Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
EdinburghFixed
Posts: 2375
Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 7:03pm

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby EdinburghFixed » 12 Jul 2009, 9:16am

saudidave wrote:So a goon attempts to undertake me at traffic lights as I attempt to turn left after indicating well in advance and I post a report of the incident here.


Well, my sympathy is naturally limited by the fact that you don't check your mirrors before manoeuvring. Something which, on the face of it, I would expect from someone who has cycled 100 miles a week and driven 25,000 miles a year for half a century across so much of the world (and as a trained Police motorcyclist, to boot).

It seems to me like you are trying to transfer the embarrasment of turning onto another vehicle (whether it should have been there or not) onto the cyclist - i.e. victim blaming - by suggesting that it was his fault you didn't see him because he was "invisible in black". This is what gets my back up.

Much of the debate since has essentially been about whether large black objects in the road are invisible, or whether they are quite easy to see. Comparing them to an arbitrary standard as you do is meaningless (although many people do wear high-viz, the overwhelming majority of cyclists and pedestrians do not, and they don't get run over).

To use an analogy, nobody would dispute that high-viz police cars are "more visible" than black cars. However that doesn't make black cars (or black cyclists, or black pedestrians) hard to see. Would you either argue that black car owners are irresponsible, or reckless, or should paint their cars in high-viz? Why not? Do you believe that if you crashed into a black car it is basically the fault of the other guy, as you do with cyclists? Don't you think that painting your car in high-viz would make it more conspicuous?

So I'm left worrying that, if you can't see people in ordinary clothes because they are invisible, how reliable is the rest of your story?

Did you actually overtake the cyclist and cut in, rather than him undertaking you? If black is invisible surely you can't tell either way? In fact, at least you overtaking and cutting in would explain why you didn't see the rider in your mirror check (or, are police motorcyclists no longer trained to use their mirrors? It's a serious question, I'm not one so I don't know.)

What colour is your car? If it's black, maybe the cyclist simply didn't see you because you were blending into the tarmac? :roll:

Just to put your mind at ease, I drive a *lot* more miles than I cycle, although if you want to be childish about things, I also cycle a *lot* more than you do :P

kwackers
Posts: 15052
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby kwackers » 12 Jul 2009, 9:32am

glueman wrote:I have some sympathy for the OP. First let me repeat, if you're turning left you should look in your left mirror before doing so whatever the scenario or expectations. That said there is an aggressive minority of riders out there who seem to have abandoned all reason when it comes to the rules of the road and personal safety.

I wrote about an incident last year of a rider who decided to use the gutter as a 'clearway' in spite of the T-junction I was coming out of, the traffic lights, pedestrian crossing and the continual stop-start traffic. There are riders who I'd characterise as recent converts, often exclusively urban commuting cyclists who seem to use a bike purely because it lets them off all responsibility while seemingly giving them a full quota of rights. If the OPs adversary was one of those he has my sympathy, they're equally cavalier about other rider's safety.

They also attract motorist's attention and tar us all with the same brush. The only possible thing in their favour is if they weren't on a bicycle they'd be adopting the same tactics in a car and far more lethal. the colour of their clothing is a red herring IMO.


Sadly the OP with his childish outbursts lost my sympathy some time ago, he does seem somewhat lively and that does make me wonder how he behaves when put on the spot by an irate cyclist.

If the incident happened as some want to assume - i.e. the cyclist tried to undertake a car that was turning left, then fine the cyclist has only themselves to blame (although like EF I do believe motorists should check to the left and left mirror before making the manoeuvre).
However the OP has repeatedly stated that the first thing he knew about the cyclist was when he banged on his roof - in other words he doesn't know that's what happened. So you could conjecture that the irate cyclist was in fact irate because he'd just been overtaken and cut up.
Given the OP's antagonistic view to the way the cyclist was dressed one can't help but think that perhaps he is looking to shift blame :wink:

the colour of their clothing is a red herring IMO.

Indeed. :wink:

kwackers
Posts: 15052
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby kwackers » 12 Jul 2009, 10:24am

I've been thinking about this thread.

What exactly was the OP's point of posting it?

Did he expect universal condemnation of the cyclist - a list of 'yes' post replies?

Was he just venting annoyance that he a 'seasoned' cyclist had been called an idiot by another cyclist?


He obviously didn't want a debate on any aspect of it that's for sure...

Kirst
Posts: 375
Joined: 16 Nov 2007, 7:38pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby Kirst » 12 Jul 2009, 11:31am

I thought my feet had vanished earlier, but then I realised I just couldn't see them because my socks are black.
I can handle bars and cycle paths but I can't handle cars and psychopaths

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/s/notinmyname

User avatar
EdinburghFixed
Posts: 2375
Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 7:03pm

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby EdinburghFixed » 12 Jul 2009, 2:32pm

Legend... one to add to the sig I think! :)

User avatar
Coffee
Posts: 395
Joined: 15 Jul 2008, 2:24pm
Location: Huntingdonshire

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby Coffee » 12 Jul 2009, 3:31pm

Was it Cunobelin that posted some research from an insurance company that listed car colour and accident rates....Black being at the top. I find it hard to see them in country lanes if they don't have lights on in certain conditions, luckily I can hear them coming a mile off, bikes are fairly quiet.
Also spotting things in mirrors isn't the same as looking at something down the street is it.
It's either down to the colour or only a certain type of person that choose black. ;-)
Rule 63

Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white VAN (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). Keep within the lane when practicable, watch out for Anna Meares elbows.

kwackers
Posts: 15052
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby kwackers » 12 Jul 2009, 4:25pm

Coffee wrote:Was it Cunobelin that posted some research from an insurance company that listed car colour and accident rates....Black being at the top. I find it hard to see them in country lanes if they don't have lights on in certain conditions, luckily I can hear them coming a mile off, bikes are fairly quiet.
Also spotting things in mirrors isn't the same as looking at something down the street is it.
It's either down to the colour or only a certain type of person that choose black. ;-)



Johnny Cash never got knocked off his bike did he? :wink:

glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby glueman » 12 Jul 2009, 5:30pm

Coffee wrote:Was it Cunobelin that posted some research from an insurance company that listed car colour and accident rates....Black being at the top.

I've heard the same factoid and believe yellow was another highly crash prone colour. It says more about which colours are popular among thrusting sensibilities than perception. Of course black and silver cars are extremely popular among the population at large whereas yellow is comparitively rare.

saudidave
Posts: 381
Joined: 16 Jan 2009, 12:22am

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby saudidave » 12 Jul 2009, 9:30pm

kwackers wrote:I've been thinking about this thread.

What exactly was the OP's point of posting it?



The OP was merely pointing out that motorists get slated on a regular basis by cyclists for their lack of consideration but often it is the cyclist at fault. It's very simple and to anyone with a modicum of grey matter, it should be blindingly obvious as it should be that black isn't an easily spotted colour in a grey, urban landscape

saudidave
Posts: 381
Joined: 16 Jan 2009, 12:22am

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby saudidave » 12 Jul 2009, 9:34pm

kwackers wrote:
Sadly the OP with his childish outbursts lost my sympathy some time ago, he does seem somewhat lively and that does make me wonder how he behaves when put on the spot by an irate cyclist.

I.


He behaved by ignoring him and departing quietly. Had he stayed he was in danger of punching him, O.K.?

kwackers
Posts: 15052
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby kwackers » 12 Jul 2009, 9:55pm

saudidave wrote:The OP was merely pointing out that motorists get slated on a regular basis by cyclists for their lack of consideration but often it is the cyclist at fault. It's very simple and to anyone with a modicum of grey matter, it should be blindingly obvious as it should be that black isn't an easily spotted colour in a grey, urban landscape

I'm absolutely confident that lots of cyclists are at fault - but then they're the one's who actually pay physically for theirs and others mistakes - car drivers on the other hand pretty much always walk away from theirs. So taking the cyclists point of view is pretty much what you'd expect on a cycling forum - yes???

It seems to me you've missed the entire point of a lot of these posts. You can't blame someone for not being seen on a bright day - it just isn't on. As a road user you have a responsibility to be observant. In daylight hours there are no excuses and by your own admission you didn't see him and thus I can't really see how you can claim he was in the process of undertaking when you nearly took him out, it's seems to me to be equally likely he was already in front of your car when you overtook and turned in.

He behaved by ignoring him and departing quietly. Had he stayed he was in danger of punching him, O.K.?

Thanks for confirming the stereotype I have of you from your posts, although I did credit you with less constraint. ;)

glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby glueman » 12 Jul 2009, 10:17pm

It's hardly surprising there's some pointed cycle advocacy on a cycling board, but there is a tendency towards 'driver bad - rider good' conclusions on this and other cycling forums. I've read some of the most horrendous logical chicanery on these issues which are basically 'well they shouldn't be on the roads' cabbie invective except with infinitely more words thrown at the case.

As I see it if the rider tried to filter through on the left of indicating cars while intending to go straight on he's either very naive or very stupid. I suppose the OP had a duty of care to save the rider from himself by checking his side mirror but were the cyclist relying on motorists observing that duty as an habitual occurence he'll be proved gravely mistaken.
Should the driver not have been indicating in preparation for a turn and failed to check mirrors he's inviting the rider to believe he's driving straight ahead and is therefor in error.

saudidave
Posts: 381
Joined: 16 Jan 2009, 12:22am

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby saudidave » 12 Jul 2009, 10:48pm

glueman wrote:It's hardly surprising there's some pointed cycle advocacy on a cycling board, but there is a tendency towards 'driver bad - rider good' conclusions on this and other cycling forums. I've read some of the most horrendous logical chicanery on these issues which are basically 'well they shouldn't be on the roads' cabbie invective except with infinitely more words thrown at the case.

As I see it if the rider tried to filter through on the left of indicating cars while intending to go straight on he's either very naive or very stupid. I suppose the OP had a duty of care to save the rider from himself by checking his side mirror but were the cyclist relying on motorists observing that duty as an habitual occurence he'll be proved gravely mistaken.
Should the driver not have been indicating in preparation for a turn and failed to check mirrors he's inviting the rider to believe he's driving straight ahead and is therefor in error.


I was indicating and the rider was stupid to do what he did. I was there and I know. You can only check things so many times. As a former motorcyclist I know full well that you have to be extremely careful and drive/ride defensively if you are on two wheels. Sadly this particular cyclist didn't do that. I didn't respond in a violent manner when screamed at by a cyclist who was 100% in the wrong, I ignored him and left, despite being angered by his response. I wanted to punch his lights out but I didn't. Isn't that what you are supposed to do as a reasonable adult? Not react and walk away? His visibility is obviously objective, but if asked to choose a visible garment, would you choose a black one or a dayglo yellow one. I know what my choice would be.

User avatar
EdinburghFixed
Posts: 2375
Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 7:03pm

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby EdinburghFixed » 13 Jul 2009, 8:32am

Why should you have to choose 80's electro-fluorescent clothes, though?

This comes down to whether you believe responsibility for safe driving comes down to the motorist, or the 'victim' (for want of a better word). If in broad daylight a driver mows down someone in a suit, because they were "invisible" and claims it's the pedestrian's fault for not wearing high viz, they'd be laughed out of town. If the same motorist ploughed into a black car and claimed it was "invisible" and the other driver's fault for not painting his car in high viz, they'd be laughed out of town.

But for a motorist who doesn't check his mirrors before manoeuvring, you're very quick to place the blame for this near-miss on the cyclist. Oh, so he caused you to turn into him by wearing normal clothes, huh?

To avoid any doubt, I think if the cyclist did undertake a vehicle indicating left then they are a total idiot - this is a big part of why I pass most stationary or slow moving traffic on the right. And if this had been at night with no bike lights, then I'd be 100% on your side, visibility-wise. But that doesn't absolve you from taking basic safety precautions which are *your responsibility*.

You say you can "only check so many times", well, right before you actually turn is probably a good start (they might want to add that to the police motorcycle training course, huh?)

To argue that you're not responsible for ramming people who choose to wear normal clothes on a bright summer day, well, sounds a bit ridiculous. You're in the car - it's your responsibility not to ram anyone.

saudidave
Posts: 381
Joined: 16 Jan 2009, 12:22am

Re: Nearly knocked a bloke off his bike this morning

Postby saudidave » 13 Jul 2009, 8:56am

EdinburghFixed wrote:
But for a motorist who doesn't check his mirrors before manoeuvring, you're very quick to place the blame for this near-miss on the cyclist. Oh, so he caused you to turn into him by wearing normal clothes, huh?



I give up! As I have explained ad nauseum, I indicated left in good time, checked my near side mirror and turned. Obviously I didn't spot him or I wouldn't have made the manouevre. There is only so much you can do, so many times you can check. Am I expected to turn left in slow moving traffic looking in to my left hand mirror and ignoring the traffic in front? Risk hitting the car in front? My guess is that he was in a blind spot or moved in to position after I had checked. What I do know is this - If he had had the common sense not to be adjacent to the nearside of a car, at a set of traffic lights, with the car repeater indicator on the front wing clearly showing, then he wouldn't have been in any danger at all, whether he was wearing all black with a ski mask on or a set of fairy lights. Edinburgh fixed has also now concluded that the incident occurred on a bright summers day! Where did I say that? Was he there? It was at 6.00 a.m. on a very dismal and wet morning. If Edinburgh fixed had the decency to read the posts before criticising me, and adding factors that didn't exist in order to embelish his post, I wouldn't have to get uppity would I? I welcome criticism and debate but not from people who don't get their facts right or add fantasies.