The Stupidest Thing I have Seen On the Roads This Week

[GarfieldLeChat]

er, I'm not talking about improving my chances in court - I'm talking about a reckless driver using it as a defence - for killing / injuring me.

and how exactly would wearing high vis on a 'bright clear day' have improved my chances of not being killed by this bloke? But hey, you're right, lets dress up like a fucking flourescent michelin man with a flashing light on your bonce because it obviously would 'improve your safety'. And lets fit airbags to bikes too...in fact lets take as much responsibilty as poss away from motorists to treat us with respect and keep their end of the bargain because bless em, they're not doing such a good job are they

(before anyone starts, I'm a motorist too)

alternatively let's abdicatea ny personal responsiblity from ourselves and blame the motorist for the problem ....

you know i reckon you make this shit up, eveyr occasion you are totally in the right and it's the evil anyonimous person whose persicuting you in every fucking story you tell... sorry but i don't buy it...

 

[Cobbles]

OK but if the driver i9s not responsible for killing the cyclist then how can you pass on the cost of the incident to the family who will also be suffering through the loss of a loved one and who would in no way be at fault for the death ?

The cost wouldn't be passed on to the family, purely the cyclist's estate.

The fact is your talking hypothetical situations , it's likely that even if a bus driver is not at fault with someones death it will still affect them . You wishing this twat to have an accident makes you a heartless cunt who doesn't have the ability to see beyond the direct consequences of any cyclist vs bus wheels collision IMO !

I wouldn't wish an acccident on anyone (where did is say that??????) but where the cyclist is guilty of having caused the accident and the consequent anguish, why shouldn't their estate be called to account?

 

[Sigmund Fraud]

alternatively let's abdicatea ny personal responsiblity from ourselves and blame the motorist for the problem ....

you know i reckon you make this shit up, eveyr occasion you are totally in the right and it's the evil anyonimous person whose persicuting you in every fucking story you tell... sorry but i don't buy it...

fine

fuck off then

 

[Termite Man]

I wouldn't wish an acccident on anyone (where did is say that??????) but where the cyclist is guilty of having caused the accident and the consequent anguish, why shouldn't their estate be called to account?

ok you didn't say you wished an accident on anyone , I seemed to think you did somehow

but where do you draw the line on what the cyclists estate is ? If he hasa wife and kids and all their money is in a joint account how do you seperate what belongs to who . If the cyclist was the sole earner of the family ( maybe the wife is disabled etc. ) how do you justify taking money from them to pass on to someone else . The sentiment is there but IMO you are still punishing the cyclists family for something they had no direct control over on top of the trauma of them losing a loved one ? The situation your talking about will have a large number of people who are adversly affected for something that wasn't their fault unfairly punished !

 

[Cobbles]

ok you didn't say you wished an accident on anyone , I seemed to think you did somehow

but where do you draw the line on what the cyclists estate is ? If he hasa wife and kids and all their money is in a joint account how do you seperate what belongs to who . If the cyclist was the sole earner of the family ( maybe the wife is disabled etc. ) how do you justify taking money from them to pass on to someone else . The sentiment is there but IMO you are still punishing the cyclists family for something they had no direct control over on top of the trauma of them losing a loved one ? The situation your talking about will have a large number of people who are adversly affected for something that wasn't their fault unfairly punished !

Fine - I take it that in a situation where there is an accident caused by a motor vehicle and the driver who caused the accident had died, under no circumstances would it be right to pursue a claim against them.

 

[Herbsman.]

Someone without 20/20 vision...? Someone hungover and not concentrating on everything...? Its not going to save your life everyday, just when you need it to...

And how is high vis clothing going to protect a cyclist from being hit by someone who is incapable of driving safely and thus shouldn't be driving a car? Do you think high vis clothing has some sort of magic anti-car forcefield that protects the cyclist from being hit?

 

[tommers]

And how is high vis clothing going to protect a cyclist from being hit by someone who is incapable of driving safely and thus shouldn't be driving a car? Do you think high vis clothing has some sort of magic anti-car forcefield that protects the cyclist from being hit?

is not crossing the road when cars are coming going to stop some idiot mounting the pavement to mow you down?

no.

improves your chances though, don't it?

 

[scifisam]

Can't see how the absence of these would make any difference if he went under a bus...or are you trying to emphasise his twattishness? In which case no lights=bad but as for hi-vis and helmets theres no legal requirement to use them (and many would say no safety benefit either, esp helmets).

Yeah, I guess I was just emphasising his twattishness. Perhaps that wasn't really necessary, since he was such a twat already, but then the thread would have been a lot shorter.

 

[Pie 1]

I was looking forward to some nice stories of foolhardy manouvers.

This thread seems to have derailed quicker than I did when I got my front wheel stuck in a tram track.

Nothing really to report from Zurich. Everyone's boringly competent here.

 

[alfajobrob]

Bloke on a bicycle (not lights, not high-vis, not helmet) who rode up next to a bus, grabbed hold of one of the high lights, and used the bus to pull him along instead of peddling. He kept hold even as they went around a corner!

OK, I know the week's only just got started, but I don't think I'll see anything stupider than that!

hehe...I've done this myself a couple of times in the past on my mtb.

Yes its dangerous, but it was good fun at the time & I was only ever gonna come a cropper myself.

I don't do it anymore though, bit trickier on fixed.

 

[bluestreak]

letting buses pull you along is dangerous? even bendy buses?

 

[tommers]

I
when I got my front wheel stuck in a tram track.

I've done that. embarrassing isn't it?

 

[Herbsman.]

letting buses pull you along is dangerous? even bendy buses?

Don't be silly. It's perfectly safe to do it with bendy buses. Everyone knows that. It's the rigid buses you have to be careful with.

 

[f for fake]

just read this chat so a bit slow

however the argument about high vis tops. I HAVE to wear them as i work on a building site, i also HAVE to wear a hard hat, you only realy need a high vis when there are vehicals driving about on the site, and yes they do help you stand out during the day time. Hard hats are only usefull if something light falls on your head, a brick dropped from a few meters up will bounce off, but anything heavyer and higher may just crack the helmet and do you damage.

Anything to make you stand out and be more safe can only be a good thing. Being a driver i try and drive safe, but small kids on the pavement sundenly ride on to the road with out looking, even at 20mph i could hit them, but who will be to blame, ME.

this country is becoming more of a blame culture rather than taking responability for themselfs. If a cyclist want not to wear a helmet and a high vis fair enough, but dont blame me if i hit you if i cant see you. Even if i am driving with due care and attention.

 

[Structaural]

I was looking forward to some nice stories of foolhardy manouvers.

This thread seems to have derailed quicker than I did when I got my front wheel stuck in a tram track.

that happened to me as well... In the rain with gf on back of bike - we slid down the road for about 2 metres, very painful.

 

[Pingu]

in the fog...at night

bloke on a bike with no lights and wearing dark clothing...

either a burglar who doesnt want to be spotted or a muppet with a deathwish

 

[sir.clip]

the stupidest thing i have seen was A man in a car driving at around 45 mph in a 30mph zone, Smoking what looked like a big spliff, whilst talking on his mobile phone, with no seat belt on, wearing dark glasses, one front light working & no brake lights, blasting out some kind of homophobic ragga tune from his in car streo system... I dident get the chance to say anything to him...

 

[Pie 1]

I dident get the chance to say anything to him...

Probably a good thing. Sounds like he probably would've shot you.

 

[lighterthief]

in the fog...at night

bloke on a bike with no lights and wearing dark clothing...

either a burglar who doesnt want to be spotted or a muppet with a deathwish

Yep, there's afair few of them about in London for sure.

 

[nick]

This morning.
bloke running a red light crossing the A23 oval junction from camberwell direction - looked neither left nor right and made it across about a nano second before a couple of heavy cars almost pulped him as they were crossing on green.

Unfortunately He didn't look behind either before he crashed the light as he did it right infront of a police car - which proceeded to pull him over and, presumably, hit him for £30.

All the other cyclists who saw it happen seemed to agree that he deserved it for being a twat and helping to perpetuate the "all cyclists ignore the law" myth.

 

[bigbry]

Can't see how the absence of these would make any difference if he went under a bus...or are you trying to emphasise his twattishness? In which case no lights=bad but as for hi-vis and helmets theres no legal requirement to use them (and many would say no safety benefit either, esp helmets).

Two or three years ago on a miserable raining November evening I went to pick my other half up from her Tesco job. On the way I have to turn right on a mini rounabout on a T junction - as I approach it the two roads left and right both come down a slope towards it. It has sreet lighting but it's that yellow lighting they use on minor roads - not very bright.

I approach at a reasonable speed looking left and right - nothing coming so I pull out and theree's a big bang and a bloke hopping along outside the drivers window. My first thought was 'I never saw him - my eyes nust be terrible'.

I get out and say to this guy, who is just picking his bike up, "Are you alright , amte ? I'm sorry I just didn't see you !" Then I notice he's got a black wooly hat on black coat, trousers and shoes. And as he picks his bike up I see that it's black also - and it hasn't got any lights - front or rear.

By now I was livid so I told him what a stupid twat he was as he got on his bike and pedalled off without a word. Would hi-vis clothing have helped ? Possibly, it would be better than black.

 

[Sigmund Fraud]

my point is regarding people not using high-vis - not people using no lights and no high-vis. If the bloke had BS/CE approved lights you would have clocked him if you'd been looking. I think high-vis is for people who aren't looking.

crucial difference

 

[TeeJay]

Nominally yes, but I resent the idea that you *have* to wear it to be safe;

Surely being "safe" on a road means taking whatever action or precautions that will make people see you and avoid hitting you or driving you into the gutter. The law might say that you only need a rear light after dark, and that a front light, high viz or anything else isn't technically needed, but ultimately you shouldn't be thinking about what you can legally get away with, you should be thinking about what will keep you safe and alive on the roads. What this means you *have* to do will depend on the road conditions, traffic, road layout, the weather, the time of year and the time of day, and how much you trust other road users not be be utter morons in how they drive. This last factor suggests that the more viz the better because it only take one complete moron, of which there are a fair number out there, to seriously mess up you day.

 

[TeeJay]

---edit---

 

[bigbry]

my point is regarding people not using high-vis - not people using no lights and no high-vis. If the bloke had BS/CE approved lights you would have clocked him if you'd been looking. I think high-vis is for people who aren't looking.

crucial difference

Fair comment - I was definitely looking and you're absolutely right - if he had got lights I would have seen him. But if he didn't have lights he would have stood a slightly better chance than no chance.

I put my car lights on when visiblity is the slightest bit impaired - I'm sure 9 times out of ten when it's abit murky I can still be seen without the lights but I try to give other road users every assistance. Surely hi-vis clothing is in the same category - they should see you but it helps to make you 'stand out'.

 

[scifisam]

my point is regarding people not using high-vis - not people using no lights and no high-vis. If the bloke had BS/CE approved lights you would have clocked him if you'd been looking. I think high-vis is for people who aren't looking.

crucial difference

However, on the occasion I mentioned where my lights failed, if I'd had hi-vis clothing that still would have worked. Besides, isn't the hi-vis clothing at a different visual level to the lights? So in tightly-packed traffic, if a bike's overtaking a car, the car might not be able to see the lights as the bike comes up on the outside, but would be able to see the cyclist in high-vis clothing (or at least bright clothing - I've only just got a high-vis jacket, but my usual coat is bright pink and I very rarely ride in the dark).

 

[steamtrain]

Total Stupidity

Driving up a hill at 7:00am on the way to work this Wednesday, just over the brow is a small roundabout. Just coming up to a Zebra crossing which is just before the said roundabout. Bearing in mind its dark and the streetlights are not very good, suddenly become aware of a car slowly overtaking me and its only got its sidelights on. Guessed that the pilot of said vehicle is unaware of roundabout, stood on brakes (yep the ABS worked), car then cut in front as she saw the roundabout ahead and the lorry coming the other way.

As car went past saw male passenger with his hands over his eyes and a lady driver with her nose virtually against the windscreen.

Stunning.

What you would call a brown trouser moment.

And relax......

 

[cybertect]

Resurrecting an ancient thread, but...

Driving home from Coventry afternoon, I saw a lycra-clad cyclist riding on the hard shoulder of the M40!

I suspect a Darwin Award may be heading toward Oxfordshire real soon now.

 

[Herbsman.]

Hmm since this thread I've been hit twice, by people who either weren't looking or just misjudged my speed (I generally ride at about 12mph). Both times, the driver should have given way, but failed to do so. Both times I was wearing white clothing. Would a high vis vest have stopped me from getting hit? Is it really that more visible than white clothing?

 

[pogofish]

Wednesday morning - Forklift stacked high with fish boxes reversing straight out on to a busy dual carrigeway!