-
This actually makes me think the opposite - sounds like he could be one of those people with a 'get out of the way' mentality that just doesn't work given the above clusterfuck.
Yes, an airhorn is a silly affectation. I remember it being talked about on urbancyclist-uk back in the late 90s/early 2000s, and people found it pretty funny to use one on a pedestrian--ha, ha. That was when many people who posted there were not yet very experienced in cycling politics and etiquette. If someone has one, it shows a lack of knowledge. There's no reason to have one. Improve your riding instead.
-
Should have phrased some things differently, but certainly I am trying to play devil’s advocate with a number of my comments.
As per using voice, I have been on a number of occasions shouted at for a friendly ‘good morning’, and told I should have a bell. So I use a bell, and often it is ignored.
-
If you need to say something to someone, use your voice.
I'm not sure say anything in an emergency situation is a good idea at all from a cycling perspective. The CA case followed by this cases very much suggest that a cyclists will have it held against them in a way that a motorist using the horn wouldn't.
Much better to keep your mouth shut and if the worst happens rely on the cast iron get out of jail free card of "I didn't see" or "the sun was in my eyes" seams to work fine for motorists.
-
Didn't Charlie Alliston shout 'get out of the way' or something? You shouldn't 'have to' shout that.
I sometimes use a bell on the bike on which I have one (out of habit more than anything, it's an old one), but I don't need one.
-
Always yield to pedestrians (including mobility assisted ones). In the hierarchy of vulnerability and entitlement to the streets they come first.
-
My general finding is that the only time I use a bell is when I'm still more than 10 metres from someone who hasn't noticed me and I want to draw their attention to my presence so they can pick a side of the path. If I'm even thinking that I might have to brake then I'm definitely not considering using a bell, partly because the relevant time has passed and partly because it always interferes with bike control (especially on drop-bars)
I'd say that 9 times out of 10 that I see cyclists use a bell, they do it ensure that they don't have to slow down. The classic "it's my right of way!" ringing of a bell, by cyclists who don't want to slow down, is often to try to open a path through a gaggle of pedestrians who've crossed against the lights. It's a douchebag move and doesn't establish priority any more than sounding a horn does.
-
I'd say that 9 times out of 10 that I see cyclists use a bell, they do it ensure that they don't have to slow down. The classic "it's my right of way!" ringing of a bell, by cyclists who don't want to slow down, is often to try to open a path through a gaggle of pedestrians who've crossed against the lights. It's a douchebag move and doesn't establish priority any more than sounding a horn does.
@Archibald take note
-
You shouldn't 'have to' shout that.
Well yes, quite. but in an emergency situation I don't really think you can make a value judgement on what somebody says in a panic.
-
A link from the twitter thread that @Greenbank posted previously...
https://clinicalnegligencebarrister.wordpress.com/2019/06/24/brushett-v-hazeldean-the-facts/
Defendant sounds like a bit of a cunt. Also backs up what's been said about people who think airhorns are necessary.
-
Northern Ireland has jaywalking laws.
I've never seen them enforced however. The local police in Belfast has been doing Light Checks (unlit cyclists), overtaking checks (1.5 meter and no less). They take any cyclist complaints serious as well.
Pedestrians here are as inattentive in the city centre as can be though, it is not so busy that it becomes impossible to drive/cycle but they do happily step out in front of you. All you can do is slow down.
The local government is doing campaigns (respect everyone's journey) to ask people to light up, wear hi-vis when running, give lots of room overtaking, not speed...
-
Cover your brakes, moderate your speed if there's a potential conflict, position yourself so that you can be seen, be aware of your surroundings, recognise who has priority, and the appropriate response to a potentially moving hazard in the road is to stop, not swerve. So, yes, but that's fairly generic roadcraft.
-
Does cycle training include pedestrian awareness - for example in a situation like this ?
Yes.
To be honest, driver training includes it. CBT motorbike training includes it. Cycle proficiency probably included it.
Nowhere teaches aggressive behaviour/cycling like this. Assertive != aggressive.
Oliver Schick
dst2
pdlouche
HousecatHST
Mickie_Cricket
ffm
Brun
JWestland
kl
hugo7
Howard
deleted
Fox
SwissChap
dubtap
not4sale
Greenbank-
Post a reply
About
In the news
Posted by
@Platini
Not only that, but the absence of such laws means the concept doesn't actually exist in Britain. :) This is a very good thing, a much-underrated freedom.
I don't agree. The vast majority of the time, it isn't even the slightest problem--if you know what you're doing. This present case is a vanishingly rare edge case. If there's some conflict, as a cyclist you can always initiate a police standoff--a friendly 'after you' will usually cause the other party to give up their resistance to your politeness. :)
There is no reason for having an airhorn on a bike whatsoever. Not justifiable. You shouldn't even need a bell. If you need to say something to someone, use your voice. There are only very few people with an impairment that prevents them from doing so.
The order is wrong. It should be: (1) insure (a basic sensible move, just become a member of a cycling organisation--the problem is that it's really aimed at middle-class people and many people on tight incomes can't afford it); (2) educate (consider cycle training, etc.); (3) improve infrastructure (although that really has no bearing on the present case). Obviously, 'lawyer up' is only in the event of a crash, so doesn't belong in this list.