Cyclists cause an accident :(

[ogr1]

If they are entitled to use the whole road, then they should pay "road tax"
and be insured, like the rest of us, IMHO. (UK at least).

Loads of cyclists here and they all bitch about car drivers opening doors on them blah! blah! Well wake up people! happens to us bikers too, only we have a tad more to lose if it all goes tit's up, because of some other road users myopic stupidity.

[Beemer]

I hate cyclists anyway, so I'm with you on this one, but what annoys me the most are those tossers who use YOUR lane when there is an obstruction in THEIR lane. Hello, if there is a slow-moving tractor, or a piece of wood or a group of cyclists in YOUR lane and there is something coming towards you in the oncoming lane, then the correct procedure is to slow down until you pass the oncoming vehicle and THEN move into the other lane to pass. If I had money for every time I saw some total fuckwit move into my lane (whether I'm on the bike or in a car) just because there is something in his lane, I'd be bloody rich.

In the majority of cases, they have seen the obstruction well in advance and you would assume they had also seen you, but no, they make no effort to slow down or wait until you pass. Bet they wouldn't do it if you were driving a cop car!

And there is NO excuse for passing like this on a blind corner.

[Jantar]

I have to say, the number of people in here blaming the cyclists for "forcing" the car driver to overtake on a blind corner is incredible. The car driver is completely at fault. The cyclists dont have any sort of psychic powers........

It all comes down to determing the primary cause of the accident. ie which single event would have prevented the series that led up to it.

The accident occured because the motorcyclist lost control while riding off the road.

Why was he off the road? Because a car was coming towards him completely on the wrong side of the road forcing him off the road.

Why was the car on the wrong side of the road? Because he was overtaking on a blind corner, which is illegal. So here is a cause, but lets look further and see if there are any other causes.

Why did he choose this spot to overtake? Unknown, but possibly he was unable to stop in the clear distance ahead, in which case it would be another cause. OR

Why did he have to go so wide as to give the motorcyclist no room? Because the cyclists were riding three abreast, and hence taking up more of the lane than the motorist was expecting. Definitely another cause and in this case the primary cause.

Consider that the lane is 4.5 meters wide, each cyclist requires 1.5 meters of lane, and the car requiures 3 meters of lane. On overtaking the car also leaves a 1 meter gap between it and the cyclists. With 3 cyclists side by side they are using all of the left lane, and the car will use its 3 meters plus a 1 meter gap of the right lane, leaving 0.5 meters for the motorcyclist. An accident will occur.

If there are only 2 cyclists side by side they use up 3 meters of the lane, the car uses up the reamaider of that lane and in leaving the 1 meter gap also uses 2.5 meters of the opposing lane, leaving just 2 meters for the motorcyclist. Its close, but an accident may be avoidable.

If the cyclists are riding in single file, then they only take up 1.5 meters of the left lane. The car in overtaking uses up the remainder, and possibly up to 0.5 meters of the opposing lane, leaving the motorcyclist a full 4 meters. The motorcyclist may curse the driver for his unsafe overtaking, but the accident would have been avoided.

So the primary cause of the accident is still the actions of the cyclists.

[Beemer]

It all comes down to determing the primary cause of the accident. ie which single event would have prevented the series that led up to it.

Got it in one! It would have been no different if the obstruction had been a cow that had broken through a fence instead of cyclists riding three abreast - the PRIMARY cause of the accident is what caused the obstruction. Riding three abreast, particularly coming up to a blind corner, is careless and the cyclists should be blamed for this. I know a lot of us hate cyclists (I'll put my hand up to that) but with good reason. A lot of them ARE arrogant and think that they have the right to take up the WHOLE lane and travel at 20-40kph or less. They seem to either have no idea of the danger they pose to vehicles suddenly coming up behind them or they don't give a rat's arse. I'm pretty sure I know which one I'd vote for.

Can you imagine the outcry if there had been a large truck in the oncoming lane and the car driver had nowhere to go and had instead ploughed into the cyclists? (Not that I am condoning his swinging into the oncoming lane in this case.) It's a bloody miracle that there wasn't a fatal accident in this case, but I bet the cyclists would not have felt any guilt if there had been.

[twinkle]

So if a vehicle is driving around a blind corner, and another vehicle overtakes this one and has a head on collision, then the vehicle which is being OVERTAKEN is at fault? Yeah right

[Beemer]

So if a vehicle is driving around a blind corner, and another vehicle overtakes this one and has a head on collision, then the vehicle which is being OVERTAKEN is at fault? Yeah right

You're taking the comparison a little far here - there will always be idiots who overtake on blind corners and none of us is condoning the action of the overtaking driver in this instance. If the obstruction had been another vehicle, travelling at a reasonable speed, then of course the person overtaking would be totally responsible for causing any accident. What we are saying is that coming up behind a group of cyclists travelling at well below the speed limit, riding three abreast and taking up the whole lane, is the greatest contributing factor to this accident. As Jantar explained, if they had been riding in single file, it is likely that even if the car driver had overtaken - which would still be wrong - there would have been room for the bike without it having to leave the road.

If the vehicle in the instance you gave was traveling at 40kph, then yes, I would say the driver of that vehicle would be at fault. Same as if a driver pulled out of a road onto a 100kph road and was only doing 30kph and a car in the same lane swerved to avoid rear-ending it.

[WINJA]

Maybe Its Time To Put Number Plates On All Push Bikes And A Rego Charge For Acc So That Cyclists Can Start To Contribute , Maybe $50 A Year , The Number Plate Can Simply Be A A Normal Rego Sticker Printed At The Post Shop With The Biggest Lettering Possible.


Also Why Dont The Pigs Crack Down On Farmers With Unregistered Unwarrented Bikes Being Used On Public Roads And No Use Of Helmets Either, Pull Over The Average Cocky On The Roads And The Pigs Could Get $1000 Off Each Of Them , Tractors And Trailers With No Reg No Warrant Either Ticket Those, Running Livestock On The Road How Bout $100 Per Head Fine , So If Hes Running 10 Cows Up The Road Thats $1000 , Why Is It Just The Average Every Day Joe Public That Gets Harrased By The Pigs

[McJim]

Cyclists are the single most vulnerable group of road users.
Bicycles pre-date cars and motorcycles - they were here first.

Aren't we all fuckin' brave for having a go at the vulnerable?

I disapprove of these cyclists in a 3 abreast formation but does that mean all cyclists are tossers? No.

I've seet motorcycles doing stupid things and causing accidents does that make all motorcyclists arseholes? No.

FFS people! classing all Cyclists/bikers/cage drivers as all being the same is as bad as racism - completely unfounded in fact.

[McJim]

Maybe Its Time To Put Number Plates On All Push Bikes And A Rego Charge For Acc So That Cyclists Can Start To Contribute , Maybe $50 A Year , The Number Plate Can Simply Be A A Normal Rego Sticker Printed At The Post Shop With The Biggest Lettering Possible.


Also Why Dont The Pigs Crack Down On Farmers With Unregistered Unwarrented Bikes Being Used On Public Roads And No Use Of Helmets Either, Pull Over The Average Cocky On The Roads And The Pigs Could Get $1000 Off Each Of Them , Tractors And Trailers With No Reg No Warrant Either Ticket Those, Running Livestock On The Road How Bout $100 Per Head Fine , So If Hes Running 10 Cows Up The Road Thats $1000 , Why Is It Just The Average Every Day Joe Public That Gets Harrased By The Pigs

Absolutely - and every pedestrian that has the audacity to cross the road - we need to charge them for using the road too.

[Beemer]

Absolutely - and every pedestrian that has the audacity to cross the road - we need to charge them for using the road too.

Yes, especially the dumb bitch who lives around the corner from our country road and walks in the middle of the lane on a 100kph road - and won't move over even when she can see there is a car coming in the other lane and one is heading towards her as well!

[twinkle]

It doesn't matter what the obstruction was and how fast it was moving, or even if it was a parked car/fallen tree. The primary cause of the accident was how the driver responded to the obstruction in his lane. If he couldn't slow down in time then he was travelling too fast for the conditions, if he chose to overtake then he is to blame.

[Beemer]

Yes, the driver CAUSED the accident by his actions, but the PRIMARY CAUSE of the accident was the obstruction in his lane - ie, the cyclists. Same in the fatal accident where the kids threw concrete off the motorway overbridge - the cause of the accident was the driver being fatally injured and losing control of his car, but the primary cause was some little tosser throwing a slab of concrete off the overbridge.

[Jantar]

It doesn't matter what the obstruction was and how fast it was moving, or even if it was a parked car/fallen tree. The primary cause of the accident was how the driver responded to the obstruction in his lane. If he couldn't slow down in time then he was travelling too fast for the conditions, if he chose to overtake then he is to blame.

The car overtaking on a blind bend was a cause, but it wasn't the primary cause. In the example you give of a fallen tree, then the tree across the road would be the primary cause. That doesn't excuse the car driver, and if you go right back to my very first post in this thread, I have maintained that the driver should be charged. But in the instance we are discussing here it is the action of the cyclists riding three abreast that started the chain of events. They are the primary cause.

[twinkle]

ok, sorry, I don't think I properly understand what primary cause is.

[pritch]

I find some of the sentiments being exressed here somewhat surprising.

From the evidence of many threads on KB it would seem motorcyclists often seem to feel somewhat vulnerable and sometimes discriminated against, both officially and otherwise.

This would have led me to think that perhaps we would have some empathy for another group of vulnerable road users. As a sometime cyclist I can assure you I don't feel arrogant, I feel extremely vulnerable, particularly on the open road.

There is a bridge near where I live and there is just no way I would ride a cycle across there on the road. The footpath is the only way to travel.

Cyclists riding in a bunch can be frustrating if you have to slow down and wait for oncoming traffic. You could always point out the error of their ways in a few short words. Realistically though, how often does this situation actually arise?