or ten minutes longer to make the journey! Get it wrong and the journey may be the last and longest one ever made ...

It is also curious how innocent of a knowledge of the law the Police can be. A friend and I were going two abreast on a quiet residential road and the only car in sight was coming the other way - the Police car. It stopped and the WPC was most vehement that we were breaking the law! I assumed she was right and we meekly carried on in single file!

I don't tend to stand my ground much with the Police, but this thread has taught me the law on two abreast!

One learns something new every day.

ATB from George

I drive a car and certainly don't want to hurt or kill anybody, but some behaviour is strange and people do put themselves in danger. There is probably no law against standing under the arm of a crane as it lifts a 100 ton load, but I wouldn't do it. 

Today somebody raced across the back of my car as I was reversing ... my warning system beeped and I duly stopped and nobody was hurt ... but why did they do that ... yes I was cautious enough to stop well in time, but it seems strange behaviour.

Why don't cyclist use cycle paths ... the ones around here are in better condition than the roads and well laid out, but no they still ride in the road. Pedestrians are more sensible and stay on the pavement rather than walk along in the middle of the road even though the law allows them to so do if they wish. 

The only accident I've ever had was a cyclist's fault ... so although I'm sympathetic to cyclists and considerably more so to pedestrians, I do think everybody needs to take care on the roads.  

George

I think in my cack handed way this is really what im saying. I know as cyclists we shouldnt have to take these measures, but the reality is we do because of self preservation.

No point banging on about what is right or wrong, because this does not change the fact that cyclists and pedestrians will be victims, as are many motorists.

I do what i can to stay safe when im a pedestrian, cyclist or motorist.

Dear Guy,

Given a viable choice of cycle path ot road, I use a cycle path even if it is a longer journey to some extent.

Recently the River Severn rose nearly five metres leaving my normal commute cycle path under between one and three metres of water. There are good reasons why cyclists do brave the roads on occasion!

I shall never ever ride my bike on a roundabout! There are far too many distractions for motorists to make the sufficiently rapid assessments and also see cyclists. I walk round them. Self-preservation is crucial in life, though twelve months ago I used to ride round them. Experience is a wonderful thing.

ATB from George

I wasn't making the distinction regarding who was in danger. Motorists are an overwhelming danger to themselves of course,  but two cars having  head-on collision right next to me because one car overtook me in an unsafe manner is hardly going to end well for me either!

If a car chooses to come around me and hits another car as a result, (provided I survive the experience) I wouldn't feel guilty in the slightest. I have no way of controlling the decision-making process of that motorist. You seem to think that I do. This is a classic example of what I mean when I say that motorists won't take responsibility. "That damn cyclist forced me to overtake him in a narrow spot on a blind corner, in limited visibility, when there was oncoming traffic etc. etc. I was in a hurry and annoyed by the fact he was wearing spandex. What choice did I have but to kill him? Not my fault."