From: Tom Crispin on
On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:07:57 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth)
wrote:

>Tom Crispin <kije.remove(a)this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>
>>
>> Does this help?
>> www.johnballcycling.org.uk/misc/positions
>
>Not a great deal.
>
>> It wasn't me crossing the zigzags, but the van clearly intended to do
>> so, and indeed would have to to reach the loading bay.
>
>Yes, looking at that the existence of the zig-zag seems completely
>irrelevant to the accident.
>
>I'd be assessing that as 50:50 responsibility for the accident. You were
>apparently overtaking on the "wrong" side of the road at a junction.
>That's a foolish location to attempt to overtake a vehicle.

It's odd how your assessment is at odds with everyone else.

>the van driver appears to have been impatient and also appeared to
>overtake the same queue of traffic without making proper observation.
From: JNugent on
Tom Crispin wrote:

> %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

>> The fac that a rule has the backing of criminal law for some users does
>> not mean that the rule may be ignored by all users. Do you think that it
>> was sensible for Crispin, the person who instructs others how to ride a
>> bicycle, to overtake a line of stationary traffic in the circumstances
>> that led to an accident?

> Clearly, with hindsight, I would have done things differently.
> However, no one ever has the option of hindsight.

> One of the great advantages of commuting by bicycle is the ability to
> pass stationary motor traffic. This needs to be done with great care
> because, unfortunately, a great many motorists fail to look propely or
> indicate before making unexpected manoeuvres.

The fact that an unexpected maneouvre takes place says something about
those who didn't expect it, particularly if it is a "a great many"
drivers who are making these "unexpected maneouvres". How great a
proprtion of road-users have to be doing something before it ceases to
be "unexpected"?

> I was wrong to overestimate the experience of the white van driver. He
> was only 22 at the date of the crash and clearly had not been taught
> to drive a van particularly well.

> Perhaps there is a lesson in this.

Don't stereotype people?

Just a suggestion...

> Drivers of vans should have
> special training to look before making a manoeuvre.

I think they do have that in order to obtain a driving licence. Of
course, not many people expect to encounter a vehicle coming at them on
the wrong side of the road - that really *is* an "unexpected maneouvre".
From: Steve Firth on
Tom Crispin <kije.remove(a)this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:

> Perhaps there is a lesson in this.

Indeed, the lesson is that anyone overtaking anything, be it a parked
car, or a line of stationary traffic has a duty of care.
From: Paul on
On 4 Jul 2008 at 2:10, Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:21:50 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
>>Overtook a slowing van; silly of him, pretty silly of you.
>
> There is little doubt that the driver was 100% to blame for running me
> over.

Obviously it's difficult to look an things objectively when you're one
of the parties invovled in an accident, and when you've been injured.

But the simple truth is that overtaking queuing traffic is a bloody
stupid thing to do on a motorbike, and even more so on a pushbike. To
claim that you bear no blame at all for what happened is manifestly
false.

Cyclists terrorize drivers and pedestrians, and put their own lives at
risk, when they ignore red lights, ride on the pavement and filter
dangerously through traffic. I can't help thinking the roads would be a
safer place if you'd spent your time in a hospital bed reflecting on
this, rather than building up a store of fevered self-righteous
indignation against the driver who hit you.

From: Rob Morley on
On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:07:56 +0100
%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

> The fac that a rule has the backing of criminal law for some users
> does not mean that the rule may be ignored by all users.

Obviously not - it may only be ignored by those users to whom it does
not apply.

> Do you think
> that it was sensible for Crispin, the person who instructs others how
> to ride a bicycle, to overtake a line of stationary traffic in the
> circumstances that led to an accident?

Just as sensible as riding down a road with a row of parked vehicles at
the side.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Prev: Car detailed with Zaino
Next: Stitched up by a talivan