Forum menu
Sorry if this has been posted already.
A Number 10 petition has been set up to make it law for vehicle drivers
to give cyclists a three foot minimum clearance when passing - whatever
one feels about how enforceable a law like this would be, it does
actually put it in the drivers mind that three foot is the minimum (not
6" Mr Astra driver on a blind bend!!!!). Whereas, the Highway is quite
ambiguous on this - it just says sufficient space, which to me is
anything down to where it does not cause the cyclist to fall off.
If you feel strongly about this please sign and email on.
[url= http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/3feet2Pass ]http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/3feet2Pass[/url]
This has been done a couple of times on here recently and most of us believe its the wrong answer - not enforcable for a start off.
More daft unenforcable 'anti-motorist' legislation?
That'll go down like a lead baloon then. I agree with the sentiment, but it will be counter productive. Pot, Kettle, black - I habitually filter through traffic with inches to spare for example.
yep, I agree with the above in that I think in many cases it would lead to a more dangerous situation developing.
not signed.
Not the way forward IMO, although you can't argue with the sentiment.
If your beasting along at 50kmh or so, you blow a tyre and move sideways/fall, do you think 3 ft is a safe passing distance?- If they aren't going to require a DECENT distance, a law like this is worse than the ambiguous current legislation.
That went well.
Well there is some very easy answer
First get rid of clarkson, and have a show about mtb/road/fixed bike instead. The sooner we start to put in people head that "no a big car does makes you above the law", "no a big car won't make your wife to stop cheating on you as she only cheats because you are crap in bed" and "no owing a ****ing big expensive car doesn't make you good. And start with the adrenaline rush argument because if it was the case you would have gone for the ducati" the better.
Second, make sure that when there is a collision between a bike and a car the car is ipso facto responsible for the accident. Make sure though that is the cyclist asked for it (traffic light jumping for example) they can't claim for compensation in court.
Third get some people on bike, and I am not talking about TJ and CFH here, I am talking rich famous and model like people. You know football players like cantona, beckam, ronaldo and so on.
Fourth get rid of the ****ing cycle lane. The earlier we teach the car that road are for bikes too, the better.
Fith ban pack cycling that is stupid, dangerous and piss people off for a good reason. Have a law like no more than 5 people can ride at the same time. They have to go in line when a car is coming. And something in the line of to groups of 5 riders have to be distant of at least 6 meters.
That will be such an improvement.
Fourth get rid of the ****ing cycle lane. The earlier we teach the car that road are for bikes too, the better.
Fith ban pack cycling that is stupid, dangerous and piss people off for a good reason. Have a law like no more than 5 people can ride at the same time. They have to go in line when a car is coming.
Aren't these two a bit contradictory?
Riders should go to single file [b]ONLY WHEN IT IS SAFE FOR A CAR TO PASS[/b]. Massively important distinction. Groups obstructing/occupying their own lane are doing the [b]right thing[/b] if the road ahead cannot be seen and the lane is not sufficiently wide for both bike and car.
it cannot work for a number of reasons. when driving I cannot get out and measure 3ft... one persons idea of 3ft is different that anothers.. men especially 🙂
And if an accident did happen, who can prove that you were under 3ft? no one!
In principal Its a good idea, I just cannot see how it could work in the real world
10 riders 2 up are often easier to pass than 10 riders in a line.
Groups of more than 5 riders illegal. What crack are you snorting? Would you pass laws saying that more than 5 cars on the road at any one time is illegal. Bikes have just as much right to be on the road as cars.
5 bikes = 5 people. 5 cars often = 5 people. Who takes up more room? Who has an internal combustion engine availible to readily overtake slower moving road users when conditions allow?
Aren't these two a bit contradictory?
yeah a bit but the point was that cyclist have to share the road too. It is very annoying/dangerous when you have 30 odd cyclist in front of you cutting corners blindly having no road sense whatsoever and having what i call a antisocial road behaviour. I do no agree with glenp a lone cyclist should be treated with most respect, however when they are several and act like cow boys they should be slapped on the wrist. Even I get annoyed by such pack of people.
As TJ says, this one has been done several times and it's a waste of time. Completely unenforceable and counter-productive. Even the CTC aren't backing it.
You've a point, but a limit of 5 is far too restrictive. You're just pandering to the "get orf my road" crowd with this.
Bikes have just as much right to be on the road as cars.
Agree however as I said they don't have the right to own the road, if even here we can't acknowledge how stupid is it to ride in pack what do you think the jo average is going to do. You seems to forget that at the moment road ARE for petrol powered vehicle. Do you think the gvt spend billion to surface roads so you can go and pootle around on your carbon exotica. well in such case, the answer is no my dear.
Maybe you should wait and be less impatient. Such a British car is king stance juan, I'm disappointed, I'm always so glad of the french attitude to bikes when I go over there.
What's not to agree with? If one rider needs to assert their position on the road, they should. If ten need to do the same, they should also. The only difference is that you as a driver can think "oh sod it, bored now" and squeeze past a single rider after a few seconds, whereas you don't dare do the same with a bigger group.
You can either see the road ahead, or you can't. If the oncoming lane is free of traffic, then just break the white line and overtake, be it one or ten.
Have a law like no more than 5 people can ride at the same time. They have to go in line when a car is coming. And something in the line of to groups of 5 riders have to be distant of at least 6 meters.
And you where doing so well... 😆
Well re-read me correctly, if you still can't understand (and I will be the first to acknowledge my english isn't common) I cn do it again in french.
What I am implying is that you do both for cars and cyclist. Not all for the cyclist.
If you really want to be able to ride at 150 pack why don't you just register to the f***ing tdf. And as for being patient I am the frist one to make sure I can overtake leaving twice the 1m distance no matter how many cars I have on my back.
Juan has a point but it's not the way to go about it. A driver would not cut up/swear at/threaten a bunch of horse riders or a tractor or a granny in a motability scooter, they'll sit behind at least reasonably patiently until it's safe to pass.
It's about time they learnt to do the same with a Sunday club run or a group of riders in a Sportive etc.
Maybe you should take a few minutes to aquaint yourself with how the road works, juan. Bikes and pedestrians have a right to get around the country, despite a tarmac'd road being laid over the only sensible route. Whhat you are saying is true of Motorways, but simply plain wrong otherwise. Roads aren't for cars only.
😯then just break the white line and overtake, be it one or ten.
. You seems to forget that at the moment road ARE for petrol powered vehicle. Do you think the gvt spend billion to surface roads so you can go and pootle around on your carbon exotica. well in such case, the answer is no my dear.
I disagree, the roads are there for everyone, its shame you can't even walk on roads these days without taking your life into your hands, such a stupid short sighted roads are for cars attitude.
Road surfacing, its not billions, I also pay for it via my council and income tax, dispite not having a car, allowing most roads to deterorate so motorised traffic can't use them would suit me fine, if trunk roputes where car free and better surfaced (or looked after at all), motorised traffic increases road surface damage wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more than bikes, feet or weather, especially road heavy haulage.
Oh and the roads were originally tarmacadammed FOR CYCLE TRAFFIC!
Roads aren't for cars only.
re read me again what you are referring about is path/bridelway, road as we name it ad been build for cars like it or not it's the way it is. And if for the lone commuter to be safer we need to "annoy" the lycra clad so be it. In the end I am pretty confident everyone will be better off.
Juan- you've got a point in that common courtesy should apply to everyone, but if a car sometimes has to wait for bikes if there's no space to pass, that's tough- they don't have any priority.
Why the wide eyes? The go on the other side of the (dashed) white line if you want to overtake a bike. The bike has a right to the lane he is riding in - iif you want to overtake then do so as if the bike were a car.
No juan. The road has not been built for cars. You are just wrong, and dangerously so.
If you really want to be able to ride at 150 pack why don't you just register to the f***ing tdf. And as for being patient I am the frist one to make sure I can overtake leaving twice the 1m distance no matter how many cars I have on my back.
Well, a pack of 150 cyclists dosn't happen on these shores very often, and the Police have (finally) been helpful in organising a rolling road block for the Tour of Britain.
I'm not a pro, and my protour team didn't get an invite to the TdF, but I did do the etape, and if you've got 9,000 riders out, then closing the roads is the only option.
We run road cycling events on open lanes each summer, you get a pack of maybe 30. We're moving a LOT faster than road traffic can, but everyone tries to be courteous and each junction is marshalled, so we minimise disruption to local residents and cyclists alike.
It's often easier to overtake one large bunch of cyclists than a long strung out bunch.
[i]have to be distant of at least 6 meters.[/i]
That's even worse, it tempts cars into overtaking one rider then they find themselves effectively in the middle of a bunch, unable to adjust their speed correctly.
Ride along the road in a safe and assertive manner. If it's safe to let a car past, wave it through/single out as appropriate. If it's not safe, the driver just has to wait, exactly as they would for a tractor or horse.
Wide eyes because it's illegal to go over the white lane my dear. I am amazed to the level of intolerance on here.It's incredible, how do you want cars to be more courteous if you just are (I know I am going to regrets that) bike fascists. You are the first moaning when a car overtake you from close (and I can understand that) because it is annoying, but then are perfectly happy with having a pack of ****ing roadies jamming roads because it's "just annoying". As I said you want to ride in packs of hundreds, well just register to the tdf, but don't ask for others to respect you if you cant respect them. If as cyclist we want things to change, I am afraid
it's not going to be a take only, we will have to give a little bit too.
juan, when riding through rush hour traffic I am sometimes held up by packs of inconsiderate motorists driving in groups of more than 5, Should it be the law for these selfish roadhogs should be required to pull over to allow me to pass?
As some have said, you were doing so well till that brainwave 🙂
If it's safe to let a car past, wave it through/single out as appropriate. If it's not safe, the driver just has to wait, exactly as they would for a tractor or horse.
Now that is dangerous, as driver I would NEVER pass without visibility, no matter what the cyclist says, so I'll just wait. lets agree to disagree, as you guys want the whole thing and are not willing to share, and that makes you in my opinion as bad as the clarkson wannabe.
[i]my dear[/i]
Stop doing this. Seriously. 🙂
Juan - try reading. I said BROKEN white line. For the hard of understanding, that means you [i]can[/i] cross the line. ****t
Juan - Are you drunk/trolling/bored? 😉
When I'm out riding in a pack, my priority is to make sure motorists can get past WHEN IT IS SAFE and AS SOON AS POSSIBLE so they don't get impatient and do something stupid.
How is that disrespectiful, obstructive, or anything else?
As I said, we can't ride the TdF, we're not pros. Even pros have to train on the road, often in a group, we all have to ride in packs, otherwise it'd be carnage when you do ride in a peloton.
You can't do 3 week tours without drafting.
You can cross the white line, provided its not solid on your side of the carriageway, or if the bikes are doing less than 10mph.
The law is adequate as it stands, better driving standards and fewer divs running red lights on their fixies is what is required.
Are you drunk/trolling/bored?
hum...
Dig bummy why I thought terms of endearment where very british 😉
Another thing juan, 'roads' in this country (with the exception of motorway) are defined as PUBLIC HIGHWAY, legally accessible by all, not just cars.
Wide eyes because it's illegal to go over the white lane my dear.
err...
its illegal to cross a solid white line, far from illegal to cross a dashed white line... c'mon juan, you're not that thick are you?
when riding through rush hour traffic I am sometimes held up by packs of inconsiderate motorists driving in groups of more than 5,
Damn straight, I could do my commute door to door in 27 minutes if it wasn't for all the stupid doxy bints in motor cars buggering about getting in my way, incapable of getting the smeg on with it, and all those boring traffic lights I insist on stopping at, which are only necessary becuase of all the stupid metal boxes fat lazy people insist on driving around. So it takes nearer 45 mins.
But that's life, they have all the right in the world to drive their cars, just as I have every right to ride my bike down the Queen's Highway.
fewer divs running red lights on their fixies is what is required.
Why if they don't cause accident surely that is as acceptable than riding in a pack of 30?
hungry monkey no I am not that thick; however I shall point to the line being referred as "white line", not "doted line" therefore I do stand correct.
Why if they don't cause accident surely that is as acceptable than riding in a pack of 30?
There is no law about riding in packs of 30, though plenty of TLI, CTC and BCF regulations and guidelines about doing so safely and with the minimum of disruption to motorists/oter road users.
There are laws about running red lights. They are there for a reason. Crushing dozy fixie riders under your wheels becuase it was green for you and the biker just ran the light is pretty hard on the motorist, plus traffic accidents gum the whole city up big time. So lights are (mostly) good.
However I will say that I nsee as many drivers running lights as I do cyclists, and 2-3 tonnes of metal running lights has more of a potential impact than a skinny fixie pillock.
Juan - just to take a step back here - your frustration is 100% derived from your mistaken belief that cars own the road. This is the same as a lot of drivers and the reason that cyclists get killed. You are just plain wrong in this belief and a potential danger to cyclists until you realise.