Forum menu
Oh noes, not the trollppocalypse!!
Not even close to angry somewhere between bemused and amused as to why an adult would bother to just try and annoy another for fun. sadly the inner you is a ****
I used it just the same as you and am being just as honest 😛
[quote=sbob ] if the courts and CPS were [s]a huge amount more robust on motoring offences than they actually are[/s] run by a frothing mentalist like TJ, that would be sufficient ground for a prosecution for careless driving.
Reality is that way: ---->
Really? So you don't think that breaking several bits of guidance in the HC "falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver"? How much of the HC is it reasonable for a careful and competent driver to ignore?
Qudratrollasauraus
A four headed Greek mythalogical dinosaur with four heads, no backbone, tiny brain and webbed feet . Usually found under bridges or on cycling forums, appears to know everything about everything and is never wrong
[quote=Junkyard ]WO HOO its the four horsemen of the trollacylpse v DEZ
Oh FFS! I know you don't do spelling on here, but I also know you can - if you're going to invent a new meme (which I'm sure will be handy in future) you could try a bit harder 😉
four horsemen of the [b]trollocalypse [/b]
Really? So you don't think that breaking several bits of guidance in the HC "falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver"? How much of the HC is it reasonable for a careful and competent driver to ignore?
I don't know if it's specifically mentioned, but I'm pretty sure that actively piloting your vehicle into the back of the car in front in a temper falls below said standard.
Just as a matter of interest (and because I'm not sure what my answer would be), what would we have thought if that had been a T junction with a stop sign, instead of a pinch point?
[quote=pondo ]I don't know if it's specifically mentioned, but I'm pretty sure that actively piloting your vehicle into the back of the car in front in a temper falls below said standard.
Whataboutery. I was specifically discussing the standard of the overtake - I don't think that was provoked by dez riding into the back of the car (which I've already said was wrong - that too would be a similar offence, though it would be hardly difficult to defend as impossible to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that he was able to stop in time after the overtake), but maybe I'm not seeing the video the same as you.
Just as a matter of interest (and because I'm not sure what my answer would be), what would we have thought if that had been a T junction with a stop sign, instead of a pinch point?
Concerning the standard of driving involved in the overtake? Pretty much the same principle applies.
Fair play. Was just thinking, just going by the video, I probably would have been less annoyed if it was a T junction, as I'd have to stop for it anyhow. In this instance, I'd have just had to stop a car's-length-and-a-bit sooner.
But you'd have then been stuck waiting behind the car, when the chances are you could have got straight out if it hadn't been there (I wouldn't necessarily strictly obey stop signs on a bike - so shoot me). Not sure if you've never experienced cars overtaking you just before junctions - I've had it loads and it's the main reason I'm empathising with dez here, as I don't think I've had a car overtake before a pinch point. It's blinking irritating.
Still going? Jeez!
Right, maybe to stop some more "what coulda shoulda woulda" beens about why the overtake was bad. You probably can't tell some of these things from the little clip
1. I could tell instantly she braked that she knew the pinch-point was there as it wasn't in sight at that point
2. Her braking started before she'd got back into her own lane and the slow-down appeared more severe than it does in the vid.
2. It wasn't a T-junction so that is completely irrelevant
3. I can easily fit through the pinch point with a car (or even lorry) coming the other way, so wouldn't have needed to stop if she hadn't overtaken incorrectly. (Funnily enough most times cars have waited for me there anyway, as they've just turned into the road and are probably still in 2nd gear)
4. [i]She[/i] didn't need to stop! She was at the pinch point before the on-coming car. (For the same reason as above). You definitely can't tell that from the video.
5. (ok one more) I wouldn't have needed to stop or even slow down if the driver of the Suzuki had waited behind me and gone around 18mph for about 10 seconds, after which she could have overtaken me quite easily, safely and without holding anyone up.
So in that instance of yet another pillock unnecessarily hindering my progress, I swore in a few seconds of annoyance and tapped* the back bumper to make a point. She noticed, but just drove off. Make of that what you will.
*[b]RAMMED[/b] like a magnificent Hora weapon. Blasted her up the rear. SMASHED! wildly up her back-end! Whatever!
Put this to bed now please!
Careful dez, you get in trouble round here for defending yourself from the trolls.
But you'd have then been stuck waiting behind the car, when the chances are you could have got straight out if it hadn't been there (I wouldn't necessarily strictly obey stop signs on a bike - so shoot me). Not sure if you've never experienced cars overtaking you just before junctions - I've had it loads and it's the main reason I'm empathising with dez here, as I don't think I've had a car overtake before a pinch point. It's blinking irritating.
Now, I didn't pose the question with an agenda, but that does rather raise a couple of interesting points* - firstly, yeah, I have had that before, and it IS irritating, but I wonder if there's a bit of a grey line about what constitutes a breach of the HC. I know you quoted it earlier, regarding making other vehicles swerve or slow down, but where do the boundaries lie? If she'd made the overtake ten, twenty, thirty yards earlier, he still would have had to slow down - if the queue of traffic coming the other way had been long, she could have overtaken half a mile earlier and DezB still would had to slow down. A fatuous comparison, I know, but you see what I'm getting at? Secondly, I'm not gonna shoot you, but you know, live by the sword and all that (said with the admission that I wouldn't stop if the way was obviously clear, either). 🙂
* It's all relative, hey... 🙂
I agree it makes for an interesting discussion, better than lots of stuff further up the thread. I didn't quote this before as it wasn't relevant:
[quote=HC rule 167]DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
...
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
There is indeed a grey line, but I think it's in pretty much the same place in both situations. If you're braking before you've completed the overtake you've quite clearly crossed it. If at the point you overtake even the best driver in the world wouldn't know that they were likely to hold up the cyclist you're the other side of it. The line is somewhere in between those scenarios.