Cyclist kills pedestrian

[mhara]

... I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers about the vital importance of not stopping on bike safety zones.

They're not bike safety zones. They're there to deflate driver road-rage - any driver who is in a rage about cyclists can invade a 'safety zone' and sit there cackling malignantly to themselves about how they're inconveniencing cyclists.
As a cyclists do I give a flying f77k?

The 'safer' the roads are made for us, the less safe I feel.
I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers. End of.

[Tom Richardson]

I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers. End of.

Its a nice idea to think that aggressive, dangerous road bullies can be trained to avert their instincts. I don't think that anything short of ECT would work for most.

[mhara]

I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers. End of.

Its a nice idea to think that aggressive, dangerous road bullies can be trained to avert their instincts. I don't think that anything short of ECT would work for most.

Training has a place, e.g. potty training, or skills training of atheletes, but like you I can't see training having much impact on drivers.
So I do mean education - what used to happen in schools ...

[kwackers]

As I was cycling in to work this morning, crossing a large 3 lane roundabout. I saw a car waiting patiently at the red lights on the island and another simply drove round the island and straight into the back of it - braking for the last 10 feet or so...
If that had been a ped or cyclist they'd have been badly hurt or worse.

I just don't think there's any hope. If someone can drive around an island and be paying no attention whatsoever, how can there be? I can't see how training of any type will cure crapness. Modern vehicles are just too much of an extension of our living rooms.

(Ford had the right idea with the Pinto - they just needed to move the fuel tank to the front.)

[MichaelM]

A nice shiny eight inch steel spike sticking out of every steering wheel would ensure that every driver drove VERY carefully forever. No other laws or safety equipment etc required. Got to be cheaper to fit than an airbag, and would only need a wipe down if used

[Pete Owens]

I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers about the vital importance of not stopping on bike safety zones

It should be noted that this is not necessarily wrong: if a car is already in the ASL when the lights change then they are entitled to stay there. You don't make it clear if it was this that you observed or if it was entering the ASL when the light had already gone red: which is, of course, wrong for drivers (and technically for cyclists in some cases).

Not true.

You should not cross a stop line unless you can see that you can clear the junction (unless you are turning right).

While the HC does say you should stop at the 2nd stop line if the lights change while you are blocking the cyclists zone - it also makes it clear that you should avoid putting yourself there in the first place.

[thirdcrank]

I understand that the problems caused by having two separate stop lines were the reason for there being a delay of many years before regulations (rather than HC advice) were formulated over stopping at ASLs. When it first goes to STOP (i.e. amber) a driver is required to stop unless it is unsafe to do so. There could be occasions when a driver could not safely stop at the first line but could do so within the few extra yards of the cyclists' line. In doing so they would end up in the ASL area. In terms of safety, that would be preferable to their continuing past the signal at STOP.

[Si]

I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers about the vital importance of not stopping on bike safety zones

It should be noted that this is not necessarily wrong: if a car is already in the ASL when the lights change then they are entitled to stay there. You don't make it clear if it was this that you observed or if it was entering the ASL when the light had already gone red: which is, of course, wrong for drivers (and technically for cyclists in some cases).

Not true.

You should not cross a stop line unless you can see that you can clear the junction (unless you are turning right).

While the HC does say you should stop at the 2nd stop line if the lights change while you are blocking the cyclists zone - it also makes it clear that you should avoid putting yourself there in the first place.

So, in fact, it is true then.

[Pete Owens]

I understand that the problems caused by having two separate stop lines were the reason for there being a delay of many years before regulations (rather than HC advice) were formulated over stopping at ASLs. When it first goes to STOP (i.e. amber) a driver is required to stop unless it is unsafe to do so. There could be occasions when a driver could not safely stop at the first line but could do so within the few extra yards of the cyclists' line. In doing so they would end up in the ASL area. In terms of safety, that would be preferable to their continuing past the signal at STOP.

The signal goes to amber about 3 seconds before red.

This means that a driver is a long way from the stop lines at the point they need to decide whether to continue or to stop. At 30mph this is about 40m nearly twice the stopping distance in the HC, which means that there is a considerable margin where a driver could choose to stop comforatably before the first stop line or to proceed through the junction well before the lights change to red. If theyare so close that they cannot stop safely before the first line they should continue.

There is no legitimate reason for a driver to obstruct the cyclists space, unless they are waiting to turn right.

[Pete Owens]

I am far more interested in what can be done to educate car-drivers about the vital importance of not stopping on bike safety zones

It should be noted that this is not necessarily wrong: if a car is already in the ASL when the lights change then they are entitled to stay there. You don't make it clear if it was this that you observed or if it was entering the ASL when the light had already gone red: which is, of course, wrong for drivers (and technically for cyclists in some cases).

Not true.

You should not cross a stop line unless you can see that you can clear the junction (unless you are turning right).

While the HC does say you should stop at the 2nd stop line if the lights change while you are blocking the cyclists zone - it also makes it clear that you should avoid putting yourself there in the first place.

So, in fact, it is true then.

Rule 178 - there is even a picture with a big red X
.... Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked.

So necessarily wrong.

Now it does go on to say that if you are already wrongly obstructing the cyclists space when the lights turn red then you shouldn't procede. That does not make it OK to to have blocked the cyclists space in the first place.

[thirdcrank]

Pete Owens

I was simply reporting what I was told by somebody who I believe was well-informed as to why the regulations took so long to formulate.

(Incidentally, you do appear to be making the common mistake of confusing the law - as it is set out in the Road Traffic Acts and subordinate statutory instruments - and the advice contained in the Highway Code.)

[Si]

PO - so you'll be retracting your statement about turning right then?

But, TBH I don't think that quibbling the technicalities of entering ASLs is getting us anywhere really. I think that we are all agreed that ideally ASLs should be left vacant for bikes.

Although there are many that would question whether or not ASLs are really any use as in many cases they can just lead to more conflict between road users (either because they are not policed correctly or because they are just pointless depending upon your viewpoint).

[Pete Owens]

Pete Owens

I was simply reporting what I was told by somebody who I believe was well-informed as to why the regulations took so long to formulate.

The reason that the regulations are such a pigs ear is that they were unwilling to frame them in a common sense way, such that the first stopline applies to motor vehicles and the second one to cycles. Instead they state that a stop line is a stop line period - thus both stop lines are legally equivalent and apply to all vehicles including cycles.

This means that in most cases cyclists are actually prohibited from entering the cycle box from the safest direction. The only legal way to enter when the lights are at red is if a cycle lane gap is provided - and these are almost always placed on the wrong side for overtaking.

[WillPhelps14]

But why was the pedestrian walking were the bloke was cycling? :-/