And todays idiots are

[guerney]

If you ask your friends, neighbours and family, you will find that hardly any will know about the changes to the highway code that put an obligation on road users to give way to pedestrians not only crossing at junctions, but also waiting to cross.

No drivers know, judging by the number of times I've almost been run over while wearing my pedestrian disguise. One time I almost got run over by a car driving at me on the pavement, turned off last moment as I was thinking about the viability of swiftly scaling the 6ft wall to my right, because the road was busy.

 

[saneagle]

No drivers know, judging by the number of times I've almost been run over while wearing my pedestrian disguise. One time I almost got run over by a car driving at me on the pavement, turned off last moment as I was thinking about the viability of swiftly scaling the 6ft wall to my right, because the road was busy.

Probably, your disguise isn't good enough. Maybe don't wear your cycle helmet when you're on foot. It sort of gives the game away - that and your padded underpants.

 

[Nealh]

As in #1 one has to be very wary of any pedestrian, dog, child and even another cyclist etc , etc and be on the brakes and slowing . One has to think like an advanced motorist and anticipate all situations.

I nearly got hit by a female cyclist on a dual path divided by a white line.
I was also with my bike but had got off and stood with it on it's stand on the non cycle part to adjust a pannier that my heel was clipping. Without thinking or looking I got on and cycled straight in to her path which made her take evasive action on to the grass and miss me . She made some curt remark to which I replied she had seen and noticed me and as I hadn't been too diligent in looking, she shoul dhave slowed, braked or even from a distance away wound her bell (which she didn't have ) to at least alert someone to her unseen arriving presence.
It is the moving cyclist coming upon some one especially from behind to being the one who need sto be most aware , stopping if necessary to avoid contact.
All my bikes have bells I use them , I ping them two or three times starting from about 10m away by which time I am slowing down when approaching others . It takes next to no time to speed up again .

 

[Az.]

Well... it is true. Drivers/cyclists don't stop even when they see a woman with little children crossing road on zebra crossing.

...after that they will probably open a thread on random forum "Look idiot with kids crossing the road" and include dashcam video.

 

[Ghost1951]

I don't have any idea how many people know about new rules regarding pedestrians, but I do notice that almost all drivers around here are passing my bike a with a much wider margin than they used to. Cycling on country roads in the old days used to involve a succession of startle reactions when cars passed far too close. These days they are quite rare in my own particular locality. I also can become aware of cars following slowly for ridiculously long periods, even while I am waving them past.

 

[guerney]

Maybe don't wear your cycle helmet when you're on foot.

That's @soundwave - he only removes his for the dentist.

It sort of gives the game away - that and your padded underpants.

Lesson learned: Gigantic padding in the crotch area is magnetic to female drivers.

 

[Nealh]

Near me is a Tesco with a crossing across on a 30mph residential road (at the roundabout it has two lanes for right or Left turning), the crossing is at around about that T 's on to busy rat run 40mph road .
I hold the road by being in the center so I 'm not cut up going on to said round about when it is clear.
Often I will always stop and let shoppers /pedestrians cross the 30mph road at the roundabout, it is surprising how many drivers in the other lane are blinkered and won't stop to allow the pedestrians to walk across. They
often have to pause in front of me to so they aren't mown down.

The vid specs will be coming in handy more often then I think both as a rider and pedestrian to report bad driving.

 

[Ghost1951]

That's @soundwave - he only removes his for the dentist.




Lesson learned: Gigantic padding in the crotch area is magnetic to female drivers.

Why Henry VIII’s Codpiece Is So…Monumental

Perhaps the most prominent part of the most well-known painting of Henry VIII (a now-lost work by Hans Holbein the Younger) is t

kottke.org

 

[Scorpio]

I gave you the link above, but I will copy/paste relevant fragment for your convenience.

The updated code clarifies that:

• when people are crossing or waiting to cross at a junction, other traffic should give way
• if people have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road <me: at a junction> , the people crossing have priority and the traffic should give way
• people driving, riding a motorcycle or cycling must give way to people on a zebra crossing and people walking and cycling on a parallel crossing

Of course nobody ever will advice you to cross the road with eyes closed, but you still can do that and die under truck knowing it was drivers fault.

Hi, not being argumentative but i did ask about people stepping off a pavement "not at a junction".
The new rules are clear but I still don't see any Highway code changes saying that's ok.

From a legal point of view I think the motorist will be found at fault - either fully or to some degree - if they hit anyone stepping into the road without looking where there's no crossing or junction. Personally I believe the Green Cross code is reasonable - it is should be a pedestrians responsibility to make sure it's safe before stepping onto a road where they might get hit by a passing car.

 

[saneagle]

Hi, not being argumentative but i did ask about people stepping off a pavement "not at a junction".
The new rules are clear but I still don't see any Highway code changes saying that's ok.

From a legal point of view I think the motorist will be found at fault - either fully or to some degree - if they hit anyone stepping into the road without looking where there's no crossing or junction. Personally I believe the Green Cross code is reasonable - it is should be a pedestrians responsibility to make sure it's safe before stepping onto a road where they might get hit by a passing car.

Whatever we think should be right, doesn’t matter. In the case of the woman that the cyclist hit that I mentioned above, she was crossing against a red pedestrian light, and the cyclist had green. He was found guilty.

There was also that case of the fixie rider, where a woman texting on her phone jumped out in front of him. He was found guilty because fixies don't have front brakes. Just like Saracen's, she had passed him, so he steered where she had been, but she suddenly woke up and jumped back into his revised path.

 

[Nealh]

In law the green light is legal if the way is clear , if a motorist hits someone they may be found at fault .
We know of the Dalston case where the guy hit a women /she walked out in front of him . His light was green so he carried on despite having an illegal 1kw kit he was found not guilty or manslaughter.

 

[Ghost1951]

Whatever we think should be right, doesn’t matter. In the case of the woman that the cyclist hit that I mentioned above, she was crossing against a red pedestrian light, and the cyclist had green. He was found guilty.

There was also that case of the fixie rider, where a woman texting on her phone jumped out in front of him. He was found guilty because fixies don't have front brakes. Just like Saracen's, she had passed him, so he steered where she had been, but she suddenly woke up and jumped back into his revised path.

If I am not mistaken, at least one of these riders was riding furiously and shouting in a somewhat abusive manner at a woman illadvisedly crossing the road. He also made unsympathetic remarks afterwards which did him no favours.

I think every case of pedestrian / car collisions will be taken by the police, CPS and the courts on its own merits. There will certainly be cases where no reasonable person (jury member or cps lawyer) would say the driver was negligent. It will hinge on whether the driver could reasonably be expected to foresee the event.

It is expected that every person driving or riding on the road is exercising proper care and attention in relation to everyone around them, especially more vulnerable people. If a driver was proceeding along the road in a sensible manner and a person without warning deviated from the pavement and jumped into the road immediately in front of them, no sane magistrate would hold them responsible. It is a matter of predictability. The video at the top of this thread shows two young people attempt to cross the road when the cyclist was thirty to forty meters from them. That gave plenty of time for the cyclist to slow down. In fact, they were changing their direction telegraphing their intention to cross before that. He ought to have picked up on that.

Had the one on the road, panicked and attempted to get back to the pavement, he would have been struck and the rider would have been very likely to be in a lot of bother.

 

[Ghost1951]

We know of the Dalston case where the guy hit a women /she walked out in front of him . His light was green so he carried on despite having an illegal 1kw kit he was found not guilty or manslaughter.

That last bit is interesting since I would have thought riding a bike with an illegally powered motor, that then resulted in death, might qualify as killing someone while carrying out a criminal act - which is more or less what manslaughter means. Perhaps the illegal motor does not reach the level of 'criminal act'. Maybe it is regarded as some sort of minor misdemeanour.

 

[flecc]

That last bit is interesting since I would have thought riding a bike with an illegally powered motor, that then resulted in death, might qualify as killing someone while carrying out a criminal act - which is more or less what manslaughter means. Perhaps the illegal motor does not reach the level of 'criminal act'. Maybe it is regarded as some sort of minor misdemeanour.

His bike did not have an illegally powered motor in law, he was riding a motorcycle in breach of the Two and Three Wheeled Type Approval regulation 168/2013. That contains an exemption from being a motor vehicle providing certain conditions are met, in the case of bicycles the conditions including the 250 Watt limit.

Any vehicle failing to meet an exemption standard is automatically a motor vehicle requiring registration etc.

So he could have been charged with a number of regulation breaches, no tax, no insurance, no registration and number plate, no motor cycle approved helmet etc., etc. But there was the more serious issue of death to be considered.

So no doubt, as in other similar cases, he was charged on the basis of riding a bicycle, the breach of 168/2013 and its implications ignored and only the cycling liability tried on the basis that the woman who suddenly ran into his path gave him no chance of stopping.
.

 

[saneagle]

In law the green light is legal if the way is clear , if a motorist hits a someone they may be found at fault .
We know of the Dalston case where the guy hit a women /she walked out in front of him . His light was green so he carried on despite having an illegal 1kw kit he was found not guilty or manslaughter.

The illegal bike was another case. he was just riding quite fast when the womend thre herself out in front of him. He left the scene carrying his bike, but he got off scott free in court, mainly because they charged him with furious cycling instead of no tax and insurance, etc.

 

[saneagle]

If I am not mistaken, at least one of these riders was riding furiously and shouting in a somewhat abusive manner at a woman illadvisedly crossing the road. He also made unsympathetic remarks afterwards which did him no favours.

I think every case of pedestrian / car collisions will be taken by the police, CPS and the courts on its own merits. There will certainly be cases where no reasonable person (jury member or cps lawyer) would say the driver was negligent. It will hinge on whether the driver could reasonably be expected to foresee the event.

It is expected that every person driving or riding on the road is exercising proper care and attention in relation to everyone around them, especially more vulnerable people. If a driver was proceeding along the road in a sensible manner and a person without warning deviated from the pavement and jumped into the road immediately in front of them, no sane magistrate would hold them responsible. It is a matter of predictability. The video at the top of this thread shows two young people attempt to cross the road when the cyclist was thirty to forty meters from them. That gave plenty of time for the cyclist to slow down. In fact, they were changing their direction telegraphing their intention to cross before that. He ought to have picked up on that.

Had the one on the road, panicked and attempted to get back to the pavement, he would have been struck and the rider would have been very likely to be in a lot of bother.

He was charged with furious cycling , though he was only riding at 15 mph. His shouting was just to get her out the way, probably because he didn't have a bell, not that it would have helped in that instance. The problem was that she jumped back the way she came, straight into him. Afterwards, he said something like it was her own fault. It's very easy for the judge sitting in his comfy chair to hold that against him, but when you're shaken up by an accident that just killed someone, you'd hardly be thinking straight. personally, I think the cyclist was very unlucky and the sentence was a bit harsh. Basically, be went to prison for not having a front brake. He would have walked free if he had one.

 

[saneagle]

Here we go:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1817290151296401550

 

[Az.]

Yeah... that was brilliant

 

[lenny]

South Yorkshire driver caught trimming beard while on motorway

The "shocking manscaping" was filmed in South Yorkshire during a road safety operation, police say.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Nealh]

If you ask your friends, neighbours and family, you will find that hardly any will know about the changes to the highway code that put an obligation on road users to give way to pedestrians not only crossing at junctions, but also waiting to cross.

Much the same with majority of drivers.