nealglover said » You seem to be asking me about theoretical situations again.
I'm talking about a cyclist choosing to overtake another cyclist, pulling out into the path of another road user causing them to brake to avoid a collision
I'm so sorry - I thought we were discussing more general principles here "If you pull out in front of another road user" certainly seems to suggest this is a more general point. Can I check that doesn't actually apply to every situation then? (it's fine, I'm not expecting an answer, I'll just carry on assuming your position). Though your complete unwillingness to answer any of the questions put to you suggests you're actually more interested in point scoring than discussing road safety. If we are limiting discussion in that way, can I retract the earlier answer I gave? The problem with the cyclist using his brakes is that he doesn't have to as there is plenty of road space to the right for him to use to pass.
crispycross said » aracer, nice try at a 'reductio ad absurdam' move on nealglover but I suspect there's a significant difference between the two cases.
I'm not suggesting otherwise, or really comparing the two cases - the example of a cyclist at a pinch point was simply addressing nealglover's assertion that it's always incorrect to pull out and cause another road user to brake. Once we've accepted that isn't the case (I'm hoping it's only mr glover refusing to accept such a point, or discuss the issue) we can move on to discussing in which situations it is reasonable for another road user to have to wait behind you. To which my argument is that the road user in front has right of way - the HC suggests it is up to the person overtaking to keep clear, not the other way around. Though mr glover's arguments are really asking for some sort of reductio to be carried out on them.
tpbiker said » Lets take bikes out of it- Aracer, answer me this. If you were driving at 50 on a duel carrigeway approaching a slower car, and a faster vehicle was in the outside lane, would you simply indicate and pull out anyway and expect the car in the outside lane to brake to create a gap for you? Because thats not how it works.
Whats the difference between the scenario above and the one in the video?
The difference is that it's not a DC with multiple lanes - your scenario is completely different. Imagine that there is no white line marked on the road (I'm going to credit you with the ability to cope with imagining such things, unlike nealglover). Legally it makes no difference at all to the situation, as a cyclist isn't obliged to ride in an advisory cycle lane and neither is a driver obliged not to. Would you still consider that the cyclist was changing lanes if that was the case (remember that the white line makes no legal difference to anything)? There is only one lane in the video.
Though to address your point about the DC directly, are you suggesting that lorries are never allowed to overtake slower moving vehicles? Because that will almost always result in cars having to slow down for them. The faster moving vehicle does not have RoW just because it is going faster - that's not how it works. It is the vehicle in front which has RoW, not the one overtaking.
To relate that back to the video, I don't dispute that it is possible that the cyclist is at fault. However I disagree with the assertion that the cyclist must be at fault simply because the car driver had to slow down - some people seem to be struggling with the difference between that and pulling out directly in front of the car causing it to brake sharply, which there is absolutely no evidence to suggest happened. No audio of screeching tyres, and about 2s between the cyclist moving to the right and the car sounding it's horn - at which point for all we know it could still be a second or two behind it and not having yet had to slow down.
So questions for those willing to answer them:
1) what should the cyclist do if he encountered a parked car in the cycle lane?
2) would it be OK if the cyclist had moved to the right 5s earlier and taken the lane?
3) if there was a long line of slower cyclists, would it be OK for the faster rider to pull out to overtake when the car was in the far distance and stay there overtaking them when the car has come up behind him and been forced to slow down?
4) given that there is space for the driver to move to the right by the same amount the cyclist moves to the right, why doesn't he just do that? Nobody need have to brake.
I'm hoping there are at least some on this "discussion" willing to answer these questions, so that we can try to establish exactly what is and isn't OK for a cyclist to do.