Cyclists say the funniest things

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GLTC5gbY7c

0.37 "You just knocked me off my bike you were lucky I stayed on it"

On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Jester wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GLTC5gbY7c

0.37 "You just knocked me off my bike you were lucky I stayed on it"

He nearly died because he thought it was OK to ride into oncoming
traffic to get past queuing cars, but you expect him to be coherent?

On Friday, August 11, 2017 at 7:11:03 PM UTC+1, Rob Morley wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Jester wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GLTC5gbY7c

0.37 "You just knocked me off my bike you were lucky I stayed on it"

He nearly died because he thought it was OK to ride into oncoming
traffic to get past queuing cars, but you expect him to be coherent?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KRqeDEQcYk

On Friday, August 11, 2017 at 1:59:23 PM UTC+1, Simon Jester wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GLTC5gbY7c

0.37 "You just knocked me off my bike you were lucky I stayed on it"

'I know 'ees in thur 'cos I saw 'im come out'

On 11/08/17 21:20, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, August 11, 2017 at 7:11:03 PM UTC+1, Rob Morley wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Jester wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GLTC5gbY7c

0.37 "You just knocked me off my bike you were lucky I stayed on it"

He nearly died because he thought it was OK to ride into oncoming
traffic to get past queuing cars, but you expect him to be coherent?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KRqeDEQcYk

Oh, not that stupid "no indicator" problem again. If you can't read the
junction and the traffic, and blindly assume the best it is *your* problem.

On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 13:28:13 +0100
TMS320 wrote:

Oh, not that stupid "no indicator" problem again.

No indicator, and failure to make proper observation before pulling
out - I think that would be a driving test fail.

If you can't read
the junction and the traffic, and blindly assume the best it is
*your* problem.

The driver blindly assumed that nobody would be approaching from the
offside rear. In a situation like this where both parties have
contributed to the problem there's a tendency to apportion more blame
to the road user who changed direction without warning.

On 13/08/17 03:27, Rob Morley wrote TMS320 wrote:

Oh, not that stupid "no indicator" problem again.

No indicator, and failure to make proper observation before pulling
out - I think that would be a driving test fail.

If the one overtaking was the one taking the driving test, it would also
be a fail. Proper observation includes noticing the proximity of junctions.

If you can't read
the junction and the traffic, and blindly assume the best it is
*your* problem.

The driver blindly assumed that nobody would be approaching from the
offside rear. In a situation like this where both parties have
contributed to the problem there's a tendency to apportion more blame
to the road user who changed direction without warning.

Primary blame is about insurance compensation or decisions in a law
court. That is only one part of it. Allowing yourself to get caught up
in a situation that is easy to predict and easy to avoid is another.
Best to avoid the morgue/ hospital bed/ insurance claims/ courts where
possible.

If all road users took the attitude that it is ok to blunder on because
another is not following the rules the roads would be complete mayhem.
Be careful about what you wish for.

On 14/08/2017 11:22, TMS320 wrote:
On 13/08/17 03:27, Rob Morley wrote TMS320 wrote:

Oh, not that stupid "no indicator" problem again.

No indicator, and failure to make proper observation before pulling
out - I think that would be a driving test fail.

If the one overtaking was the one taking the driving test, it would also
be a fail. Proper observation includes noticing the proximity of junctions.

If you can't read
the junction and the traffic, and blindly assume the best it is
*your* problem.

The driver blindly assumed that nobody would be approaching from the
offside rear. In a situation like this where both parties have
contributed to the problem there's a tendency to apportion more blame
to the road user who changed direction without warning.

Primary blame is about insurance compensation or decisions in a law
court. That is only one part of it. Allowing yourself to get caught up
in a situation that is easy to predict and easy to avoid is another.
Best to avoid the morgue/ hospital bed/ insurance claims/ courts where
possible.

If all road users took the attitude that it is ok to blunder on because
another is not following the rules the roads would be complete mayhem.
Be careful about what you wish for.

"Allowing yourself to get caught up in a situation that is easy to
predict and easy to avoid is [best avoided]."

Like a cyclist ploughing through a group of pedestrians on a pedestrian
crossing (whether the lights are red or green for him), and whether or
not he employs the standard technique of bellowing a few choice
obscenities at his hapless victims as he approaches?

On 14/08/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 14/08/2017 11:22, TMS320 wrote:
On 13/08/17 03:27, Rob Morley wrote TMS320 wrote:

Oh, not that stupid "no indicator" problem again.

No indicator, and failure to make proper observation before pulling
out - I think that would be a driving test fail.

If the one overtaking was the one taking the driving test, it would
also be a fail. Proper observation includes noticing the proximity of
junctions.

If you can't read
the junction and the traffic, and blindly assume the best it is
*your* problem.

The driver blindly assumed that nobody would be approaching from the
offside rear. In a situation like this where both parties have
contributed to the problem there's a tendency to apportion more blame
to the road user who changed direction without warning.

Primary blame is about insurance compensation or decisions in a law
court. That is only one part of it. Allowing yourself to get caught up
in a situation that is easy to predict and easy to avoid is another.
Best to avoid the morgue/ hospital bed/ insurance claims/ courts where
possible.

If all road users took the attitude that it is ok to blunder on
because another is not following the rules the roads would be complete
mayhem. Be careful about what you wish for.

"Allowing yourself to get caught up in a situation that is easy to
predict and easy to avoid is [best avoided]."

Like a cyclist ploughing through a group of pedestrians on a pedestrian
crossing (whether the lights are red or green for him), and whether or
not he employs the standard technique of bellowing a few choice
obscenities at his hapless victims as he approaches?

When you have nothing to contribute, try resising the temptation to reply.

You still haven't answered my question about a law that demands someone
gets off and walks a bicycle at a memorial service.

On 14/08/2017 20:39, TMS320 wrote:
On 14/08/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 14/08/2017 11:22, TMS320 wrote:
On 13/08/17 03:27, Rob Morley wrote TMS320 wrote:

Oh, not that stupid "no indicator" problem again.

No indicator, and failure to make proper observation before pulling
out - I think that would be a driving test fail.

If the one overtaking was the one taking the driving test, it would
also be a fail. Proper observation includes noticing the proximity of
junctions.

If you can't read
the junction and the traffic, and blindly assume the best it is
*your* problem.

The driver blindly assumed that nobody would be approaching from the
offside rear. In a situation like this where both parties have
contributed to the problem there's a tendency to apportion more blame
to the road user who changed direction without warning.

Primary blame is about insurance compensation or decisions in a law
court. That is only one part of it. Allowing yourself to get caught
up in a situation that is easy to predict and easy to avoid is
another. Best to avoid the morgue/ hospital bed/ insurance claims/
courts where possible.

If all road users took the attitude that it is ok to blunder on
because another is not following the rules the roads would be
complete mayhem. Be careful about what you wish for.

"Allowing yourself to get caught up in a situation that is easy to
predict and easy to avoid is [best avoided]."

Like a cyclist ploughing through a group of pedestrians on a
pedestrian crossing (whether the lights are red or green for him), and
whether or not he employs the standard technique of bellowing a few
choice obscenities at his hapless victims as he approaches?

When you have nothing to contribute, try resising the temptation to reply.

You think that pointing out how cyclists behave is "nothing", do you?

You still haven't answered my question about a law that demands someone
gets off and walks a bicycle at a memorial service.

That is because someone else did it whilst I was busy with other things.

The issue was not a memorial service as such, though that lack of
respect undoubtedly aggravated the offence.

It was about ignoring road closures (I see that you have again defended
that practise) and abusing pedestrian areas in general.

BTW: After pointing out that cycling slowly and walking are "no
different" from each other, you never did try to justify doing the one
that is illegal where the legal option is just as "good".