advertisement


Highway Code Changes

tiggers said:
I know it's bad form to quote yourself, but I experienced a prime example of that being discussed in the above quote this morning whilst driving out of London. I was on a road where the left most portion of the road is painted up as a cycle lane (piss poor idea IMO, but there you go). An ambulance with sirens and lights was needing to get down the road in the opposite direction to which I was travelling so both lanes of slow moving traffic moved to their left and into the cycle lane so as to let the ambulance use the middle of the road to get through. We were all stationary for about 30 seconds except for the cyclist in front of me who was trying to squeeze past the car in front but was unable to do so as the car had pulled left for said ambulance. He then started bashing the roof of the car and yelling that none of us should be in the cycle lane. The driver got out and explained about the ambulance to which the cyclist said he didn't give a shit about... cars aren't allowed in the cycle lane. The driver then lost it and shoved him off his bike. Fortunately things then calmed down, but... well this is what happens when two idiots meet! Neither helped the situation and it just makes me exasperated to be honest. Later on the M11 I watched as a van tried to stop a car joining from a slip road as he might have had to slow down by 5mph (it was busy) and then they spent half a mile beeping their horns and gesticulating at each other.... again two idiots... Sigh! Life is just too short for this sort of crap!
Click to expand...
Just plain daft behaviour. Could understand if the car cut into the cycle lane without due care but that doesn't appear to be case in this instance. I have actually been close passed by an ambulance a few times, ironic to say the least. One thing I have noticed is that good ambulance drivers don't use the siren when overtaking cyclists (usually) when on a call; this is really good practice & I always give them a wave.

It's amazing how frightening it is when you get beeped from behind when cycling, it always causes an involuntary flinch from me.
 
Woodface said:
Well that's just it, in the vast majority of cases it is far safer & will hopefully make the roads safer & fewer lives will be lost. I am sorry if the odd motorist feels persecuted by this change or has their feelings hurt. I doubt there has ever been a change to which motorists haven't objected to since they took away the man with the red flag.
Click to expand...
Nobody here shows any sign of feeling persecuted or hurt feelings. It's supposed to be a discussion, that's all.

There is nothing wrong with change where there is a clear benefit. For example, having worked in the US I think turning left at a red light when safe to do so should be considered.

My only concern with the changes being discussed is the potential for people to be hit by a car, especially silent electric cars. No apologises from me for being concerned. There are lots of poor drivers around and even good drivers make mistakes.
 
Brian said:
I'll be interested in the opinion of @Andrew C! on the benefits of the change relative to the potential for accidents to pedestrians crossing at a junction. I suspect he will have some experience of injuries to pedestrians that occur when crossing the road at junctions from vehicles turning left following the rules we've been used to for decades.
Click to expand...

Ooh not very often I get asked my opinion!:D

Pedestrian RTC’s have always been fairly easy to investigate, imho. As said upthread, the onus has always been on the motorist to be able to stop in the distance that can be seen to be clear, taking into account other factors.

A pedestrian entering a carriageway from the motorists near side - the motorist could have mitigation depending on how close they were when the predestination entered. A pedestrian from the motorists offside no so much.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ivers-unaware-of-planned-highway-code-changes

Provided the investigating officer his suitably trained and informed, the new changes won’t present much difference.
 
tiggers said:
In which case the vehicle behind is too close as they shouldn't need to see why a vehicle is stopping in order to stop themselves. Driving too close is a pet hate of mine... just saying :D
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more strongly. And all the nefarious rear ender whip lash (oo er) criminal gang insurance claimants rely on it!
 
Arkless Electronics said:
I couldn't disagree more strongly. And all the nefarious rear ender whip lash (oo er) criminal gang insurance claimants rely on it!
Click to expand...

Disagree all you like, being wrong is your choice.

In fact just ask yourself why the nefarious rear ender whip lash (oo er) criminal gang insurance claimants get paid out.
 
No new rule about the thing which most boiled my piss in that London then? Whats that then?? Twats in cars pulling out into the middle of the road to turn right so all other traffic in that lane has no choice but to stop if they don't want to go into the side of them!! My god I was sorely tempted to just ride straight into the side of one at a speed that would damage the car but not injure me....
 
Woodface said:
Established breaking distances have been in place long before erroneous whiplash claims. You really do come out with some crap;)
Click to expand...

I speak the most sense of anyone on here actually. Fact. And if some total ****er tries to test his best stopping distance in front of me on a clear road for no reason he'll find out what road rage really is!
 
People who think they’re well ‘ard just need to know that coked up knife carriers are driving cars on our roads. Every single day. All over the country.
 
tiggers said:
And if some total ****er tries to test his best stopping distance in front of me on a clear road for no reason he'll find out what road rage really is!
Click to expand...

What? Some ageing duffer of an electronics engineer bursting a blood vessel over very little and giving himself a coronary? :D
 
Arkless Electronics said:
I speak the most sense of anyone on here actually. Fact. And if some total ****er tries to test his best stopping distance in front of me on a clear road for no reason he'll find out what road rage really is!
Click to expand...
Would that be a civil or criminal suit you’d be facing? Burden of proof comes to mind again.
 
Arkless Electronics said:
I speak the most sense of anyone on here actually. Fact. And if some total ****er tries to test his best stopping distance in front of me on a clear road for no reason he'll find out what road rage really is!
Click to expand...

And posting this on what is in effect a social media platform is highly likely to be found and used …
 
A Porsche 928 had it's bodywork severely remodelled by my size 12 steel toe caps after just such an event in that London. The driver locked himself inside.... Instant justice.
 
Arkless Electronics said:
A Porsche 928 had it's bodywork severely remodelled by my size 12 steel toe caps after just such an event in that London. The driver locked himself inside.... Instant justice.
Click to expand...

But the point is, especially in London, you could just as easily end up with a ventilated torso for such actions. Slow down, anticipate, stay calm, live longer. It really is easy.
 
Tony Lockhart said:
But the point is, especially in London, you could just as easily end up with a ventilated torso for such actions. Slow down, anticipate, stay calm, live longer. It really is easy.
Click to expand...

probably better yes... the twat screeched to a halt locking up his tyres and tried to do a U turn right in front of me but stalled it! I had to use all my braking power and only just pulled up with about a foot to spare! If my reactions had been slower by a fraction of a second I'd have ploughed into the passenger side door. He deserved it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top