Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Likely Lad – politicalbetting.com

1235

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Eabhal said:

    The cyclist was doing about 15mph and had about a second to react. No chance.

    The cyclist was not at fault.
    The cyclist was drinking and then trying to replace the B*d*n into its holder. He looks up, car. How is that not driving without due care and attention.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    Eabhal said:

    The cyclist was doing about 15mph and had about a second to react. No chance.

    The cyclist was not at fault.
    If you look at the screen grab you can see he is looking down at the point the MINI is obvious. It wasn't a lack of time to react, he didn't see the MINI as he wasn't looking.


  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,425
    MattW said:

    The turning BMW Mini cannot be seen on the video until 1-1.5s before the collision, when the cyclist doing 15mph is approximately 6-10m away.

    AFAICS there was nothing the cyclist (who had both hands back on his bars I think in the vid) could have done, unless we rely on things such as "the colliding cyclist was further forward so should have anticipated the lunge by the careless driver".

    What he could have done was not been doing 15mph alongside stationary traffic approaching a junction.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    MattW said:

    The turning BMW Mini cannot be seen on the video until 1-1.5s before the collision, when the cyclist doing 15mph is approximately 6-10m away.

    AFAICS there was nothing the cyclist (who had both hands back on his bars I think in the vid) could have done, unless we rely on things such as "the colliding cyclist was further forward so should have anticipated the lunge by the careless driver".

    ... Purge
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,039
    TOPPING said:

    This is the same madness that believes a Jaffa Cake is a cake.
    Wait until you guys hear that they make Jaffa Cake Minis.


  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149
    Donkeys said:

    The Republicans in Congress should have voted to convict him at his second impeachment trial in 2021.

    I'm not sure he ever gets bored.

    Sooner or later there will be an on-camera freakout - perhaps when police lay hands on him, perhaps when a judge tells him on camera to STFU.

    His diehard supporters will believe whatever he tells them, even if it directly contradicts what they would otherwise see, or with sanity, or with the usual social requirement of acting in a non-laughable manner if you're an adult. See how some of them are wearing NAPPIES now in answer to Michael Cohen calling their hero "Von ShitzInPantz". Cohen presumably knew exactly what he was doing.

    But many of Donald Trump's supporters are not diehard and in principle they can peel themselves off, as if not in a cult but on the outer periphery of one.

    Mary Trump possibly has a different assessment of where he will go. She seems worried that he may be able to escape his current troubles.

    You are right about how he projects his vantage-point: "This is what you know. This is how you're feeling, and what you're thinking, about being in the presence of a god". He was like that before he went into politics. Extremely powerful self-belief.
    This is the Lincoln Project take on that, which is a bit brutal.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_KsI_wkKgI
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940

    I don't have all day to find the section you indicate (despite the evidence of my repeated posts) - can you link to the section you refer too?
    Are you not familiar with the Highway Code already?
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116

    People clearly have a problem with basic english. Since when is a car that large a 'mini'. It is fucking huge. And no it is not loved in the same way - at least not by any of the proper mini owners I know. It is about as popular as the telly tubby daleks were. Indeed it might have shared the same designer.
    God, those Fatleks were awful.

    As for the BMW Mini, it has got larger, as do most cars, with every facelift. R50 was smaller than R56 and so on.

    I love the Mini. Been to plant Oxford a few times in a past life during pre launch on R50, always a great buffet.

    The first R50 was a pleasure to work on and be involved with.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    TOPPING said:

    The cyclist was drinking and then trying to replace the B*d*n into its holder. He looks up, car. How is that not driving without due care and attention.
    Because it is a cyclist doing it and, to some of our fellow cyclists, they can do no wrong.
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,508
    edited May 2024
    148grss said:

    A good part of the solution to the housing crisis - I hope to see people who love to talk on that issue support this.
    I can't see the point of banning council house sales. Increase the qualification period if necessary to temporarily reduce demand - but the actual problem here is one of supply.

    Build much more social housing, sure. But selling existing stock off to long-term tenants can help fund further building, so do that too.

    Not doing so just pushes the problem elsewhere.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,060

    If you look at the screen grab you can see he is looking down at the point the MINI is obvious. It wasn't a lack of time to react, he didn't see the MINI as he wasn't looking.


    To add did the cyclist not think "Hmm, why are the cars to the right of me stationary"
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    Eabhal said:

    Are you not familiar with the Highway Code already?
    Not in minute detail, no. Passed my test in 1991, no retest since.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,329
    Leon said:

    Close enough for me to get that wine. I’m in the frankly enchanting town of vieste, at the end of the Gargano peninsula - the spur of the heel of the Italian boot - Puglia!

    It’s gorgeous and there’s about three people here



    And yes that thing - you can just see it in that photo - is indeed a fishing contraption. A trabucco. A method of fishing so ancient they are now historically preserved

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabucco
    The Med and Adriatic coasts are just so beautiful.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Taz said:

    Because it is a cyclist doing it and, to some of our fellow cyclists, they can do no wrong.
    I am a fellow cyclist but you've got to look at the situation.

    In this case cyclist = taking refreshments, so for me this puts him in the wrong.

    Surely no one on this board is saying it's ok for a cyclist to be eating and drinking (and texting?) while cycling.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940
    edited May 2024
    TOPPING said:

    I am a fellow cyclist but you've got to look at the situation.

    In this case cyclist = taking refreshments, so for me this puts him in the wrong.

    Surely no one on this board is saying it's ok for a cyclist to be eating and drinking (and texting?) while cycling.
    My car comes with a cup holder for some reason. Weighs 1.5 tonnes.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    TOPPING said:

    I am a fellow cyclist but you've got to look at the situation.

    In this case cyclist = taking refreshments, so for me this puts him in the wrong.

    Surely no one on this board is saying it's ok for a cyclist to be eating and drinking (and texting?) while cycling.
    I am also a fellow cyclist, I cycle to work daily and do around 60 miles a week. I think some people are saying this.

    I do not disagree with you either. If you take a drink while driving you will rightly get a ticket for it. If I take a drink when cycling I do so when I have stopped. It is a distraction.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940

    Not in minute detail, no. Passed my test in 1991, no retest since.
    That explains a lot. Check out rule H3, for example.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,329
    MikeL said:

    Can anyone explain why the NPR/Marist 52-47 poll is not listed on 538?

    They do list an NPR/Marist which was 50-48 to Biden (two candidates only) but that was 22 to 25 April.

    Presumably the 52-47 is a newer poll?

    Always a concern when sites miss out certain polls - you wonder if it's an accident or are they doing deliberate cherry picking?

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

    RCP lists it, as showing a 2% lead.

    538 tends to break up polling results, into All voters, Registered voters, likely voters, which can be confusing.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Eabhal said:

    My car comes with a cup holder for some reason. Weighs 1.5 tonnes.
    Sure and if you are taking a swig of coffee as you plough into a Tesco Metro you will be guilty of careless driving and likely done for driving without due care and attention.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,922
    Taz said:

    God, those Fatleks were awful...
    The Fatleks/Tellytubby Daleks/Skittle Daleks/New Paradigm Daleks are probably never coming back: the props are no longer viable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTWReZfjFxY

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    Eabhal said:

    My car comes with a cup holder for some reason. Weighs 1.5 tonnes.
    Don't think any bike smaller than a Reliant Robin or Messerschmidt bubble wagon has a cup holder?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,847
    Scott_xP said:

    @AdamBienkov

    Conservatives keep backing things that hurt their own side.

    Voter ID laws which stop Tory MPs from voting, electoral system changes which encouraged tactical votes for Sadiq Khan and now a postal vote ban which would have meant Ken Livingstone won in 2012

    Oh if only Livingston had won in 2012. Johnson would have been a spent force a decade sooner than he ultimately was!
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    Eabhal said:

    My car comes with a cup holder for some reason. Weighs 1.5 tonnes.
    So does my car. So what. It does not matter what extras your car has what matters is how you use them.

    The cupholder is not just there to service the driver but passengers as well.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,321
    AlsoLei said:

    I can't see the point of banning council house sales. Increase the qualification period if necessary to temporarily reduce demand - but the actual problem here is one of supply.

    Build much more social housing, sure. But selling existing stock off to long-term tenants can help fund further building, so do that too.

    Not doing so just pushes the problem elsewhere.
    Except the thing that has happened is that the "long term tenants" do not generally sell on the ex council houses to owner occupation, but rather the majority of ex council stock has ended up being rented, but now they are rented in the private sector with the intermediate owner pocketing the large discount.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    Eabhal said:

    That explains a lot. Check out rule H3, for example.
    I get that - the driver is at fault for cutting across. Unambiguous. BUT. The cyclist could have saved himself from danger by being more sensible. I was taught defensive driving (by an ex-police driver). You anticipate that other road users may not follow the highway code. The cyclist here is assuming that no-one will cut across, and he is right that if they obey the code, they won't. But in the real world he ought to be riding defensively and factoring in others making mistakes. As it was he was distracted himself.

    Legally (by the code) the driver is in the wrong. But the incident could have been easily averted by the cyclist too, if he had paid attention.

    Is that fair?
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    Carnyx said:

    Don't think any bike smaller than a Reliant Robin or Messerschmidt bubble wagon has a cup holder?
    My Carrera Crossfire does, as a screwed on extra. The bike frame came with pre drilled holes for the fitting of one.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,329
    carnforth said:
    "The customer is always right in matters of taste".

    Perhaps the show was crap.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940
    Taz said:

    So does my car. So what. It does not matter what extras your car has what matters is how you use them.

    The cupholder is not just there to service the driver but passengers as well.
    Struggling to find anything in the Highway Code that prohibits drinking while on the move (for either cyclists or motorists).

    But perhaps it is a bit silly that people in control of a massive chunk of metal are allowed to do so. Same with those big touch screens that most cars come with nowadays - very difficult to use while keeping your eyes on the road.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    carnforth said:
    Nothing to do with just being a crap show, of course.

    I have seen some crap Brexit takes, this is one of the worst.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,013

    Trump wants to go to jail. He thinks that politically it is how he wins. Absurdly he has failed so far, but with jail the only legal sanction remaining its no strikes and you're out time.

    How does jail work when the convict has a secret service detail? You could argue that as the convict would be in the protection of the authorities then they are not needed. How do you apply legal sanction fairly and equally - as demanded by the constitution - when you can't apply it equally because of who the convict is?

    "Secret Service preparing for possible Trump imprisonment"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qYi_ecUoY4
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    viewcode said:

    The Fatleks/Tellytubby Daleks/Skittle Daleks/New Paradigm Daleks are probably never coming back: the props are no longer viable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTWReZfjFxY

    I Saw one at the Dr Who Exhibition in London over a decade ago. It was where they had the 3D Weeping Angels streaming out at you at one stage.

    It looks just as bad in real life as on TV.
  • There are large parts of Greater London, where you do need to own a car.

    A lot of people who live 100 yards from a Zone 2 station might not think so, but it’s true.
    There are a few. The solution is to have more cycle lanes and better bus provision. On the whole in London, you do not need to own a car nor should you want to. We should aspire to have no cars at all in London.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,306
    ,
    Eabhal said:

    Struggling to find anything in the Highway Code that prohibits drinking while on the move (for either cyclists or motorists).

    But perhaps it is a bit silly that people in control of a massive chunk of metal are allowed to do so. Same with those big touch screens that most cars come with nowadays - very difficult to use while keeping your eyes on the road.
    All road users should keep their eyes on the road…
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,221
    AlsoLei said:

    I can't see the point of banning council house sales. Increase the qualification period if necessary to temporarily reduce demand - but the actual problem here is one of supply.

    Build much more social housing, sure. But selling existing stock off to long-term tenants can help fund further building, so do that too.

    Not doing so just pushes the problem elsewhere.
    It only helps fund further building if the money from the house sales goes to the local government housebuilding budget (rather than, say, partly or largely to central government) and if the funds resulting are more than the cost of building rather than less (or if they are suitably topped up from other central tax revenue). So while I'm in favour of "build more council houses and use RTB as a mechanism for increasing the private housing supply over time" I also wouldn't be surprised if with the current RTB system as set up by central government it was a drain on council house supply rather than a net positive.
  • This thread helpfully proves the point on cyclists vs cars. Some will always favour the cyclist, some the car.

    Personally, I favour neither. There are idiots on both sides, especially those muppets on bikes that ignore red lights. But then there are muppets in cars that do that too.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,306

    This thread helpfully proves the point on cyclists vs cars. Some will always favour the cyclist, some the car.

    Personally, I favour neither. There are idiots on both sides, especially those muppets on bikes that ignore red lights. But then there are muppets in cars that do that too.

    At least one thing we can all agree on is the terrible road layout, with the end of the cycle lane immediately before a junction.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,060
    RobD said:

    ,

    All road users should keep their eyes on the road…
    If I was an actuary, I'd probably hike the cyclist's car insurance (If he has one) as he's clearly more likely to be involved in an accident with his car than someone with good to excellent road awareness.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,093
    Taz said:

    I am also a fellow cyclist, I cycle to work daily and do around 60 miles a week. I think some people are saying this.

    I do not disagree with you either. If you take a drink while driving you will rightly get a ticket for it. If I take a drink when cycling I do so when I have stopped. It is a distraction.
    I'll be doing my first ever 'race' (*), and I've been practicing taking my bottle (**) out to drink whilst going along. Only on straight and level sections where I have lots of visibility around (***). I'm also practicing having a gel whilst riding, with the same criteria. Water's fine, but the gel gets a little messy.

    Although TBF, as it's only a 25km ride, I'll probably do without either unless it's a really hot day, and just take my gels and water in transition.

    (*) I'll just be happy if I finish.
    (**) Yes, it is a bottle.
    (***) The new cycle path alongside the old A14 is great for this.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940

    I get that - the driver is at fault for cutting across. Unambiguous. BUT. The cyclist could have saved himself from danger by being more sensible. I was taught defensive driving (by an ex-police driver). You anticipate that other road users may not follow the highway code. The cyclist here is assuming that no-one will cut across, and he is right that if they obey the code, they won't. But in the real world he ought to be riding defensively and factoring in others making mistakes. As it was he was distracted himself.

    Legally (by the code) the driver is in the wrong. But the incident could have been easily averted by the cyclist too, if he had paid attention.

    Is that fair?
    Sure. But it's also right that much more responsibility lies with the person behind the wheel of the 1.5 tonne (and usually heavier) vehicle to keep everyone else safe.

    The cyclist could have moved in a central position in front of the vehicles. Otoh, cyclists are also encouraged to filter through to the cycle box at the next junction where visibility is much higher in heavy traffic.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    Eabhal said:

    Struggling to find anything in the Highway Code that prohibits drinking while on the move (for either cyclists or motorists).

    But perhaps it is a bit silly that people in control of a massive chunk of metal are allowed to do so. Same with those big touch screens that most cars come with nowadays - very difficult to use while keeping your eyes on the road.
    I never claimed that about the highway code, so you are arguing a point I never made.

    However you can eat or drink while driving you are open to being accused of careless driving if you can be accused of being distracted as a consequence.

    In this case the cyclists drinking was negligent in my view and contributed to the accident.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Eabhal said:

    Struggling to find anything in the Highway Code that prohibits drinking while on the move (for either cyclists or motorists).

    But perhaps it is a bit silly that people in control of a massive chunk of metal are allowed to do so. Same with those big touch screens that most cars come with nowadays - very difficult to use while keeping your eyes on the road.
    "Cyclists are required by law to act responsibly. It is a criminal offence to ride a cycle either dangerously or without due care and attention whilst on a road."

    From: https://www.askthe.police.uk/
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940
    TOPPING said:

    "Cyclists are required by law to act responsibly. It is a criminal offence to ride a cycle either dangerously or without due care and attention whilst on a road."

    From: https://www.askthe.police.uk/
    I can't spot drinking in there?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    Taz said:

    I Saw one at the Dr Who Exhibition in London over a decade ago. It was where they had the 3D Weeping Angels streaming out at you at one stage.

    It looks just as bad in real life as on TV.
    The original dalek design is iconic and I find it hard to believe that there exist other 'monsters' from 1960's sci fi that are essentially unchanged and yet look totally right. (I guess the last Capaldi story muddies the water a bit with the old style Cybermen, but Cybermen have been updated on a number of occasions, while a 2024 dalek will be the same as one from 1963.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    Eabhal said:

    Sure. But it's also right that much more responsibility lies with the person behind the wheel of the 1.5 tonne (and usually heavier) vehicle to keep everyone else safe.

    The cyclist could have moved in a central position in front of the vehicles. Otoh, cyclists are also encouraged to filter through to the cycle box at the next junction where visibility is much higher in heavy traffic.
    I don't disagree with that, I just think that this is not a black/white situation, which could have been avoided by a more careful cyclist (as one assumes happens thousands of times a day)
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149
    edited May 2024
    RobD said:

    That’s the whole point. It isn’t just about reacting, it is being aware of what is going on, especially with other road users who cannot see you.
    The right-turner *could* see him.

    1 - The right turner is visible in the video for at least 2 seconds whilst approaching the right-turn, so can see the cyclists approaching in the lane he is about to cross, unless it is a magic X-ray video camera, or the driver failed to look and see.

    Maybe the person riding the cycle is the invisible man, and the video camera has an invisible man detector to see people who are invisible to right-turning drivers.

    2 - The right turner failed to pause to look around the car who had either waved him across or left him a gap, and if you are crossing a traffic lane it is a basic responsibility of a careful and considerate driver to make sure it is clear.

    That is *especially* the case when entering any space which may be a blind spot; you stop at a point where you can see it and make sure it is clear.

    That's exactly the same reason as there is a rule not to overtake in lane 2 when a vehicle is stopped in lane 1 at a zebra crossing. Because there could be a pedestrian in the blind spot.

    The right-turner failed to look, which is without due care all day.

    I wouldn't drink while moving either, but that's nothing to do with the collision.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,093

    I don't disagree with that, I just think that this is not a black/white situation, which could have been avoided by a more careful cyclist (as one assumes happens thousands of times a day)
    IMV it is up to both cyclists and drivers to ride/drive responsibly. The riders and drivers both made mistakes. If only one had made a mistake, the accident would not have happened.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Eabhal said:

    I can't spot drinking in there?
    "According to the Highway Code, rule 148 states that: “Safe driving and riding needs concentration. Avoid distractions when driving or riding such as eating and drinking.”
    So while it’s not against the law to eat and drink at the wheel, the police can still prosecute motorists if they think their ability to control their vehicle is in question."


    If you are genuinely saying that drinking one-handed while on a bike cycling through, actually undertaking in Central London is all fine and dandy then that is the most bonkers thing I've read on here for a while and it's a high bar.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    MattW said:

    The right-turner *could* see him.

    1 - The right turner is visible in the video for at least 2 seconds whilst approaching the right-turn, so can see the cyclists approaching in the lane he is about to cross, unless it is a magic X-ray video camera, or the driver failed to look and see.

    Maybe the person riding the cycle is the invisible man, and the video camera has an invisible man detector to see people who are invisible to right-turning drivers.

    2 - The right turner failed to pause to look around the car who had either waved him across or left him a gap, and if you are crossing a traffic lane it is a basic responsibility of a careful and considerate driver to make sure it is clear.

    That is *especially* the case when entering any space which may be a blind spot; you stop at a point where you can see it and make sure it is clear.

    That's exactly the same reason as there is a rule not to overtake in lane 2 when a vehicle is stopped in lane 1 at a zebra crossing. Because there could be a pedestrian in the blind spot.

    The right-turner failed to look, which is without due care all day.
    And looking down at your drinks holder until 1.2 seconds before impact is all good, is it?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940

    I don't disagree with that, I just think that this is not a black/white situation, which could have been avoided by a more careful cyclist (as one assumes happens thousands of times a day)
    This is part of the reason that cyclists can come across as quite aggressive. If you are a "careful cyclist", you have to live in constant anticipation that a driver is going to do something like this.

    It's nervy stuff and when something does inevitably happen, there is a big release of that tension towards an oblivious but often not malicious driver. Your life is on the line.

    It's also why there is a gender gap. Men have a higher tolerance to risk (in general).
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    MattW said:

    The right-turner *could* see him.

    1 - The right turner is visible in the video for at least 2 seconds whilst approaching the right-turn, so can see the cyclists approaching in the lane he is about to cross, unless it is a magic X-ray video camera.

    2 - The right turner failed to pause to look around the car who had either waved him across or left him a gap, and if you are crossing a traffic lane it is a basic responsibility of a careful and considerate driver to make sure it is clear.

    That is *especially* the case when entering any space which may be a blind spot; you stop at a point where you can see it and make sure it is clear.

    That's exactly the same reason as there is a rule not to overtake in lane 2 when a vehicle is stopped in lane 1 at a zebra crossing.

    He failed to look, which is without due care all day.
    Quite so. He'll be clobbered if it goes to court.

    Yet it's exactly the kind of situation in which I don't cross the road when I am out on foot - some driver is doing something tricky and in a hurry and under pressure and potentially panicking and cutting corners. I wait, till it is all sorted out. (One reason being so I can keep an eye open for cyclists overtaking on the inside from the other direction and ignoring pedestrians.)

    The cyclist has himself to blame as well, and I hope his insurance goes up, simply in fairness to the other cyclists for when he gets his bike trashed or worse.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,922

    The original dalek design is iconic and I find it hard to believe that there exist other 'monsters' from 1960's sci fi that are essentially unchanged and yet look totally right. (I guess the last Capaldi story muddies the water a bit with the old style Cybermen, but Cybermen have been updated on a number of occasions, while a 2024 dalek will be the same as one from 1963.
    I like the in-universe explanation (that they continually upgrade themselves) for the Cybermen's changing appearance.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    viewcode said:

    I like the in-universe explanation (that they continually upgrade themselves) for the Cybermen's changing appearance.
    Pity the Cyclistmen can't do that.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    edited May 2024
    Eabhal said:

    This is part of the reason that cyclists can come across as quite aggressive. If you are a "careful cyclist", you have to live in constant anticipation that a driver is going to do something like this.

    It's nervy stuff and when something does inevitably happen, there is a big release of that tension towards an oblivious but often not malicious driver. Your life is on the line.

    It's also why there is a gender gap. Men have a higher tolerance to risk (in general).
    There are definite times when cars act like dicks. Fine.

    What we are talking about here is a cyclist going at some speed, undertaking a line of traffic, then taking a drink, and looking down to replace his drink and CAR.

    That is a) a dick move; and b) imv likely as not illegal (driving w/o dc&a).
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Jason Beer would have that cyclist begging for a ten stretch within 15 minutes.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686
    Carnyx said:

    Quite so. He'll be clobbered if it goes to court.

    Yet it's exactly the kind of situation in which I don't cross the road when I am out on foot - some driver is doing something tricky and in a hurry and under pressure and potentially panicking and cutting corners. I wait, till it is all sorted out. (One reason being so I can keep an eye open for cyclists overtaking on the inside from the other direction and ignoring pedestrians.)

    The cyclist has himself to blame as well, and I hope his insurance goes up, simply in fairness to the other cyclists for when he gets his bike trashed or worse.
    Indeed. Being in the right is only of limited consolation when lying in the gutter. Piloting a vehicle (or even being a pedestrian) in a busy urban area is not just about knowing what you should be doing, it's also about anticipating other people making a mistake.

    Do cyclists have insurance? I don't.
  • TresTres Posts: 2,775

    Berry stepped down as a councillor in Camden some months ago on the grounds that she's spending so much time in Brighton. She shouldn't have been on the Green's Assembly list. They just kept her there because she has some name recognition. They are spitting in the face of democracy with this stunt. If it was so important for Garbett to get elected, they could've put Garbett first on the list. They chose to put her fourth.
    It was how the members voted. It would be spitting in the face of democracy to put the candidates in any other order.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686
    TOPPING said:

    And looking down at your drinks holder until 1.2 seconds before impact is all good, is it?
    Had he seen him earlier, he'd have probably still hit him - just perhaps not as hard.

    Basically, it was the cyclist's right of way. We should all be alert to people suddenly taking up the roadspace in front of us, but if you hit someone who has driven suddenly into your carriageway- and you could have only avoided the collision by taking sudden evasive action - it's not really your fault.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,670
    edited May 2024
    RobD said:

    At least one thing we can all agree on is the terrible road layout, with the end of the cycle lane immediately before a junction.
    Yes, probably one of the very few times I can agree with your post!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149
    Carnyx said:

    Quite so. He'll be clobbered if it goes to court.

    Yet it's exactly the kind of situation in which I don't cross the road when I am out on foot - some driver is doing something tricky and in a hurry and under pressure and potentially panicking and cutting corners. I wait, till it is all sorted out. (One reason being so I can keep an eye open for cyclists overtaking on the inside from the other direction and ignoring pedestrians.)

    The cyclist has himself to blame as well, and I hope his insurance goes up, simply in fairness to the other cyclists for when he gets his bike trashed or worse.
    There are design issues too.

    I routinely stop when driving at junctions, roundabout exits/entrances (which are also junctions) to let pedestrians, horses, cyclists etc cross - but only if I can fully control the situation. So not normally where there are 2 lanes together, unless I can make myself "wide" and block both.

    The answer to that in addition to driver education is a move to single lane or more constrained approaches with roundabout designs that discourage, rather than facilitate, higher speeds.

    There was actually an interesting cyclist vs cyclist insurance case recently after a collision on a Scottish cycleway. The more heavily injured cyclist (who had lost more employment time etc) claimed against the less heavily injured cyclist several years after the ~2019 crash and the Court ruled 50:50 fault, so he will get compensation from the other's insurance but half of the assessment.

    It will be a bit hard to track down reports.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116

    The original dalek design is iconic and I find it hard to believe that there exist other 'monsters' from 1960's sci fi that are essentially unchanged and yet look totally right. (I guess the last Capaldi story muddies the water a bit with the old style Cybermen, but Cybermen have been updated on a number of occasions, while a 2024 dalek will be the same as one from 1963.
    The Cybermen got a facelift in virtually every story. Even in the eighties there were subtle differences.

    The Moonbase ones are my favourites personally, the ones with Flares from Revenge of the Cybermen less good.

    I am trying to think of another sixties monster that came back and was unchanged and it is a struggle.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686
    TOPPING said:

    "According to the Highway Code, rule 148 states that: “Safe driving and riding needs concentration. Avoid distractions when driving or riding such as eating and drinking.”
    So while it’s not against the law to eat and drink at the wheel, the police can still prosecute motorists if they think their ability to control their vehicle is in question."


    If you are genuinely saying that drinking one-handed while on a bike cycling through, actually undertaking in Central London is all fine and dandy then that is the most bonkers thing I've read on here for a while and it's a high bar.
    Have you never had a drink while driving a car? I certainly have. And drinking while cycling is a lot less dangerous than drinking while driving.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149
    TOPPING said:

    And looking down at your drinks holder until 1.2 seconds before impact is all good, is it?
    No, but imo nothing to do with this collision or its causes, other than as a red herring.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    Cookie said:

    Indeed. Being in the right is only of limited consolation when lying in the gutter. Piloting a vehicle (or even being a pedestrian) in a busy urban area is not just about knowing what you should be doing, it's also about anticipating other people making a mistake.

    Do cyclists have insurance? I don't.
    I have it as a member of cycling UK. You can get it as part of your home insurance. Contents IIRC.

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,424
    Taz said:

    The Cybermen got a facelift in virtually every story. Even in the eighties there were subtle differences.

    The Moonbase ones are my favourites personally, the ones with Flares from Revenge of the Cybermen less good.

    I am trying to think of another sixties monster that came back and was unchanged and it is a struggle.
    The Macra? Size issues I think...
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149

    There are large parts of Greater London, where you do need to own a car.

    A lot of people who live 100 yards from a Zone 2 station might not think so, but it’s true.
    Yes; however the figure for households owning a motor vehicle is only half, and a large number of those will be enforced by a need to carry tools or drive out of London.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,871
    Cookie said:

    Indeed. Being in the right is only of limited consolation when lying in the gutter. Piloting a vehicle (or even being a pedestrian) in a busy urban area is not just about knowing what you should be doing, it's also about anticipating other people making a mistake.

    Do cyclists have insurance? I don't.
    Yes. Most cyclists will be covered by home insurance.

    If not there's always Cycling UK (though why they ever changed the Cycle Touring Club name I have no idea).
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Cookie said:

    Have you never had a drink while driving a car? I certainly have. And drinking while cycling is a lot less dangerous than drinking while driving.
    Your kidding, right? Drinking while cycling is much more dangerous than drinking while driving. As we can see in the vid. He only had control of the bike with one hand and therefore couldn't get himself into the right place to brake. Hence smacked into the car.

    A driver can make a car brake, change direction, do all kinds of things easily with one hand.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    MattW said:

    No, but imo nothing to do with this collision or its causes, other than as a red herring.
    Cycling without due care and attention is def a factor. He wasn't looking where he was going and might, if he had been looking, have slowed down to take into account traffic conditions.

    He wasn't so he didn't.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116

    The Macra? Size issues I think...
    Macra.

    There's no such thing as Macra

    Macra do not exist.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,906
    AlsoLei said:

    I can't see the point of banning council house sales. Increase the qualification period if necessary to temporarily reduce demand - but the actual problem here is one of supply.

    Build much more social housing, sure. But selling existing stock off to long-term tenants can help fund further building, so do that too.

    Not doing so just pushes the problem elsewhere.
    The problem is the discount; the sale does not fund the cost of a replacement.
    It is just free money for the buyer, at the expense of the taxpayer.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,871
    TOPPING said:

    Your kidding, right? Drinking while cycling is much more dangerous than drinking while driving. As we can see in the vid. He only had control of the bike with one hand and therefore couldn't get himself into the right place to brake. Hence smacked into the car.

    A driver can make a car brake, change direction, do all kinds of things easily with one hand.
    But not exactly under control if spilling hot coffee everywhere with the other hand.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940
    edited May 2024
    Taz said:

    I have it as a member of cycling UK. You can get it as part of your home insurance. Contents IIRC.

    I'm covered through my home insurance. I think a lot of people end up over-paying because they don't realise they already have liability covered.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,109
    edited May 2024

    There are bad cyclists and there are bad drivers.

    London and other cities should be making it safer for people to cycle, use buses and to reduce the use of cars. You do not need to own a car in London.

    No you don't need a car in central London, you can use black cabs instead.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    TOPPING said:

    Your kidding, right? Drinking while cycling is much more dangerous than drinking while driving. As we can see in the vid. He only had control of the bike with one hand and therefore couldn't get himself into the right place to brake. Hence smacked into the car.

    A driver can make a car brake, change direction, do all kinds of things easily with one hand.
    Exactly. I would also say drinking while cycling along a line of stationary traffic is dafter than drinking while cycling in moving traffic.

    This is why whenever I have a drink when cycling I do so when I am stopped. It is common sense. You may hit a pothole and lose control. There are many reasons. I have hit potholes twice in the last month and was very glad to have both hands on my handlebars.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616

    But not exactly under control if spilling hot coffee everywhere with the other hand.
    Don't disagree. And good to see we are all agreeing that drinking while driving or cycling could, if traffic conditions dictate, be driving without due care & attention.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149
    edited May 2024

    There are two other, opposing, knee jerk reactions. One is cyclists good, evil motorists bad. The second is its opposite. As a mere pedestrian, I find cyclists harder to deal with as they are less predictable: have they seen me? Will they let me cross?. On the other hand, I'd also say driving standards are slipping. On the third hand, the recent well-intentioned changes to the Highway Code with its hierarchy of risk does not seem to have helped much.
    I actually find that the HWC code changes have helped in my medium sized town.

    It is a slow burn, especially due to the lack of publicity campaigns and total lack of continuing driver education in the UK.

    But no one has driven into the back of me yet, and I find that drivers stop if my body language indicates I will be crossing. There are problems where there are poor sightlines, because like the right-turner in the vid they assume no one is in an area they cannot see and go sleepily hooning through, rather than thinking, and slowing down or stopping to look.

    I'd say it's like 20mph zones, and may take a decade or two to change the culture.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,274
    edited May 2024
    Sean_F said:

    The Med and Adriatic coasts are just so beautiful.
    It’s utterly magical here - at this time of year anyway. I hear it is hideously rammed in July August and you have to book a space on the beach and reserve restaurants ten days in advance. But now? There’s no one here. Maybe the odd German hiker. Locals drink wine and argue, languidly, in the 14th century piazzas. A workman whistles and a lizard skitters, then all is quiet again. And as the afternoon passes the old Jewish ghetto dreams of itself, and the pines on the cliffs give their scent to the sun, and the sea


  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Leon said:

    It’s utterly magical here - at this time of year anyway. I hear it is hideously rammed in July August and you have to book a space on the beach and reserve restaurants ten days in advance. But now? There’s no one here. Maybe the odd German hiker. Locals drink wine and argue, languidly, in the 14th century piazzas. A workman whistles and a lizard skitters, then all is quiet again. And as the afternoon passes the old Jewish ghetto dreams of itself, and the pines on the cliffs give their scent to the sun, and the sea

    Very poetic. But perhaps next time you should write the description yourself instead of getting Claude to do it.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940
    edited May 2024

    But not exactly under control if spilling hot coffee everywhere with the other hand.
    Depends what you mean by "dangerous". To yourself? To others?

    I've watched it again and the cyclist has already replaced the drink and restarted peddling before the Mini makes an appearance. He's doing significantly less than 20mph.

    The only thing this shows is how speed is just so important for avoiding collisions, particularly when taking into account reaction times. Perhaps The Drake did not go far enough.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,992

    Are you worrried that Swinney might reverse the GRR and Hate Crime bills, both of which the SLDs unanimously backed?
    Surely he will scrap both or they are circling the drain
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,992
    148grss said:

    Hamas has, according to reporting, accepted the terms of the ceasefire proposed by the US. It is Israel who have rejected them. You can keep saying both sides are as bad as each other but, materially, Israel is clearly causing more destruction and killing more innocent people than Hamas ever has - and Israel clearly does not care about the hostages.
    When did the US agree it, it was the Arab countries that drew it up. Unless they were fibbing the US had no clue till Hamas drew it out of the hat yesterday, to try and steamroll Israel into accepting their deal.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,811
    edited May 2024
    RobD said:

    That’s the whole point. It isn’t just about reacting, it is being aware of what is going on, especially with other road users who cannot see you.
    If you go back to the start of the video, the cyclist should have seen the Mini [eta preparing to turn] several seconds earlier through the gap in the traffic, and the Mini likewise although the driver might have been looking down the right turn.

    The cyclist was at fault. The driver may also have been at fault.

    Rule 76
    Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road.

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82

    Nor does rule 76 change that.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,274
    TOPPING said:

    Very poetic. But perhaps next time you should write the description yourself instead of getting Claude to do it.
    lol. I would reply with something insightful here - something that would quite probably blow your mind - a new discovery I’ve made - but I’m not allowed to discuss REDACTED
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,149
    edited May 2024
    TOPPING said:

    Don't disagree. And good to see we are all agreeing that drinking while driving or cycling could, if traffic conditions dictate, be driving without due care & attention.
    My favourite is still eating bowls of cereals (leaving aside Ronnie and Rhonda Pickering, and fat 58 year old men doing Kung Fu kicks, and landing butt-first).

    Whether in Surrey:
    https://youtu.be/0elsNDRqLtQ?t=28

    Or in Lane 2 of the M90 at Queensferry:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-61421665
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,093
    Leon said:

    lol. I would reply with something insightful here - something that would quite probably blow your mind - a new discovery I’ve made - but I’m not allowed to discuss REDACTED
    The ban should also be on you mentioning that there's something you're banned from talking about... Call it a super-injunction...
  • PJHPJH Posts: 775
    MattW said:

    Yes; however the figure for households owning a motor vehicle is only half, and a large number of those will be enforced by a need to carry tools or drive out of London.
    Exactly so, it is out of London (or the edges of Zone 6) that requires a car. I do 2 regular journeys, one is 7 miles and 25 minutes by car but 55 by public transport (in fact, only 11 is by public transport, the rest is walking), the other is 50 miles and 80-90 minutes by car but the quickest I've done it by public transport is 2:30 and that's only because I cycle the last 6 miles. Twice I haven't been able to go at all because there was no train service on that day.

    But I agree with the sentiment that you should discourage driving locally. I rarely drive anywhere within 2-3 miles of where I live (walk/cycle) and never towards central London as public transport is always better. We do need better radial links in the suburbs though.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686
    TOPPING said:

    Your kidding, right? Drinking while cycling is much more dangerous than drinking while driving. As we can see in the vid. He only had control of the bike with one hand and therefore couldn't get himself into the right place to brake. Hence smacked into the car.

    A driver can make a car brake, change direction, do all kinds of things easily with one hand.
    Yes but it's much higher risk. A driver is in charge of a much heavier and faster moving piece of metal.
    We all drive and/or pilot our bikes in a way that is not totally risk free. Which is fine, until someone pulls across us/steps out in front of us/does something else unexpected. The cyclist was unlucky in that he was putting his drink away as someone pulled directly into his path. But I'd suggest even if he'd had an extra half second from not putting his drink away he'd have been very lucky to avoid impact.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,820
    .
    RobD said:

    That’s the whole point. It isn’t just about reacting, it is being aware of what is going on, especially with other road users who cannot see you.
    So cyclists need to pay attention and drivers don't ?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    edited May 2024
    In re the supposed automatic coronation of Mr Swinney as FM: the candidates for the election of FM have just been announced (BBC):

    Alex Cole-Hamilton, Scottish Liberal Democrats leader
    Douglas Ross, Scottish Conservatives leader
    Anas Sarwar, Scottish Labour leader
    John Swinney, Scottish National party leader

    Slightly disappointed the Greens didn't put one up.

    Voting soon.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,306
    Nigelb said:

    .

    So cyclists need to pay attention and drivers don't ?
    Both do. Looking down fiddling with your water bottle while entering a junction is not paying attention.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,274

    The ban should also be on you mentioning that there's something you're banned from talking about... Call it a super-injunction...
    But then I’d just say that I could tell you something about something about something but I’m banned from mentioning the fact that REDACTED REDACTED but Jesus it’s a mindgasm
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,616
    Cookie said:

    Yes but it's much higher risk. A driver is in charge of a much heavier and faster moving piece of metal.
    We all drive and/or pilot our bikes in a way that is not totally risk free. Which is fine, until someone pulls across us/steps out in front of us/does something else unexpected. The cyclist was unlucky in that he was putting his drink away as someone pulled directly into his path. But I'd suggest even if he'd had an extra half second from not putting his drink away he'd have been very lucky to avoid impact.
    Just to write that do you see how bizarre it sounds "the cyclist was unlucky in that he was putting his drink away as..."

    How anyone could think that it is ok for a cyclist to be drinking at that particular point is extraordinary. It's hardly pinging along the C3 on the Embankment. He was undertaking in heavy traffic.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,940
    MattW said:

    My favourite is still eating bowls of cereals (leaving aside Ronnie and Rhonda Pickering, and fat 58 year old men doing Kung Fu kicks, and landing butt-first).

    Whether in Surrey:
    https://youtu.be/0elsNDRqLtQ?t=28

    Or in Lane 2 of the M90 at Queensferry:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-61421665
    The second one is genuinely impressive. The driver should be flying Apache attack helicopters or something.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    edited May 2024
    Leon said:

    But then I’d just say that I could tell you something about something about something but I’m banned from mentioning the fact that REDACTED REDACTED but Jesus it’s a mindgasm
    I see you've discovered the joys of pussycat and pineapple pizza.
    [edited]
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,093
    Cookie said:

    Yes but it's much higher risk. A driver is in charge of a much heavier and faster moving piece of metal.
    We all drive and/or pilot our bikes in a way that is not totally risk free. Which is fine, until someone pulls across us/steps out in front of us/does something else unexpected. The cyclist was unlucky in that he was putting his drink away as someone pulled directly into his path. But I'd suggest even if he'd had an extra half second from not putting his drink away he'd have been very lucky to avoid impact.
    I honestly don't think that's the case from the video.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,666
    TOPPING said:

    Very poetic. But perhaps next time you should write the description yourself instead of getting Claude to do it.
    I had a thoroughly disappointing couple of days in that neck of the woods in September 1996, as a poor student staying in a tent near the beach. Place called Gallipoli. The scirocco was blowing, it was overcast and the most humid I’ve ever encountered in Europe, and you couldn’t sit near the sea for salt spray. It then poured with rain.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,787
    PJH said:

    Exactly so, it is out of London (or the edges of Zone 6) that requires a car. I do 2 regular journeys, one is 7 miles and 25 minutes by car but 55 by public transport (in fact, only 11 is by public transport, the rest is walking), the other is 50 miles and 80-90 minutes by car but the quickest I've done it by public transport is 2:30 and that's only because I cycle the last 6 miles. Twice I haven't been able to go at all because there was no train service on that day.

    But I agree with the sentiment that you should discourage driving locally. I rarely drive anywhere within 2-3 miles of where I live (walk/cycle) and never towards central London as public transport is always better. We do need better radial links in the suburbs though.
    It’s a lot further in than Zone 6 that can require a car.

    Central London has very few car owners, so the half figure is deceptive.

    For example, we are taking in my mother-in-law because she can’t drive (age/illness) and she was living in a house bought by her husband (passed away) in one of the areas that you really need a car for.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,410
    Eabhal said:

    My car comes with a cup holder for some reason. Weighs 1.5 tonnes.
    Seems a flawed design for a cupholder to weigh that much.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686
    TOPPING said:

    Just to write that do you see how bizarre it sounds "the cyclist was unlucky in that he was putting his drink away as..."

    How anyone could think that it is ok for a cyclist to be drinking at that particular point is extraordinary. It's hardly pinging along the C3 on the Embankment. He was undertaking in heavy traffic.
    Where he had as much right to be as any driver. Notwithstanding what I said earlier about it only being of limited consolation being in the right while he's lying in the gutter, he shouldn't need to be hypervigilant all the time in case someone carelessly and wrongly ploughs across him.
This discussion has been closed.