Should I or shouldn't I?
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Car detailed with Zaino
Next: Stitched up by a talivan
From: Periander on 5 Jul 2008 20:40 %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote in news:1ijmqdc.o45wv71p5469sN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk: > Danny Colyer <danny_colyer(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On 05/07/2008 22:57, Steve Firth wrote: >> > If I'm driving a car and someone opens a door and I drive into it, >> > the accident is my fault, not the fault of the person opening the >> > door. >> >> And what about HC rule 239? >> "You MUST ensure you do not hit anyone when you open your door. >> Check for cyclists or other traffic". >> >> > Quite why cyclists believe that the responsibility should go the >> > other way is beyond me. >> >> Perhaps reading the HC would help you. > > Perhaps getting a clue would help you. The prohibition in the HC is on > opening the door and hitting someone or something with the door. If > the door has been opened and someone rides or drives into it then they > are in the wrong. > > The stupidity of cyclists seems to be without limit. Perhaps they > should be made to sit a test before being allowed on the roads? > Actually much as I like to laugh when a cyclist gets taken out as the result of his own folly (especially if there's blood, broken bones and a wrecked cycle) there is actually an offence of "Opening a door to the danger of road users". Don't ask me to quote act and section it's to late and I can't be arsed but it's there none the less. -- Regards, Periander
From: JNugent on 5 Jul 2008 22:39 Periander wrote: > %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote in > news:1ijmqdc.o45wv71p5469sN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk: > >> Danny Colyer <danny_colyer(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 05/07/2008 22:57, Steve Firth wrote: >>>> If I'm driving a car and someone opens a door and I drive into it, >>>> the accident is my fault, not the fault of the person opening the >>>> door. >>> And what about HC rule 239? >>> "You MUST ensure you do not hit anyone when you open your door. >>> Check for cyclists or other traffic". >>> >>>> Quite why cyclists believe that the responsibility should go the >>>> other way is beyond me. >>> Perhaps reading the HC would help you. >> Perhaps getting a clue would help you. The prohibition in the HC is on >> opening the door and hitting someone or something with the door. If >> the door has been opened and someone rides or drives into it then they >> are in the wrong. >> >> The stupidity of cyclists seems to be without limit. Perhaps they >> should be made to sit a test before being allowed on the roads? >> > > Actually much as I like to laugh when a cyclist gets taken out as the > result of his own folly (especially if there's blood, broken bones and a > wrecked cycle) there is actually an offence of "Opening a door to the > danger of road users". Don't ask me to quote act and section it's to > late and I can't be arsed but it's there none the less. I'm sure that what you say is correct - but everyone - including cyclists - is still under a duty to try to avoid an open door. No-one should expect miracles when the door is opened with an approaching vehicle very close by, but if the vehicle can be stopped, or if its course can be changed so as to avoid a collision, that's what the driver or rider must do.
From: Tom Crispin on 6 Jul 2008 01:53 On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 00:00:22 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: >Perhaps they should >be made to sit a test before being allowed on the roads? With a little modification, a great idea. One of Cycling England's objectives is that every primary child should have the opportunity to take Bikeability Levels 1 and 2. Thanks to the local scheme I run, 285 children in Lewisham have passed Bikeability Levels 1 and 2 before their 11th birthday. Of the 7 who chose not to take the course I suspect most will never ride a bike.
From: Chris Bartram on 6 Jul 2008 04:08 Tom Crispin wrote: > On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 00:00:22 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) > wrote: > >> Perhaps they should >> be made to sit a test before being allowed on the roads? > > With a little modification, a great idea. One of Cycling England's > objectives is that every primary child should have the opportunity to > take Bikeability Levels 1 and 2. > > Thanks to the local scheme I run, 285 children in Lewisham have passed > Bikeability Levels 1 and 2 before their 11th birthday. Of the 7 who > chose not to take the course I suspect most will never ride a bike. Is the old cycling proficiency scheme still going? I did that aged 10-11 at primary school and IMHO it really made a difference.
From: ®i©ardo on 6 Jul 2008 04:34
Tom Crispin wrote: > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:40:21 +0100, JNugent <JN(a)NPPTG.com> wrote: > >> You would never expect all of the parked cars in a row next to the kerb >> to sprout drivers, have their engines turned on and to move off one >> after the other, all within a few seconds. >> >> Well, no-one normal would. > > 20% of deaths and serious injuries among London's cyclists are by a > driver or passenger opening their car door into the path of a cyclist. Perhaps, bearing in mind the substantial difference between "deaths" and "serious injuries", you could tell us the number of deaths and the number of serious injuries sustained by cyclists riding into car doors. -- Moving things in still pictures! |