Crankycorner
Full Member
Correct. It’s also not illegal to drive 50 km/hr on a motorway but it’s incredibly unsafe to do it. Pedantic John would do well to remember legal doesn’t mean right.?
For example, drink 20 pints!
Correct. It’s also not illegal to drive 50 km/hr on a motorway but it’s incredibly unsafe to do it. Pedantic John would do well to remember legal doesn’t mean right.?
For example, drink 20 pints!
There's one parking bay on the left hand side on that road, which I also know very well, and if you watch the video, there are cars parked in it, so even if he were to move into the space he would quickly have to swerve back out into traffic again to avoid the parked cars, which is obviously dangerous.
It is not safe in this scenario for any cyclist to move to the left - the bay is occupied and the narrow width of the road doesn't afford a safe passing distance.
We could be discussing that all day and night, what is legal and safe are the most important considerations, followed up by consideration for other road users.So what if it's possible? It's illegal? Are road users supposed to act by what is possible or what is legal? If I'm at a crossroads and the light goes green should I go or sit there forever - after all someone coming the other way could barrel through. Whilst that may not be legal, it is possible
If this is the motorist's thinking then it is entirely illogical. That stretch of road is, at the very most, 500m long. You then come into Douglas village where it merges to become a two-way road where there's ample space to overtake. Doing 40kmph means you'd do 500m in about 45 seconds. Doing 50kmph - the legal limit - means you'd do it in roughly 35 seconds. "Stuck behind the cyclist the whole way along my journey" in this instance, in reality, actually means it's taking the motorist about 10 seconds more to drive this road. Blowing your horn at someone on a bike for the sake of 10 seconds is just dickhead behaviour
Might have been GNUI Cork'Gnat', the word is 'gnat'.
I'd seriously question the third level institution that certified you.
?
Note please, I did say that if there were no cars parked there, that it would be possible. Obviously with cars parked there it is not possible.
We could be discussing that all day and night, what is legal and safe are the most important considerations, followed up by consideration for other road users.
There are 2 parties at fault there, two wrongs do not make a right.
Uncalled for.Looking at that photo, I am thinking, how does she pass the beep test.
Fair dues.
He could have slowed down and pulled in out of the way of the car, it is technically possible.And in the video, based on which you accuse him of holding up traffic there are cars parked there. So you concede that it's not possible for him to move in there in this instance.
The cyclist is being both legal and safe in that video. The motorist is being unsafe in needlessly blowing his horn at the cyclist, and is showing no consideration for the cyclist by attempting to intimidate him.
No sir, both are wrong.Except there aren't in this case. There's one wrong, an impatient motorist with a sense of entitlement losing their temper over what is at most a ten second delay.
I cringed. , I do be morto for you Jank.'Gnat', the word is 'gnat'.
I'd seriously question the third level institution that certified you.
?
This lad makes John look like the poster boy of good behaviour and sanity.