Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.
In this example with or without the rule change the driver should indicate before going round the bend so that any vehicles behind know that they will either be turning or pulling over. Drivers behind should be paying enough attention to spot this and adjust their spending accordingly.
For any BMW drivers you can find your indicators on a stalk just behind the steering wheel.
Is that not where I hang my air freshner?
ffs what do you think your rear view mirror is for 😉
So I can make sure that my hair is in place and that I manage to shave all my nose hairs of course!!... Duh!!
Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.
In this example with or without the rule change the driver should indicate before going round the bend so that any vehicles behind know that they will either be turning or pulling over. Drivers behind should be paying enough attention to spot this and adjust their spending accordingly.
For any BMW drivers you can find your indicators on a stalk just behind the steering wheel.
Is that not where I hang my air freshner?
ffs what do you think your rear view mirror is for 😉
So I can make sure that my hair is in place and that I manage to shave all my nose hairs of course!!... Duh!!
Not read all this thread but can someone please explain to me why a cyclist is not obliged to use a cycle lane even when one is present and why would a cyclist choose not to do so ?
Not read all this thread but can someone please explain to me why a cyclist is not obliged to use a cycle lane even when one is present and why would a cyclist choose not to do so ?
I agree, cyclist should defiantly always ride in the gutter, especially when their is glass in there, when they are poorly maintained, and when the gutters are raised.
Not read all this thread but can someone please explain to me why a cyclist is not obliged to use a cycle lane even when one is present and why would a cyclist choose not to do so ?
I agree, cyclist should defiantly always ride in the gutter, especially when their is glass in there, when they are poorly maintained, and when the gutters are raised.
Thankyou for the sarcastic reply to a genuine question from a non cyclist. I understand what you are trying to say and it makes sense. Pity about the delivery.
Not read all this thread but can someone please explain to me why a cyclist is not obliged to use a cycle lane even when one is present and why would a cyclist choose not to do so ?
Often cycle lanes are not fit for purpose. They are badly maintained, not wide enough people park in them meaning you then have to pull out into traffic and ones that are adjacent to footpaths often have people walking in them. If you ride in most cycles lanes the least you can expect is lots of punctures , but personal injury is also a very real possibility from being toppled off your bike. If they were of better quality I would certainly use them as a preference in a lot of situations. However many of our roads are not wide enough for this so we need to share the space.
No, but I'm glad you brought that up. I think cyclists (or their parents) should pay road tax unless they have done so already. It would be hard to implement though. It's probably better to get rid of road tax and increase tax on something else..............red and blue striped shirts seems sensible to me.
What it highlights to me is this new norm that people are responsible to more vulnerable people, without those people being asked to take any responsibility themselves.
For example, cycling with headphones on. Just who are these stupid people? I myself get annoyed with anyone in my family who doesn't put on a helmet, of which we have six or seven between us.
I would never cycle with headphones on.
I think it’s funny though that people in cars think this so awful. Do you always drive with the windows open, no radio on and a complete ban on conversation whilst driving? If not you are being a tad hypocritical.
No, but I'm glad you brought that up. I think cyclists (or their parents) should pay road tax unless they have done so already. It would be hard to implement though. It's probably better to get rid of road tax and increase tax on something else..............red and blue striped shirts seems sensible to me.
Same rate as other vehicles that are zero emissions?
You know roads and transport are funded from general taxation?
Nearly smashed into 2 cyclists today. One on a Brompton jumping the lights on borough high street as I came out of St Thomas Street and then a courier ignoring his give way lines he should have stopped at but that's life and some things never change.
What it highlights to me is this new norm that people are responsible to more vulnerable people, without those people being asked to take any responsibility themselves.
For example, cycling with headphones on. Just who are these stupid people? I myself get annoyed with anyone in my family who doesn't put on a helmet, of which we have six or seven between us.
I would never cycle with headphones on.
I think it’s funny though that people in cars think this so awful. Do you always drive with the windows open, no radio on and a complete ban on conversation whilst driving? If not you are being a tad hypocritical.
So a cyclist has no wing mirrors, but chooses to have ear phones on, do you think that is a good idea? in a car you have a lot more vision. Also pedestrians crossing a road looking at their mobile/ headphones on, as a car driver, I don't do these things as a pedestrian.
Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
When crossing yes. The new HC says that if they are now waiting to cross a car has to stop. So now I have to be a mind reader or expect that any pedestrian standing on the pavement is likely to be crossing so I then have to stop on a corner of a junction.
Nearly smashed into 2 cyclists today. One on a Brompton jumping the lights on borough high street as I came out of St Thomas Street and then a courier ignoring his give way lines he should have stopped at but that's life and some things never change.
Well, I was on a 35 mile cycle around central London today and several cars just pulled out on me nearly taking me out. And I saw quite a few cars jumping red lights but as you say some things never change.
What it highlights to me is this new norm that people are responsible to more vulnerable people, without those people being asked to take any responsibility themselves.
For example, cycling with headphones on. Just who are these stupid people? I myself get annoyed with anyone in my family who doesn't put on a helmet, of which we have six or seven between us.
I would never cycle with headphones on.
I think it’s funny though that people in cars think this so awful. Do you always drive with the windows open, no radio on and a complete ban on conversation whilst driving? If not you are being a tad hypocritical.
So a cyclist has no wing mirrors, but chooses to have ear phones on, do you think that is a good idea? in a car you have a lot more vision. Also pedestrians crossing a road looking at their mobile/ headphones on, as a car driver, I don't do these things as a pedestrian.
Of course all car drivers use their mirrors, and those indicators.
I drive, and I’m not sitting here acting like I drive like the perfect pupil on their driving test.
Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
When crossing yes. The new HC says that if they are now waiting to cross a car has to stop. So now I have to be a mind reader or expect that any pedestrian standing on the pavement is likely to be crossing so I then have to stop on a corner of a junction.
Bonkers.
Young kids often run on ahead of their parents and stand waiting for them to catch up and cross the road together, even if they are 50 yards plus behind them. Mmmmm…..that’s gonna be great! Everyone will just be stationary looking at one another, simply being indecisive.
Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
When crossing yes. The new HC says that if they are now waiting to cross a car has to stop. So now I have to be a mind reader or expect that any pedestrian standing on the pavement is likely to be crossing so I then have to stop on a corner of a junction.
Bonkers.
Young kids often run on ahead of their parents and stand waiting for them to catch up and cross the road together, even if they are 50 yards plus behind them. Mmmmm…..that’s gonna be great!
Surely common sense would come into it and as a driver you would slowly carry on if the parents are many yards away and the kid isn't going to cross.
On the other hand how will driverless cars (lol) stick to the highway code and know if the person standing on the pavement is waiting to cross or just having a chat with his mate.
Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
When crossing yes. The new HC says that if they are now waiting to cross a car has to stop. So now I have to be a mind reader or expect that any pedestrian standing on the pavement is likely to be crossing so I then have to stop on a corner of a junction.
Bonkers.
Young kids often run on ahead of their parents and stand waiting for them to catch up and cross the road together, even if they are 50 yards plus behind them. Mmmmm…..that’s gonna be great!
Surely common sense would come into it and as a driver you would slowly carry on if the parents are many yards away and the kid isn't going to cross.
On the other hand how will driverless cars (lol) stick to the highway code and know if the person standing on the pavement is waiting to cross or just having a chat with his mate.
You are assuming the driver will know the child is with or waiting for, an accompanying adult. How will the driver necessarily know…..there are so many variables that can come into play affecting this legislation. You have even quite rightly illustrated one yourself as a matter of fact.
If I were uncertain about the intention of the child, new rules or old rules, it is better to take no chances rather than risk hitting them.
Well yes Seth, that’s a given……but how long have you got to wait for the parent/adult to arrive on the scene? Remember other confused traffic that is also held up into the bargain…..all at the behest/actions of a poorly unsupervised child!
The answer is as long as it takes. The question that follows is ‘what is the alternative’? Sweep round the corner at speed? As for unsupervised, well the ironic comment is that any fool (almost) can be a parent, yet you have to take a test to drive a car.
One of the sillier weekend headlines, from the Sunday Times, suggested just this. And as I’m sure the headline writer knew well, the Highway Code simply says cyclists should use the centre of the lane, and even then only at certain times, for example approaching junctions or on narrow sections of roads, where a car overtaking would cause danger. This is a change to the code, but it’s not new, or even new guidance. Cyclists have been formally advised for years to take what is known as the “primary position” at such moments.
There is no new rule on riding two abreast
The new text just makes it clearer. The old version says people should “never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads”, which was slightly vague and a bit sweeping. The code will now say: “You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders.” Hopefully over time more drivers will understand why it can be safer. Note to the Sunday Times: the rules do not “encourage” riding two abreast.
There is no new rule on not having to use cycle lanes
Another slightly excitable paragraph from the Sunday Times story said that the new Highway Code would mean cyclists are no longer obliged to use bike lanes when one is provided. But this was the case anyway. The language has simply been made clearer, saying cyclists “may exercise their judgment and are not obliged to use them”.
I’m not a cyclist, but chatted regularly with a keen one at work, he took the time to explain to me why cyclists would move to the middle of the road, not use cycle lanes and sometimes ride two abreast much as @Jints highlighted above.
It really does make a lot of sense for a vulnerable road user, and since been being made aware, it’s made me aware of how easy it is to follow to a cyclist to a safe over taking spot, and how many will know this is approaching and wave you through using their awareness of the hazard approaching on say, a narrow country lane. Take a look at the cycle lanes, particularly the coned off ones, they’re in a right state because the road sweeping machines can’t get to them, and no council is paying for manual cleaning of them!
Of course there are arsehole cyclists, there are arsehole drivers and pedestrians too.
What it highlights to me is this new norm that people are responsible to more vulnerable people, without those people being asked to take any responsibility themselves.
For example, cycling with headphones on. Just who are these stupid people? I myself get annoyed with anyone in my family who doesn't put on a helmet, of which we have six or seven between us.
I would never cycle with headphones on.
I think it’s funny though that people in cars think this so awful. Do you always drive with the windows open, no radio on and a complete ban on conversation whilst driving? If not you are being a tad hypocritical.
You say that like I only use my car.
When I drive I listen to music. I also give cyclists a wide berth.
When I cycle I don't.
Why? Because on a bicycle I know I am the vulnerable one and so I take responsibility for myself. As a pedestrian and cyclist you need to hear what's going on around you. This is not the case in a car - I would say that it's limited to hearing emergency services and other cars' horns.
Comments
we done road tax yet?
I think cyclists (or their parents) should pay road tax unless they have done so already.
It would be hard to implement though.
It's probably better to get rid of road tax and increase tax on something else..............red and blue striped shirts seems sensible to me.
Bonkers.
I drive, and I’m not sitting here acting like I drive like the perfect pupil on their driving test.
Mmmmm…..that’s gonna be great!
Everyone will just be stationary looking at one another, simply being indecisive.
On the other hand how will driverless cars (lol) stick to the highway code and know if the person standing on the pavement is waiting to cross or just having a chat with his mate.
How will the driver necessarily know…..there are so many variables that can come into play affecting this legislation.
You have even quite rightly illustrated one yourself as a matter of fact.
Remember other confused traffic that is also held up into the bargain…..all at the behest/actions of a poorly unsupervised child!
The question that follows is ‘what is the alternative’?
Sweep round the corner at speed?
As for unsupervised, well the ironic comment is that any fool (almost) can be a parent, yet you have to take a test to drive a car.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/24/common-myths-about-what-uk-highway-code-changes-will-mean
Cyclists won’t be “in the middle of the road”
One of the sillier weekend headlines, from the Sunday Times, suggested just this. And as I’m sure the headline writer knew well, the Highway Code simply says cyclists should use the centre of the lane, and even then only at certain times, for example approaching junctions or on narrow sections of roads, where a car overtaking would cause danger. This is a change to the code, but it’s not new, or even new guidance. Cyclists have been formally advised for years to take what is known as the “primary position” at such moments.
There is no new rule on riding two abreast
The new text just makes it clearer. The old version says people should “never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads”, which was slightly vague and a bit sweeping. The code will now say: “You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders.” Hopefully over time more drivers will understand why it can be safer. Note to the Sunday Times: the rules do not “encourage” riding two abreast.
There is no new rule on not having to use cycle lanes
Another slightly excitable paragraph from the Sunday Times story said that the new Highway Code would mean cyclists are no longer obliged to use bike lanes when one is provided. But this was the case anyway. The language has simply been made clearer, saying cyclists “may exercise their judgment and are not obliged to use them”.
It really does make a lot of sense for a vulnerable road user, and since been being made aware, it’s made me aware of how easy it is to follow to a cyclist to a safe over taking spot, and how many will know this is approaching and wave you through using their awareness of the hazard approaching on say, a narrow country lane. Take a look at the cycle lanes, particularly the coned off ones, they’re in a right state because the road sweeping machines can’t get to them, and no council is paying for manual cleaning of them!
When I drive I listen to music. I also give cyclists a wide berth.
When I cycle I don't.
Why? Because on a bicycle I know I am the vulnerable one and so I take responsibility for myself. As a pedestrian and cyclist you need to hear what's going on around you. This is not the case in a car - I would say that it's limited to hearing emergency services and other cars' horns.
seriously though. How can someone be prosecuted for a breach of the Highway Code if it isn’t available to the public ?