Zebra crossings are for pedestrians

a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

On 07/02/2020 09:48, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

Same applies with drivers and pedestrians, but of course you are
simply obsessed with just cyclists.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI8mXzEJFfE

--
Bod

On 07/02/2020 10:10, Bod wrote:
On 07/02/2020 09:48, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

Same applies with drivers and pedestrians, but of course you are
simply obsessed with just cyclists.

Drivers are *definitely* allowed to ride across (as opposed to along it
from footway to footway) a zebra crossing.

AAMOF, so are cyclists. A driver (or a cyclist) proceeding lawfully
along the carriageway is not obliged to cede priority to a cyclist
abusing the pedestrian facility of a zebra crossing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI8mXzEJFfE

Whatever...

On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?

On 08/02/2020 11:26, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?


The driver only needs to give pedestrians precedence, therefore it is
permissible to cross while pedestrians are on the crossing and moving
away.

The cyclist entered the carriageway without giving way to traffic
already on the carriageway, therefore a charge of careless cycling or
possibly dangerous cycling would be justified.

On Saturday, 8 February 2020 15:06:38 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 11:26, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?


The driver only needs to give pedestrians precedence, therefore it is
permissible to cross while pedestrians are on the crossing and moving
away.

Highway code rule 194.
Allow pedestrians plenty of time to cross and do not harass them by revving your engine or edging forward.


The cyclist entered the carriageway without giving way to traffic
already on the carriageway, therefore a charge of careless cycling or
possibly dangerous cycling would be justified.

The victim was already on the crossing before the driver moved therefore a charge of attempted murder is justified.

On 08/02/2020 15:33, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2020 15:06:38 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 11:26, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?


The driver only needs to give pedestrians precedence, therefore it is
permissible to cross while pedestrians are on the crossing and moving
away.

Highway code rule 194.
Allow pedestrians plenty of time to cross and do not harass them by revving your engine or edging forward.


The cyclist entered the carriageway without giving way to traffic
already on the carriageway, therefore a charge of careless cycling or
possibly dangerous cycling would be justified.

The victim was already on the crossing before the driver moved therefore a charge of attempted murder is justified.




You must be Judge Lee and ICMFP

Vehicles are not pedestrians, cyclists travel at greater speed than
pedestrians, the one that should face charges is the cyclist, he
endangered pedestrians and came close to causing a collision with them
and the car.

The cyclist did not obey HC rule 20 and 19
The cyclist did not obey rule 79

When joing a carriageway you must give way to traffic already on the
carriageway, the cyclist did not.

The car driver gave way to the legally entitled pedestrians.

On Saturday, 8 February 2020 17:26:03 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 15:33, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2020 15:06:38 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 11:26, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?


The driver only needs to give pedestrians precedence, therefore it is
permissible to cross while pedestrians are on the crossing and moving
away.

Highway code rule 194.
Allow pedestrians plenty of time to cross and do not harass them by revving your engine or edging forward.


The cyclist entered the carriageway without giving way to traffic
already on the carriageway, therefore a charge of careless cycling or
possibly dangerous cycling would be justified.

The victim was already on the crossing before the driver moved therefore a charge of attempted murder is justified.




You must be Judge Lee and ICMFP

Vehicles are not pedestrians, cyclists travel at greater speed than
pedestrians, the one that should face charges is the cyclist, he
endangered pedestrians and came close to causing a collision with them
and the car.

The cyclist did not obey HC rule 20 and 19
The cyclist did not obey rule 79

When joing a carriageway you must give way to traffic already on the
carriageway, the cyclist did not.

The car driver gave way to the legally entitled pedestrians.

So that makes attempted murder OK?

On 08/02/2020 18:25, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2020 17:26:03 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 15:33, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2020 15:06:38 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 11:26, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?


The driver only needs to give pedestrians precedence, therefore it is
permissible to cross while pedestrians are on the crossing and moving
away.

Highway code rule 194.
Allow pedestrians plenty of time to cross and do not harass them by revving your engine or edging forward.


The cyclist entered the carriageway without giving way to traffic
already on the carriageway, therefore a charge of careless cycling or
possibly dangerous cycling would be justified.

The victim was already on the crossing before the driver moved therefore a charge of attempted murder is justified.




You must be Judge Lee and ICMFP

Vehicles are not pedestrians, cyclists travel at greater speed than
pedestrians, the one that should face charges is the cyclist, he
endangered pedestrians and came close to causing a collision with them
and the car.

The cyclist did not obey HC rule 20 and 19
The cyclist did not obey rule 79

When joing a carriageway you must give way to traffic already on the
carriageway, the cyclist did not.

The car driver gave way to the legally entitled pedestrians.

So that makes attempted murder OK?


Look up the definition of 'attempted murder'. Google is a good place to
start.

If someone jumps in front of you and you avoid them (as he did) then
that just shows how important it is to have skilled licenced road users
with road worthy vehicles.

If someone jumps in front of you and you hit them, then it is unlikely
and unreasonable that any blame will be attached to you.

On Saturday, 8 February 2020 19:09:09 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 18:25, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2020 17:26:03 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 15:33, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 8 February 2020 15:06:38 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
On 08/02/2020 11:26, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 7 February 2020 09:48:53 UTC, MrCheerful wrote:
a good video from Hull showing why cyclists must not ride over zebra
crossings.

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news...e-hull-3814847

The driver should have stopped until the pedestrian cleared the crossing anyway.
What law was the cyclist breaking?


The driver only needs to give pedestrians precedence, therefore it is
permissible to cross while pedestrians are on the crossing and moving
away.

Highway code rule 194.
Allow pedestrians plenty of time to cross and do not harass them by revving your engine or edging forward.


The cyclist entered the carriageway without giving way to traffic
already on the carriageway, therefore a charge of careless cycling or
possibly dangerous cycling would be justified.

The victim was already on the crossing before the driver moved therefore a charge of attempted murder is justified.




You must be Judge Lee and ICMFP

Vehicles are not pedestrians, cyclists travel at greater speed than
pedestrians, the one that should face charges is the cyclist, he
endangered pedestrians and came close to causing a collision with them
and the car.

The cyclist did not obey HC rule 20 and 19
The cyclist did not obey rule 79

When joing a carriageway you must give way to traffic already on the
carriageway, the cyclist did not.

The car driver gave way to the legally entitled pedestrians.

So that makes attempted murder OK?


Look up the definition of 'attempted murder'. Google is a good place to
start.

OK it was merely assault with a deadly weapon.


If someone jumps in front of you and you avoid them (as he did) then
that just shows how important it is to have skilled licenced road users
with road worthy vehicles.

If someone jumps in front of you and you hit them, then it is unlikely
and unreasonable that any blame will be attached to you.

The victim did not 'jump' in front of the car. The car driver CHOSE to use the car as a weapon.