Should be part of our driving license

On 01/05/2018 00:08, JNugent wrote:
On 30/04/2018 23:53, TMS320 wrote:

On 30/04/18 19:01, MrCheerful wrote:

all the other categories you mention are pedestrians, cyclists are
vehicle users.

I have a copy of the first Highway Code. There is a paragraph headed "To
drivers of horse drawn vehicles" And another headed "Drivers of vehicles
and cyclists". (I am sure most people can understand what that means,
despite the grammar.) In the section headed "To Drivers of Motor
Vehicles (Including Motor Cyclists)" it refers to "... your vehicle" and
in the section headed "To cyclists" it refers to "... your cycle".

So obviously, a bicycle isn't a vehicle.

Or do you think the phrase "your vehicle" may have been used in order to
obviate the need for a list of possible motor vehicle types at every
iteration?

"...your motor-car, omnibus, motor-van, lorry, charabanc, tractor,
road-roller, steam-roller, steam traction-engine or (as the case may be)
any other sort of motor vehicle..."?


and since there is case law that states that a bicycle is a
vehicle...........

IIRC the first highway code also says that cyclists must not filter in
between other vehicles or undertake them.

On 01/05/18 00:08, JNugent wrote:
On 30/04/2018 23:53, TMS320 wrote:
On 30/04/18 19:01, MrCheerful wrote:

all the other categories you mention are pedestrians, cyclists are
vehicle users.

I have a copy of the first Highway Code. There is a paragraph headed "To
drivers of horse drawn vehicles" And another headed "Drivers of vehicles
and cyclists". (I am sure most people can understand what that means,
despite the grammar.) In the section headed "To Drivers of Motor
Vehicles (Including Motor Cyclists)" it refers to "... your vehicle" and
in the section headed "To cyclists" it refers to "... your cycle".

So obviously, a bicycle isn't a vehicle.

....as ridden or guided horse and pedestrian.

Or do you think the phrase "your vehicle" may have been used in order to
obviate the need for a list of possible motor vehicle types at every
iteration?

"...your motor-car, omnibus, motor-van, lorry, charabanc, tractor,
road-roller, steam-roller, steam traction-engine or (as the case may be)
any other sort of motor vehicle..."?

When the heading was "... Drivers of *motor* vehicles..." before
"...your vehicle" was used in the text you don't suppose there is
sufficient catch all? One exception was "horse drawn vehicle" but that
clearly does not have a *motor* so has its own section which refers back
to a subset of the rules affecting operators of *motor* vehicles.

On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 9:06:00 AM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:


When the heading was "... Drivers of *motor* vehicles..." before
"...your vehicle" was used in the text you don't suppose there is
sufficient catch all? One exception was "horse drawn vehicle" but that
clearly does not have a *motor* so has its own section which refers back
to a subset of the rules affecting operators of *motor* vehicles.

Indeed - in my mind, an electric bike with a twistgrip throttle is a motor vehicle, but in the eyes of the LAW, it is a bicycle and no helmet, licence, VED, MOT or insurance is required. Plus, you can drive it while impaired through alcohol.

On 01/05/18 11:08, JNugent wrote:
On 30/04/2018 23:53, TMS320 wrote:

On 30/04/18 19:01, MrCheerful wrote:

all the other categories you mention are pedestrians, cyclists are
vehicle users.

I have a copy of the first Highway Code. There is a paragraph headed "To
drivers of horse drawn vehicles" And another headed "Drivers of vehicles
and cyclists". (I am sure most people can understand what that means,
despite the grammar.) In the section headed "To Drivers of Motor
Vehicles (Including Motor Cyclists)" it refers to "... your vehicle" and
in the section headed "To cyclists" it refers to "... your cycle".

So obviously, a bicycle isn't a vehicle.

Or do you think the phrase "your vehicle" may have been used in order to
obviate the need for a list of possible motor vehicle types at every
iteration?

"...your motor-car, omnibus, motor-van, lorry, charabanc, tractor,
road-roller, steam-roller, steam traction-engine or (as the case may be)
any other sort of motor vehicle..."?

I think a bicycle is a vehicle.
From etymonline:

vehicle (n.)
1610s, "a medium through which a drug or medicine is administered," also
"any means of conveying or transmitting," from French véhicule (16c.),
from Latin vehiculum "means of transport, vehicle, carriage,
conveyance," from vehere "to bear, carry, convey," from PIE root *wegh-
"to go, move, transport in a vehicle," which also is the source of
English wagon. Sense of "cart or other conveyance" in English first
recorded 1650s.

On 01/05/18 18:50, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/05/2018 00:08, JNugent wrote:
On 30/04/2018 23:53, TMS320 wrote:

On 30/04/18 19:01, MrCheerful wrote:

all the other categories you mention are pedestrians, cyclists are
vehicle users.

I have a copy of the first Highway Code. There is a paragraph headed "To
drivers of horse drawn vehicles" And another headed "Drivers of vehicles
and cyclists". (I am sure most people can understand what that means,
despite the grammar.) In the section headed "To Drivers of Motor
Vehicles (Including Motor Cyclists)" it refers to "... your vehicle" and
in the section headed "To cyclists" it refers to "... your cycle".

So obviously, a bicycle isn't a vehicle.

Or do you think the phrase "your vehicle" may have been used in order
to obviate the need for a list of possible motor vehicle types at
every iteration?

"...your motor-car, omnibus, motor-van, lorry, charabanc, tractor,
road-roller, steam-roller, steam traction-engine or (as the case may
be) any other sort of motor vehicle..."?


and since there is case law that states that a bicycle is a
vehicle...........

IIRC the first highway code also says that cyclists must not filter in
between other vehicles or undertake them.

For once I agree with you.

On 01/05/2018 10:38, Peter Keller wrote:
On 01/05/18 11:08, JNugent wrote:
On 30/04/2018 23:53, TMS320 wrote:

On 30/04/18 19:01, MrCheerful wrote:

all the other categories you mention are pedestrians, cyclists are
vehicle users.

I have a copy of the first Highway Code. There is a paragraph headed "To
drivers of horse drawn vehicles" And another headed "Drivers of vehicles
and cyclists". (I am sure most people can understand what that means,
despite the grammar.) In the section headed "To Drivers of Motor
Vehicles (Including Motor Cyclists)" it refers to "... your vehicle" and
in the section headed "To cyclists" it refers to "... your cycle".

So obviously, a bicycle isn't a vehicle.

Or do you think the phrase "your vehicle" may have been used in order to
obviate the need for a list of possible motor vehicle types at every
iteration?

"...your motor-car, omnibus, motor-van, lorry, charabanc, tractor,
road-roller, steam-roller, steam traction-engine or (as the case may be)
any other sort of motor vehicle..."?

I think a bicycle is a vehicle.

So do I.

I was trying to derive meaning from the text quoted from the HC.

From etymonline:

vehicle (n.)
1610s, "a medium through which a drug or medicine is administered," also
"any means of conveying or transmitting," from French véhicule (16c.),
from Latin vehiculum "means of transport, vehicle, carriage,
conveyance," from vehere "to bear, carry, convey," from PIE root *wegh-
"to go, move, transport in a vehicle," which also is the source of
English wagon. Sense of "cart or other conveyance" in English first
recorded 1650s.

On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 10:38:40 AM UTC+1, Peter Keller wrote:

vehicle (n.)
also
"any means of conveying or transmitting," from French véhicule (16c.),
from Latin vehiculum "means of transport, vehicle, carriage,
conveyance," from vehere "to bear, carry, convey,

Is a horse a vehicle though?

On 01/05/18 07:50, MrCheerful wrote:

IIRC the first highway code also says that cyclists must not filter in
between other vehicles or undertake them.

It does not say what apparently think it says. The word "filter" is used
in the motor vehicle section so it is not a matter of change of style or
language.

The specific wording is "Do not attempt to gain a forward position in a
traffic block by riding along the narrow spaces between stationary
vehicles."

This does not specify the space between vehicle and kerb and it is under
a section labeled "Duties towards Other Road Users" not "Rule of the Road".

On 01/05/2018 12:45, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/05/18 07:50, MrCheerful wrote:

IIRC the first highway code also says that cyclists must not filter in
between other vehicles or undertake them.

It does not say what apparently think it says. The word "filter" is used
in the motor vehicle section so it is not a matter of change of style or
language.

The specific wording is "Do not attempt to gain a forward position in a
traffic block by riding along the narrow spaces between stationary
vehicles."

This does not specify the space between vehicle and kerb and it is under
a section labeled "Duties towards Other Road Users" not "Rule of the Road".

But it still says it?

And as you know, lots of cyclists *do* cycle between lines of stationary
or slow-moving vehicles.

On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 12:45:11 PM UTC+1, TMS320 wrote:


The specific wording is "Do not attempt to gain a forward position in a
traffic block by riding along the narrow spaces between stationary
vehicles."

Is this cyclist OK in that regard then?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcHQJrNXkAEk6Hj.jpg