poxy cyclists

[JPDirect]

Originally Posted by LNT

Neem: If you read my post correctly, it states that if the junction was as illustrated, and I think the original poster suggests that it is. Therefore, the picture seems to indicate that it is perfectly straight, and the view is not hampered by anything to the left and right. In these circumstances, there is a case for suggesting that the car could well stop prior to the cycle lane, if they were not bloody minded and thinking "I'm on the road so if a bike hits me, it's not my fault". Something may well not be your fault, but it's you who ends up with a bent car and all the hassle. I'd prefer to keep my car unbent, and if it means stopping a yard prior to the junction in case a stupid cyclist listning to his mp3/on the phone/picking his nose (delete as appropriate) then that's what I'll do, because being right in principle doesn't fix your car, and doesn't stop the inevitable. As a matter of fact, the diagram also appears to be so straight as to make one wonder why a cyclist wasn't seen earlier that he was. How many people on this forum have had an accident owing to a vehicle pulling out in front of them? And how many have pulled out of a junction and been hit by a vehicle on the main road having misjudged their speed?

Tom is also quite right, but I would then refer him to the final sentence in this post above. I also refer him to my previous post which stated that we should live life as it is, and not as it ought to be.

The fact of the matter is, it's all very well denouncing cyclists, but my whole point about all this is that being in the right and being bloody minded doesn't fix the car, or avoid it getting bent in the first place.

LNT,

Why don't you get off your high horse and actually read MY post properly. I was ALREADY at the junction, waiting to turn left and the idiot cyclist was at least about 40 metres away at the time.

I was waiting at the junction for about 40 seconds waiting to take a left turn and the cyclist STILL didn't see me until it was too late. It's all very well you harping on about keeping a yard or so infront of the Give Way lines, but you'd think the cyclist had enough time to see me, plus he was a good number of metres away at the time, enough space for him to stop, had he been paying attention. Also, if you are stupid enough to stop a yard or so in front of the Give Way lines everytime, how the hell are you going to see around the corners? Not every junction is the same, well not where I live anyway...

Once again, I refer you to my original post.

Your input is welcome, but stupid comments like yours only annoy me and other careful CAR drivers.

[NEEMSTAR]

Originally Posted by LNT

Neem: If you read my post correctly, it states that if the junction was as illustrated, and I think the original poster suggests that it is. Therefore, the picture seems to indicate that it is perfectly straight, and the view is not hampered by anything to the left and right. In these circumstances, there is a case for suggesting that the car could well stop prior to the cycle lane, if they were not bloody minded and thinking "I'm on the road so if a bike hits me, it's not my fault". Something may well not be your fault, but it's you who ends up with a bent car and all the hassle. I'd prefer to keep my car unbent, and if it means stopping a yard prior to the junction in case a stupid cyclist listning to his mp3/on the phone/picking his nose (delete as appropriate) then that's what I'll do, because being right in principle doesn't fix your car, and doesn't stop the inevitable. As a matter of fact, the diagram also appears to be so straight as to make one wonder why a cyclist wasn't seen earlier that he was. How many people on this forum have had an accident owing to a vehicle pulling out in front of them? And how many have pulled out of a junction and been hit by a vehicle on the main road having misjudged their speed?

Tom is also quite right, but I would then refer him to the final sentence in this post above. I also refer him to my previous post which stated that we should live life as it is, and not as it ought to be.

The fact of the matter is, it's all very well denouncing cyclists, but my whole point about all this is that being in the right and being bloody minded doesn't fix the car, or avoid it getting bent in the first place.

JP is showing on his diagram what happened in a very general manner i imagine - not knocking his photoshop skills but i am sure he does not have time to draw the big oak tree on the corner (or whatever else) of the junction which may have been hampering his view of oncoming traffic, hence the reason he was waiting at the line like any normal driver

i dont see why we as drivers need to stop before the line to give way to a cyclist that may or may not come - in fact i think it may be more dangerous - giving the cyclist a false sense of security as he comes flying towards his give way sign and shoots across just as you start to pull away causing a sticky situation. at the end of the day give way still means give way

[LNT]

Originally Posted by JPDirect

LNT,

Why don't you get off your high horse and actually read MY post properly. I was ALREADY at the junction, waiting to turn left and the idiot cyclist was at least about 40 metres away at the time.

I was waiting at the junction for about 40 seconds waiting to take a left turn and the cyclist STILL didn't see me until it was too late. It's all very well you harping on about keeping a yard or so infront of the Give Way lines, but you'd think the cyclist had enough time to see me, plus he was a good number of metres away at the time, enough space for him to stop, had he been paying attention. Also, if you are stupid enough to stop a yard or so in front of the Give Way lines everytime, how the hell are you going to see around the corners? Not every junction is the same, well not where I live anyway...

Once again, I refer you to my original post.

Your input is welcome, but stupid comments like yours only annoy me and other careful CAR drivers.

Read the first sentence of my original post where I acknowledge that you were stationary. Your anger has obviously failed to read that bit. What then followed was some suggestions and then generalisations and some tips on accident avoidance. Just because you want people to be sympathetic for you, posted on here for people to say "Poor you, aren't all cyclists idiots?" and someone dares to play devils advocate, or puts an alternative view they are stupid? If I annoyed you, then that's your problem I'm afraid. I drive a car too, and, I would suggest, drive a car to a much higher standard than you, given my qualifications and experience. I have not made any reference to other junctions, apart from referring to cycle crossings in my area. I am also fully aware that every junction is different, but you nailed your colours firmly to the mast with your illustration, which would seem to indicate a very straight junction with no obstructions. You did say "it shows CLEARLY what happened". There's no question of defending the cycle rider at all, that would be futile, but, again you suggest that you've seen the cyclist as you've approached the junction and not actually done anything about it, or treated him as a potential hazard.

You are obviously someone who can't take criticism and your reference to my "being stupid" by stopping a yard behind the junction in case a cyclist doesn't stop indicates a total lack of consideration for anyone who might have the audicity to cross your path. Your term "harping on" about this also shows a certain contempt for anyone with an alternative view.

Indeed, your other name calling and references to the cyclist speak volumes for your attitude which appears to be one of a very angry person with such tunnel vision as to have no ability to see any other point of view but your own. This is not a good trait, because, in the same situation, knowing what you know now, if the situation arises again at that junction, what are you going to do? Will you do anything different? It seems not, and so I'd get an account at the body shop if I were you.

If, according to you I'm "On my high horse" "Harping on" and, yes, "Stupid", then you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm sure you'll be understanding if I treat those insults with the contempt that they deserve.

[Unknownsoldier]

As the scousers in Harry Enfield and Chums said:

"Calm Down, Calm Down"

Come on you to, you both make valid arguments and points, but just take several deep breaths and step back for a second, "anger leads to escalation".

Tom

[LNT]

Tom,
No anger from me, and no deep breaths needed, because I have the ability to have an objective (and therefore sometimes alternative) view on matters. As you'll find out if you end up doing the job you've previously indicated an interest in... but if someone is ignorant enough to resort to abusing me then I'm at liberty to express my view on that. Nothing to do with calming down mate so please don't tar me with the same brush.

[Unknownsoldier]

No offence intended LNT (and I agree, alternative views give depth to answers and allow more information to flow, at least that's what I constantly get told by my prof.), I understand, it's just after seeing what happened to Angie etc. then I just don't want to see 2 more guys come a cropper

ATB,
Tom

[JPDirect]

Originally Posted by LNT

Read the first sentence of my original post where I acknowledge that you were stationary. Your anger has obviously failed to read that bit. What then followed was some suggestions and then generalisations and some tips on accident avoidance. Just because you want people to be sympathetic for you, posted on here for people to say "Poor you, aren't all cyclists idiots?" and someone dares to play devils advocate, or puts an alternative view they are stupid? If I annoyed you, then that's your problem I'm afraid. I drive a car too, and, I would suggest, drive a car to a much higher standard than you, given my qualifications and experience. I have not made any reference to other junctions, apart from referring to cycle crossings in my area. I am also fully aware that every junction is different, but you nailed your colours firmly to the mast with your illustration, which would seem to indicate a very straight junction with no obstructions. You did say "it shows CLEARLY what happened". There's no question of defending the cycle rider at all, that would be futile, but, again you suggest that you've seen the cyclist as you've approached the junction and not actually done anything about it, or treated him as a potential hazard.

You are obviously someone who can't take criticism and your reference to my "being stupid" by stopping a yard behind the junction in case a cyclist doesn't stop indicates a total lack of consideration for anyone who might have the audicity to cross your path. Your term "harping on" about this also shows a certain contempt for anyone with an alternative view.

Indeed, your other name calling and references to the cyclist speak volumes for your attitude which appears to be one of a very angry person with such tunnel vision as to have no ability to see any other point of view but your own. This is not a good trait, because, in the same situation, knowing what you know now, if the situation arises again at that junction, what are you going to do? Will you do anything different? It seems not, and so I'd get an account at the body shop if I were you.

If, according to you I'm "On my high horse" "Harping on" and, yes, "Stupid", then you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm sure you'll be understanding if I treat those insults with the contempt that they deserve.

Hi LNT,

I've only skim read your post above, as it's probably full of rubbish... Plus I don't want to bore anyone else.

This thread is about "Poxy Cyclists", not about whether you're a qualified or experienced driver, no one really cares whether you have qualifications or not, doesn't make you a good driver, does it? I'm a member of the IAM, but I don't like to show off about it like you do!

We'll see what the court decides next month. I'll keep the majority of readers (who are actually interested) updated.

[LNT]

Well actually, in quoting my post but not reading it, yet replying to it in the way that you have, you've unwittingly confirmed everything within it. Something of a paradox really.

And I'm not a member of the IAM, and never said I was. I don't need to be. I'll certainly agree that membership of the IAM doesn't necessarily make you a good driver. You obviously prove that one with your attitude and bloody mindedness. If I had a pound for everyone who told me they were a member of the IAM... On the other hand, my training, qualifications and experience, are recognised officially as meaning that I AM a good driver. But I never actually said that either, I merely said that I drove to a higher standard than you, and I stand by that. (You did say you only skim read my post though...)

I'm glad you sought the views of all the members of this forum so you could speak on their behalf. I'm sure they'll be pleased about that, seeing as though none of them are interested in my views, but they are of yours. Now who's on their "High horse"?

It was another angry post wasn't it? Come on admit it. Otherwise you wouldn't have needed to edit it...

Bottom line is, the cyclist WAS an arse, and WAS at fault, but you don't seem to be able to understand, or you refuse to believe that it was AVOIDABLE, and that's the whole point. Doesn't matter who's to blame. Could it have been AVOIDED by a [superior] driver? And are the millions of cyclists out there all "Poxy"? Well yes according to you, but that only underlines your narrow mindedness.

[JPDirect]

Yet another boring post then, yawn, yawn, yawn...

Your views are yours I guess; you're probably just stuck in your ways - one of those grumpy old men, who always have something to moan about.

Typically people like you who show off about themselves and always think they're right aren't worth talking to and always want the last word in everything. Have it mate, 'cos you'll only lose sleep over it!

I won't be replying to your posts anymore, as you bore the hell out of me, but I will reply to anyone who has something sensible to say. As promised, I'll let you know what the outcome is next month.

By the way, thanks to all of you that sent me PM's, I understand why they were sent that way!

[Pottsy]

A reasoned discussion turned into an argument, which then turned into personal comments. This is not permitted in this forum.