old - Fazer Owners Club - old
General => General => Topic started by: darrsi on 25 November 2015, 07:35:35 am
-
I'm not a fan of either to be truthful, but cyclists do take the piss some times.
There was a road approaching, he was undertaking, and there was no cycle lane. Taxi's do make random moves, but turning into a side road can be predicted with a little bit of foresight.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3332395/Internet-split-s-fault-taxi-knocked-London-cyclist-bike.html?login#readerCommentsCommand-message-field (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3332395/Internet-split-s-fault-taxi-knocked-London-cyclist-bike.html?login#readerCommentsCommand-message-field)
-
Mainly bike's "fault" on this occasion. As you say, no cycle lane, he's putting himself into a position where shit has a greater chance of happening, and it did on this occasion.
When I ride both the roadbike and the motorbike I always try to think about my positioning and asking myself if I'm somewhere where drivers would expect to see me. Going down the inside approaching a junction is asking for trouble really.
-
Hard to be sure, but it looks like the cab only indicated when the bike was almost alongside. Seems like a bit of a late decision to take the turning. Wonder if that allowed sufficient time to check the mirror properly?. Some cyclists do stupid things and as a driver you have to allow for that. Undertaking any vehicle at a junction even if it's not indicating is risky.
-
This is going to be fun, as we already know the public jury is split in the decision, so let's put this into perspective with some misconceptions and the highway code, that thing that all road users should be adhering to but dont-
'Undertaking is illegal'
No, no it's not!
Cyclists AND motorcyclists can pass on the left
When any vehicle is turning left you are to check for Undertaking cyclists and motorcyclists.
The flip side to all this is that if a vehicle is indicating to turn left then you must not undertake
Simples, right?
Well unfortunately as this video shows fucking pricks are incapable of using indicators adequately, and/or making very bad and dangerous last second maneuvers!
Let's change this to something 99% of us do,
Filter
Why do we filter?
Because we are allowed to!
Is it safe to do so?
No, not in the slightest!
Why?
Because cunts don't look or signal adequately
If this video showed a motorbike filtering and the taxi pulling into a gap in traffic on the left using the same piss poor signalling and observations hitting the bike would you still blame the motorbike? It's the same manoeuvre after all and the motorbike is doing something he is allowed to do, as is the cyclist in the video!
That being said we all have a duty of care to ourselves then to others, if you ride with no self preservation and no care for the dangers immediately around then this is going to happen more than once!
-
I'd equally call the motorcyclist a tit in this instance because of the left turn.
-
What motorcyclist would that be Midden?
-
Looks like natural selection to me .
-
I'd equally call the motorcyclist a tit in this instance because of the left turn.
I must've missed the slim line engine. :rollin
-
Even though I cycle as well as ride a bike, I think it's 60/40 against the cyclist.
Yes, the taxi indicated late and probably turned without looking, but it was a stupid place for the cyclist to try to filter past on the nearside :(
-
We all know black cabs can suddenly do random turns, as it's just the nature of their job, they have that extra steering lock for u-turns, and the driver's probably have verbal diarrhea whilst driving.
They do stick out like a sore thumb though, and all things considered should always be approached with caution, especially if you want to pass them.
But sneaking up the inside of a taxi, or any vehicle for that matter, on top of a side turning could have been thought out a little bit better in my opinion, regardless of how late he indicated.
It's just fortunate for him that there was no speed involved.
Bit similar to buses.
Every day car drivers will undertake me then feel a bit peeved when that big red bus in front of them has suddenly pulled over at a bus stop!
Fancy that!!! A bus stopping at a bus stop! And the worrying this is, they never even predicted it. :groan
-
Everyone is missing 2 important points....something we should all be doing out there to avoid accidents.....if it was me on that cycle I wudda stopped because of the cabs SPEED AND ROAD POSITION......plus the fact the bus pulled away and the cab didn't. It is easily the cyclists fault.
-
Everyone is missing 2 important points....something we should all be doing out there to avoid accidents.....if it was me on that cycle I wudda stopped because of the cabs SPEED AND ROAD POSITION......plus the fact the bus pulled away and the cab didn't. It is easily the cyclists fault.
Coming from someone that tried overtaking a dump truck whilst it was turning right!
-
I cycle in traffic all year long, daily. So far hit 4 times by cars - always 100% their fault by the law, but 3 out of four times - my better caution and judgement could have avoided the accident. The way I look at the world: say I support Milwall FC. Should I be able to freely go around the country with a Milwall scarf? Definitely. If I wear it to a Chelsea fans club, are they allowed to beat me up? No. But is it my fault if I do that and get the beating? IMO - definitely.
Now, for the video. Cyclist made 2 mistakes.
1) When the traffic is flowing, be happy you're not stationary. Filtering along moving vehicles increases the danger. Filtering near the intersection - even worse. Filtering on the "near" side near the intersection - how many drivers check that blind spot? Had he passed on the right, then perhaps he could have expected to be expected. :) But on that side... The taxi driver should have signaled earlier and checked the mirror - but graveyards are full of (motor)cyclists that had the right of way. :\
2) He's riding a "fixie". Latest hipster craze. No front brake. You don't filter, nor ride in traffic without a good front brake - whether on a bicycle, or a motorcycle. Even when filtering along stationary vehicles, you need to be able to stop in your tracks when you see people turning the steering wheel (front wheels moving), or reaching for the doors to open them.
The cyclist has learned a lesson rather cheaply - no injury or damage from what I could tell. Hope he doesn't filter that way in the future, for both his and the drivers' sake.
P.S. Love the way they handled the situation - like real gentlemen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TGSWcSfK_U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TGSWcSfK_U)
-
Slainar, I just looked at the video again. He does have a front brake.
Still a muppet for passing on the nearside though.
-
Slainar, I just looked at the video again. He does have a front brake.
Still a muppet for passing on the nearside though.
I stand corrected. :)
-
Slainar, I just looked at the video again. He does have a front brake.
Still a muppet for passing on the nearside though.
I stand corrected. :)
I have seen other cyclists riding about on those bikes with no brake tho. Some don't have any reflectors either. Is that legal?. I thought all bikes had to have front and rear working brakes and reflectors?. Surely they don't sell them new like that? :eek.
-
Everyone is missing 2 important points....something we should all be doing out there to avoid accidents.....if it was me on that cycle I wudda stopped because of the cabs SPEED AND ROAD POSITION......plus the fact the bus pulled away and the cab didn't. It is easily the cyclists fault.
Coming from someone that tried overtaking a dump truck whilst it was turning right!
Yup....remember that ride out lol...ended up in a shit mud puddle but I didn't hit the Lorry or drop the bike tho......PURE SKILL
-
Obviously! Lol
-
Cyclist fault rule 167 no overtaking on a junction. If you do you should bear the consequences.
Having said that I also drive car in London. In such cases I keep 1 inch distance from the road edge way in advance before the turn hence nobody even have a remote chance to pull such antics on me. There has been one more cyclist before this one that has undertaked the taxi on the bend.
Means very bad driving skills and wrong road position from the cabby I mean seriously artic will do this turn tighter. I think he has made the decision to turn on the bend itself in the last moment. Its ok to do that ONLY if you make sure the road is clear. Which was not.
Position is very important. You do good position in advance everybody around will know what you will do signal or not. You stay in the middle nobody expects you to turn...
-
ALWAYS expect every cunt on the road to do anything....
-
I'm gonna go 50/50 on this one.
Bike was going too fast and the pedestrian was lazy in just about every way.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html)
-
I bet he waits until he finds a crossing next time ;)
-
I'm gonna go 50/50 on this one.
Bike was going too fast and the pedestrian was lazy in just about every way.
[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html[/url] ([url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html[/url])
If that on the left was a bicycle lane, then it's pedestrian's fault 100%. If it's just a line marking the end of the road/lane, then 50-50: pedestrian shouldn't have crossed out of "zebra" and shouldn't have run, definitely not run-stop-run-stop. However, if it wasn't a bicycle lane, cyclist shouldn't have undertaken a car, but overtaken it.
-
I'm gonna go 50/50 on this one.
Bike was going too fast and the pedestrian was lazy in just about every way.
[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html[/url] ([url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html[/url])
If that on the left was a bicycle lane, then it's pedestrian's fault 100%. If it's just a line marking the end of the road/lane, then 50-50: pedestrian shouldn't have crossed out of "zebra" and shouldn't have run, definitely not run-stop-run-stop. However, if it wasn't a bicycle lane, cyclist shouldn't have undertaken a car, but overtaken it.
It WAS a cycle lane, but there was also a big red bus in the way of it.
The pedestrian had already started crossing so technically had the right of passage, but the cyclist should've slowed down in caution anyway.
Even so, both a bit careless.
The pedestrian will think twice when he next crosses a road.
The cyclist will probably do it again tomorrow. :lol
-
Some don't have any reflectors either. Is that legal?. I thought all bikes had to have front and rear working brakes and reflectors?.
Yes, they're supposed to.
There again, all cars are supposed to have both headlights and both rear lights working and I've lost count of the number of vehicles I've seen with at least one faulty one recently...
-
Some don't have any reflectors either. Is that legal?. I thought all bikes had to have front and rear working brakes and reflectors?.
Yes, they're supposed to.
There again, all cars are supposed to have both headlights and both rear lights working and I've lost count of the number of vehicles I've seen with at least one faulty one recently...
I'm still being blinded by all the fog light wankers that haven't turned their lights off yet since that ONE day of fog we had a few weeks ago.
-
It WAS a cycle lane, but there was also a big red bus in the way of it.
The pedestrian had already started crossing so technically had the right of passage, but the cyclist should've slowed down in caution anyway.
Even so, both a bit careless.
The pedestrian will think twice when he next crosses a road.
The cyclist will probably do it again tomorrow. :lol
The cyclist couldn't have seen him in time because of the big vehicle he was... WASN't undertaking (since it's a bicycle lane). The pedestrian, when having decided to cross where he shouldn't, should at least make sure it is safe, he's not making anyone brake hard, or change direction quickly - which he didn't. The cyclist should have hit the brakes - there was the time.
-
It WAS a cycle lane, but there was also a big red bus in the way of it.
The pedestrian had already started crossing so technically had the right of passage, but the cyclist should've slowed down in caution anyway.
Even so, both a bit careless.
The pedestrian will think twice when he next crosses a road.
The cyclist will probably do it again tomorrow. :lol
The cyclist couldn't have seen him in time because of the big vehicle he was... WASN't undertaking (since it's a bicycle lane). The pedestrian, when having decided to cross where he shouldn't, should at least make sure it is safe, he's not making anyone brake hard, or change direction quickly - which he didn't. The cyclist should have hit the brakes - there was the time.
If he didn't see that pedestrian then it's time for a trip to the opticians!
It was more a case of which side of him was he going to ride, and because of his speed, plus that totally inconsiderate action of a bus stopping at a bus stop (how very dare he) the decision didn't come quick enough.
Personally i would've aimed straight at him and let the pedestrian choose either way.
On my motorbike, or any other motor vehicle for that matter, that's where the air horn, plus a decent set of brakes have a big say. :car
-
If he didn't see that pedestrian then it's time for a trip to the opticians!
My guess is that he couldn't see him until he had passed the car on his right (inside of which the camera was mounted). Looks like a big vehicle - car, or a bus from the video. So both the cyclist and the pedestrian were surprised. However, the pedestrian should have expected a bicycle to come through the bicycle lane, while the cyclist couldn't have expected a pedestrian to run across the road.
It was more a case of which side of him was he going to ride, and because of his speed, plus that totally inconsiderate action of a bus stopping at a bus stop (how very dare he) the decision didn't come quick enough.
Looks indecisive to me to. Though I'd say he had the time to stop as well - that was a third option. In front the pedestrian, behind and stop.
Not sure about the problem with bus stopping - in my city you just pass on the middle of the road side, you're not supposed to expect pedestrians boarding/unboarding the bus on that side - just from the kerb side. The bicycle in front went right on.
Personally i would've aimed straight at him and let the pedestrian choose either way.
On my motorbike, or any other motor vehicle for that matter, that's where the air horn, plus a decent set of brakes have a big say. :car
I often brake, slow down, when I see the pedestrian is not sure whether to go, or stop, or run. If they don't see me, then I go behind men and in front of women - because, from my experience, if they see me at the very last second, women often tend to suddenly stop or jump backwards, while men tend to start running-jumping forward, seldom stopping.
-
I'm gonna go 50/50 on this one.
Bike was going too fast and the pedestrian was lazy in just about every way.
[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html[/url] ([url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335035/So-wrong-time-Cyclist-colliding-pedestrian-sparks-new-debate-taxi-video-divided-internet.html[/url])
Ok that was 100% cycle fault what a twat. Bear in mind rights of way or even if there was say a green traffic light and pedestrian was going on red does not matter here at all. Like in this example when some plonker hits an woman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KjgMuosiY0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KjgMuosiY0)
The Highway code is clear that all road rules and signals are advisory. You MUST stop and make sure if there is dangerous situation or say pedestrian in the middle of the road like in this case. Hazzard avoidance major fail here.
Pedestrian is in the wrong place, so what does that gives you wild card to run him over :thumbdown
Instead of slowing down or even stopping the twat with the cycle has actually accelerated and pointed the bike towards the pedestrian.
Honestly I would be tempted to beat the shit out of somebody if they do that to me. What a plonker.
Rule 144 You MUST NOT- drive dangerously
- drive without due care and attention
- drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.
-
But... the cyclist did stop... and she did RUN into him from the side, didn't she. You can't be expected to expect people running at you from the side of the road.
-
But... the cyclist did stop... and she did RUN into him from the side, didn't she. You can't be expected to expect people running at you from the side of the road.
I'm getting confused now, who is "she"?
It's London anyway, pedestrians and cyclists tend not to give a monkeys about anyone else.
-
Some don't have any reflectors either. Is that legal?. I thought all bikes had to have front and rear working brakes and reflectors?.
Yes, they're supposed to.
So do some of the hipster 'fixie' bicycle riders that Slaninar refers to in reply #12 buy the bikes equipped with 2 sets of brakes, then start taking them off when they get home?.
-
The Highway code is clear that all road rules and signals are advisory
what a load of sh!te. where did you come up with that one?
try telling that to a judge when you run a "STOP" sign..............certain rules and signals are a "MUST" do eg the hexagonal red STOP sign and a Blue circle with 30 in it (mandatory minimum speed)
-
But... the cyclist did stop... and she did RUN into him from the side, didn't she. You can't be expected to expect people running at you from the side of the road.
Think you'll find that there's more chance of this happening than there is of them running head on at you!
-
Front and rear lights are good enough. Reflectors are required by law but if you have working lights - you don't really need them. Most road bikes as well as fixies don't have reflectors.
However, two separate brake systems, one on each wheel are required both by law and common sense. One brake can fail any time.
For single speed (and fixed gear) bicycles, rear wheel can be stopped with pedals - but many people ride without the front as well. I've found that a good front brake is crucial for sudden situations, like pedestrians jumping on the bicycle lane - often happens where I ride.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kumLyiWkIoE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kumLyiWkIoE)
-
But... the cyclist did stop... and she did RUN into him from the side, didn't she. You can't be expected to expect people running at you from the side of the road.
Think you'll find that there's more chance of this happening than there is of them running head on at you!
LOl. Even less chance of coming across the Spanish inquisition. However, the cyclist did STOP, not hit the pedestrian head on. And the pedestrian was running, both literally, and running the red light. Her fault (the pedestrian) IMO.
P.S. The first crossing - first 10 to 15 seconds of the video - that was a more careless riding from that same cyclist IMO. I thought that would be it. Going too fast, too much to the side of the road, having seen the pedestrians happy to run red light in group just in front of him. You are invisible on the bicycle and motorcycle after all.
-
But... the cyclist did stop... and she did RUN into him from the side, didn't she. You can't be expected to expect people running at you from the side of the road.
Think you'll find that there's more chance of this happening than there is of them running head on at you!
LOl. Even less chance of coming across the Spanish inquisition. However, the cyclist did STOP, not hit the pedestrian head on. And the pedestrian was running, both literally, and running the red light. Her fault (the pedestrian) IMO.
P.S. The first crossing - first 10 to 15 seconds of the video - that was a more careless riding from that same cyclist IMO. I thought that would be it. Going too fast, too much to the side of the road, having seen the pedestrians happy to run red light in group just in front of him. You are invisible on the bicycle and motorcycle after all.
Pedestrian's a bloke!
-
Pedestrian's a bloke!
:rollin :lol
We're not talking about the same video then.
This one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KjgMuosiY0#t=68 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KjgMuosiY0#t=68)
29 seconds, roughly.
-
Pedestrian's a bloke!
:rollin :lol
We're not talking about the same video then.
This one
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KjgMuosiY0#t=68[/url] ([url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KjgMuosiY0#t=68[/url])
29 seconds, roughly.
My bad, I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention, just like the woman crossing the road. :lol
The videos aren't obvious on my work laptop.
That was her fault, phone in hand, just being a sheep and following other peoples movements without looking whatsoever.
In fairness she wouldn't have heard anyone coming towards her though, although I accept that's not a great excuse, but another reason why I'm not a fan of silent electric cars either!
-
You lot saying the pedestrians aren't at fault in any of these clips do realise there's highway code rules for pedestrians too right!?
(which all the pedestrians are not adhering to)
The pedestrians are at fault in every clip according to the highway code, go to court after an accident and they'd be proper fucked!
-
I think it's what they term 'Jaywalking' in America isn't it..wandering out into moving traffic where you shouldn't do.
-
Main difference is it's enforced over there, same as Germany and many other countries!
-
Look it up, I think you'll find that pedestrians have 'a right of way'.
-
I think it's what they term 'Jaywalking' in America isn't it..wandering out into moving traffic where you shouldn't do.
There is no jaywalking in the UK, here we just call it crossing the road - traffic or not is perfectly legal to do so :lol
The Highway code is clear that all road rules and signals are advisory
what a load of sh!te. where did you come up with that one?
try telling that to a judge when you run a "STOP" sign..............certain rules and signals are a "MUST" do eg the hexagonal red STOP sign and a Blue circle with 30 in it (mandatory minimum speed)
My point was all the rules are advisory in the sense that if somebody cross on a red light that does not give you an wild card to run him over. You always must drive with due care means the magic words "he was running red light your honour, which is a MUST cross on a green rule, hence I have run him over..." are not good enough for the judge to agree with you.
-
:)
-
Chances are, if you unwittingly decide, by choice, to take a chance and walk in front of me, you'd better start shifting, 'cos i ain't stopping!
No need for me to explain any further.....try me!
They always move......rather sharpishly, especially when you rev, drop a gear, and take aim. :evil
-
They always move......rather sharpishly, especially when you rev, drop a gear, and take aim. :evil
(http://www.yellmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/mad-max-2-max-dog.jpg)
:rollin
-
Front and rear lights are good enough. Reflectors are required by law but if you have working lights - you don't really need them. Most road bikes as well as fixies don't have reflectors.
However, two separate brake systems, one on each wheel are required both by law and common sense. One brake can fail any time.
For single speed (and fixed gear) bicycles, rear wheel can be stopped with pedals - but many people ride without the front as well. I've found that a good front brake is crucial for sudden situations, like pedestrians jumping on the bicycle lane - often happens where I ride.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kumLyiWkIoE[/url] ([url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kumLyiWkIoE[/url])
Air horn.....a solver of problems, and maketh of many dances. :lol
-
They always move......rather sharpishly, especially when you rev, drop a gear, and take aim. :evil
([url]http://www.yellmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/mad-max-2-max-dog.jpg[/url])
:rollin
Hi vis jacket, 2 headlights, reflective Arai stickers on the lid and bike, reflective tape on the top box, beeping indicators, LED strip lights on each side of the fairing connected and in sync with my normal indicators, LED brake light which also becomes another added rear set of added indicators as well as the originals, and a noisy but not too loud Quill end can.
I fucking dare any bastard i just ran down then wheel spun over to say they never saw or heard me!
I can't be any more noticeable unless i stick cow bells on the wheels and wear a mini skirt!
Okay......you can erase that thought now! :lol
-
Still not enough for bikes. This video explains the visibility problem from the angle of human instincts and limits:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqQBubilSXU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqQBubilSXU)
Add poor driver training (and none training required to be a pedestrian) and there you have it.
I had a SMIDSY once, driving a car. Hit the brakes at the very last second. And consider myself to be a very cautious driver, on the lookout for (motor)cyclists. Now I'm ten years older with worse reflexes. Could happen any time to anyone. :(
-
There's a tube station not far from where i live that's situated on top of quite a steep bridge that goes over the track and my worst scenario is when it's pissing down with rain so i have a visor full of water droplets, oncoming cars coming over the bridge with their lovely bright headlights illuminating every single one of those droplets, then some cnut deciding to cross the road dressed in dark clothing in the thought that i must be able to see them, just 'cos they fancy a kebab but can't be arsed to use the proper crossing.
I might feel a bump, then wash the bike down later......but no, i simply cannot see them, through no fault of my own.
Why anyone would want to cross a road on the wrong side of a blind bridge just beggars belief, i wouldn't even consider it in broad daylight?
-
Look it up, I think you'll find that pedestrians have 'a right of way'.
"Right of way" simply means that someone is allowed to "Pass and re-pass" across a piece of land, ie they can do it repeatedly and do not need to ask for permission at any time.
The correct term is "priority", ie who gets to go first. At a roundabout, traffic from the right has priority, ie you're required to let it go first. If a pedestrian has set foot on a zebra crossing, they have priority and traffic must stop for them.
However, although you're not allowed to deliberately run them down, some idiot just stepping out into the road does *not* have priority and, if they get hit, may well be deemed to be at fault.
-
Look it up, I think you'll find that pedestrians have 'a right of way'.
"Right of way" simply means that someone is allowed to "Pass and re-pass" across a piece of land, ie they can do it repeatedly and do not need to ask for permission at any time.
The correct term is "priority", ie who gets to go first. At a roundabout, traffic from the right has priority, ie you're required to let it go first. If a pedestrian has set foot on a zebra crossing, they have priority and traffic must stop for them.
However, although you're not allowed to deliberately run them down, some idiot just stepping out into the road does *not* have priority and, if they get hit, may well be deemed to be at fault.
So what you're actually suggesting is by writing *not* and also "may well", you don't really know the exact answer either, just like the rest of us?
Spoken like a true lawyer. :lol
All i know is if you decide to rudely and carelessly step out in front of me then you get to hear the tone of my air horn, which in turn tends to give people a quick lesson in how to River Dance.
When i was a kid the Green Cross Code was drummed into you at school, on tv, posters, in fact it was everywhere. You don't really see that sort of thing these days, it was a proper campaign that was designed to help pedestrians and drivers alike.
Now if you go past a school for instance the chances are a bunch of kids will cross in front of you as slowly as possible with zero eye contact, but if you're really lucky one of them might actually acknowledge you with a middle finger to say "fuck you very much".
How times have changed. :\
-
When i was a kid the Green Cross Code was drummed into you at school, on tv, posters, in fact it was everywhere. You don't really see that sort of thing these days, it was a proper campaign that was designed to help pedestrians and drivers alike.
the reason the Green Cross Code isn't taught any more is because the little darlings are driven to school in 4 x 4's!!
I have tried to teach my kids how to cross properly looking both ways but still they will just blindly cross!
-
I often brake, slow down, when I see the pedestrian is not sure whether to go, or stop, or run. If they don't see me, then I go behind men and in front of women - because, from my experience, if they see me at the very last second, women often tend to suddenly stop or jump backwards, while men tend to start running-jumping forward, seldom stopping.
This bit about male and female reactions is just so, so true. A good heads up to others - except Darrsi who couldn't give a fook anyhow, and rightly so in a lot of cases :lol
-
So what you're actually suggesting is by writing *not* and also "may well", you don't really know the exact answer either, just like the rest of us?
Spoken like a true lawyer. :lol
No, if i was speaking like a true lawyer I'd have charged you £150 for that answer.
-
So what you're actually suggesting is by writing *not* and also "may well", you don't really know the exact answer either, just like the rest of us?
Spoken like a true lawyer. :lol
No, if i was speaking like a true lawyer I'd have charged you £150 for that answer.
This is very true. :lol
-
I often brake, slow down, when I see the pedestrian is not sure whether to go, or stop, or run. If they don't see me, then I go behind men and in front of women - because, from my experience, if they see me at the very last second, women often tend to suddenly stop or jump backwards, while men tend to start running-jumping forward, seldom stopping.
This bit about male and female reactions is just so, so true. A good heads up to others - except Darrsi who couldn't give a fook anyhow, and rightly so in a lot of cases :lol
Rather than having to suddenly remember who steps which way, 'cos you're bound to forget, just aim straight at them with the horn blowing.
Then you can't get it wrong, :D
-
I often brake, slow down, when I see the pedestrian is not sure whether to go, or stop, or run. If they don't see me, then I go behind men and in front of women - because, from my experience, if they see me at the very last second, women often tend to suddenly stop or jump backwards, while men tend to start running-jumping forward, seldom stopping.
This bit about male and female reactions is just so, so true. A good heads up to others - except Darrsi who couldn't give a fook anyhow, and rightly so in a lot of cases :lol
Rather than having to suddenly remember who steps which way, 'cos you're bound to forget, just aim straight at them with the horn blowing.
Then you can't get it wrong, :D
Good shout :lol :lol . Been thinking though......what happens if it's a faggott or a lesbo eh - what then ? :eek
-
Good shout :lol :lol . Been thinking though......what happens if it's a faggott or a lesbo eh - what then ? :eek
If there are two lesbos and they are kissing each other I do not have problem with that at all, dreams come true :rollin :rollin
-
Be careful what you wish for... :rollin
(http://s18.postimg.org/fnz4484ll/lesbianas.jpg)
-
:woot :woot
-
Good shout :lol :lol . Been thinking though......what happens if it's a faggott or a lesbo eh - what then ? :eek
[/quote]
they'd start mincing on the spot
and slaninar.......bang outta order, we need lipstick lez's
-
Look it up, I think you'll find that pedestrians have 'a right of way'.
If a pedestrian has set foot on a zebra crossing, they have priority and traffic must stop for them.
This isn't how the highway code is set, and a mistake too many people make-
Zebra crossings are a two way thing, pedestrians must wait until vehicles give way to them to cross, as such vehicles must give way to pedestrians waiting* to cross
What do too many people do?
Walk up to the crossing and just step out.
So what's the major problem here?
It's pissing down with rain and someone just steps out thinking 'they have priority' you end up attempting an emergency stop but because the road is slippy the pedestrian ends up getting knee capped by a sliding motorbike!
Yes, it's happened, no not to me, the bike rider was declared to have done no wrong- pedestrian fault!
This isn't a dig at you grahamm, too many people decide to interpret the highway code as they see fit, and they're wrong!
-
I hate (whether on bicycle, motorcycle or in a car) when pedestrians stand by the crossing waiting for you to STOP (children and elderly excluded). Can't you see I'm slowing down, waving/waiting for you to pass?! Most of the time they would have passed without me needing to stop, or slow down much, but they just stand still, until I reach the crossing, waiting for me to come to a full stop. Most of the time I just smile and say thank you and ride on, without stopping.
-
Had a fella walk out on me the other day going home from work but it was a bit of a tough one.
Because firstly, he just looked like a very pissed Irishman.......but secondly he had a white stick!
So I did the decent thing and refrained from using my air horn and rode around him.
Dunno if he ever made it to the other side? :lol
-
If a pedestrian has set foot on a zebra crossing, they have priority and traffic must stop for them.
This isn't how the highway code is set, and a mistake too many people make-
Zebra crossings are a two way thing, pedestrians must wait until vehicles give way to them to cross, as such vehicles must give way to pedestrians waiting* to cross
Err, not from what I've just read:
Rule 18 ([url]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35[/url])
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should
always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
always cross between the studs or over the zebra markings. Do not cross at the side of the crossing or on the zig-zag lines, as it can be dangerous.
You MUST NOT loiter on any type of crossing.
So "always check that the traffic has stopped" is only a "should", not a "MUST".
Rule 19
Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing. Keep looking both ways, and listening, in case a driver or rider has not seen you and attempts to overtake a vehicle that has stopped.
This addresses Slainar's comment. Provided they haven't stepped onto the crossing, he's within his rights to keep going (although it's generally considered polite and sensible to stop :) )
Rule 195 ([url]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203[/url])
Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing
look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
So as soon as they step on the crossing, it's a legal requirement ie "MUST" that you give way, but, again, it's recommended that you watch out for pedestrians and slow down or stop if they're waiting.
Here's the law it's based on (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/part/I/crossheading/movement-of-traffic-at-crossings/made):
Precedence of pedestrians over vehicles at Zebra crossings
25.—(1) Every pedestrian, if he is on the carriageway within the limits of a Zebra crossing, which is not for the time being controlled by a constable in uniform or traffic warden, before any part of a vehicle has entered those limits, shall have precedence within those limits over that vehicle and the driver of the vehicle shall accord such precedence to any such pedestrian.
-
In my country you must stop when you see a pedestrian approaching the crossing - doesn't have to step on it. NOBODY respects this. :)
Also, overtaking a car stopped at zebra crossing is life endangering for pedestrian and the fine is immediate loss of the driver's license + fine.
-
If a pedestrian has set foot on a zebra crossing, they have priority and traffic must stop for them.
This isn't how the highway code is set, and a mistake too many people make-
Zebra crossings are a two way thing, pedestrians must wait until vehicles give way to them to cross, as such vehicles must give way to pedestrians waiting* to cross
Err, not from what I've just read:
Rule 18 ([url]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35[/url])
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should
always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
always cross between the studs or over the zebra markings. Do not cross at the side of the crossing or on the zig-zag lines, as it can be dangerous.
You MUST NOT loiter on any type of crossing.
So "always check that the traffic has stopped" is only a "should", not a "MUST".
Rule 19
Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing. Keep looking both ways, and listening, in case a driver or rider has not seen you and attempts to overtake a vehicle that has stopped.
This addresses Slainar's comment. Provided they haven't stepped onto the crossing, he's within his rights to keep going (although it's generally considered polite and sensible to stop :) )
Rule 195 ([url]https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203[/url])
Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing
look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
So as soon as they step on the crossing, it's a legal requirement ie "MUST" that you give way, but, again, it's recommended that you watch out for pedestrians and slow down or stop if they're waiting.
Here's the law it's based on ([url]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/part/I/crossheading/movement-of-traffic-at-crossings/made[/url]):
Precedence of pedestrians over vehicles at Zebra crossings
25.—(1) Every pedestrian, if he is on the carriageway within the limits of a Zebra crossing, which is not for the time being controlled by a constable in uniform or traffic warden, before any part of a vehicle has entered those limits, shall have precedence within those limits over that vehicle and the driver of the vehicle shall accord such precedence to any such pedestrian.
The easiest way to think about this is put yourself in a pedestrians position.
I know damn well that if i'm at a zebra crossing there is no way way i am stepping foot on it until all you bastard car and bike drivers/riders have stopped dead, given me eye contact, and maybe waved me across or flashed your lights. If you're still moving i ain't chancing it, and just for the Brucie Bonus, i WILL put my hand up and even say thank you for being the one that stopped to let me cross.
Then whilst cautiously crossing in downright fear of my life, i'll then look at the other side of the road and plead with them fuckers to spare mercy on me as well, and let me reach the other side in one piece, then jump for joy in sheer relief when i finally make it. :woot
That's how you cross a road. :smokin
-
The zig zag lines make up the limits of the zebra crossing, hopefully everyone understands this along with rule 25!
-
there's a pelican crossing by me where you take your life in your hands each time you cross on it. 2 lanes of traffic each way and lane 1 stops but lane 2 sometimes drive through.......BLIND TWATS :evil
I've nearly been hit 3 times and one girl was killed. I always wait for lane 1 to stop now and gingerly await lane 2 stopping on my side, I then look for the same on the opposite side before crossing
the other week some tosser had stopped across the crossing in heavy traffic then the lights went red allowing me to cross. I walked around the rear of this car and slapped it and the window went down. I told him not to stop on the crossing and he replied he'd break me leg if I touched his car again
the red mist came down and I told the 25 stone fat twat to get out the car, called him allsorts from the middle of the crossing whilst drivers were watching. The cnut really got me goat.....................damn.......wrong post :lol
-
there's a pelican crossing by me where you take your life in your hands each time you cross on it. 2 lanes of traffic each way and lane 1 stops but lane 2 sometimes drive through.......BLIND TWATS :evil
I've nearly been hit 3 times and one girl was killed. I always wait for lane 1 to stop now and gingerly await lane 2 stopping on my side, I then look for the same on the opposite side before crossing
the other week some tosser had stopped across the crossing in heavy traffic then the lights went red allowing me to cross. I walked around the rear of this car and slapped it and the window went down. I told him not to stop on the crossing and he replied he'd break me leg if I touched his car again
the red mist came down and I told the 25 stone fat twat to get out the car, called him allsorts from the middle of the crossing whilst drivers were watching. The cnut really got me goat.....................damn.......wrong post :lol
Arrrr ehhhhh Maddog
-
I don't even know where to begin....... :rolleyes
http://www.bmw.co.uk/en_GB/topics/discover-bmw/bikes-equipment.html (http://www.bmw.co.uk/en_GB/topics/discover-bmw/bikes-equipment.html)
-
That's how you cross a road. :smokin
The reply was about the Highway Code and the Law. Unfortunately what they say and what people do are different matters :(
Although there was one bit that I found interesting:
Prior to that post, I was under the impression that you mustn't filter past a vehicle that is closest to the crossing (in the Zig-Zag area) whether there is a pedestrian there or not. Now, having read what I posted, it seems that you *can* filter past if they're stopped on the Zig-Zags if they *haven't* stopped for a pedestrian.
I presume that it's been updated to clarify the situation, but I don't have an older version of the HC to hand to check at the moment.
-
sorry frosties..............are you one of our larger brethren then? :lol
and where did you get me photo? ;)
-
Gra.....I asked the same question at one of classes, answer was filter to rear bumper of vehicle closest to crossing........fine with that!
I then asked about filtering straight through to the rear of the lead vehicle on the other side of the crossing but still within the zigzags and was told not to pass the crossing just incase a ped appears/decides to walk across and you cannot see them......made sense but cannot say if legal or illegal move
I'd bet a penny to a pound though, if you passed the crossing and hit someone, you'd be on a sticky wicket in court (might even be a 50/50 given by the court)
-
I slow down to walking speed when passing vehicle stopped in front of crossing - just in case I don't see a pedestrian. Even if the car is parked.
-
sorry frosties..............are you one of our larger brethren then? :lol
and where did you get me photo? ;)
Fellow Scouser fella & ye mum gave me the pic this morning soft lad :lol
-
I then asked about filtering straight through to the rear of the lead vehicle on the other side of the crossing but still within the zigzags and was told not to pass the crossing just incase a ped appears/decides to walk across and you cannot see them.....
Sure, were I to filter past the front vehicle at a crossing now, I would first make *absolutely* certain it was clear and that there was nobody about to step onto it. Provided there wasn't, I would proceed, but, any uncertainty, I'd stop and wait.
Actually this is useful to me as there's a road in Portsmouth which leads to the bottom of the M275 with a Pelican crossing on it (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.8050462,-1.08613,3a,75y,305.83h,89.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syaSeVkZpv7R4IsV_4UpCBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) where you get a lot of traffic stopped at the lights on the roundabout at the end and it backs up past the crossing.
It's an S-bend and you can see clearly across it and you don't get so much traffic coming the other way, so it's great for filtering up the queue.
Previously, though, I've often had to stop because there's been a car standing at the crossing and I couldn't legally filter past them, but now I know that if the crossing is clear (and I can see it is), I can proceed instead :thumbup
-
I then asked about filtering straight through to the rear of the lead vehicle on the other side of the crossing but still within the zigzags and was told not to pass the crossing just incase a ped appears/decides to walk across and you cannot see them.....
Sure, were I to filter past the front vehicle at a crossing now, I would first make *absolutely* certain it was clear and that there was nobody about to step onto it. Provided there wasn't, I would proceed, but, any uncertainty, I'd stop and wait.
Actually this is useful to me as there's a road in Portsmouth which leads to the bottom of the M275 with a Pelican crossing on it (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.8050462,-1.08613,3a,75y,305.83h,89.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syaSeVkZpv7R4IsV_4UpCBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) where you get a lot of traffic stopped at the lights on the roundabout at the end and it backs up past the crossing.
It's an S-bend and you can see clearly across it and you don't get so much traffic coming the other way, so it's great for filtering up the queue.
Previously, though, I've often had to stop because there's been a car standing at the crossing and I couldn't legally filter past them, but now I know that if the crossing is clear (and I can see it is), I can proceed instead :thumbup
yeah but watch out for that speed camera near the Shell station it's only a 40 limit there!! :rollin
-
yeah but watch out for that speed camera near the Shell station it's only a 40 limit there!! :rollin
Yes, I know. (Although it is a front-facing camera, so wouldn't catch bikes, but that's an entirely separate issue... :D )