Thread: Cyclist attacks bus driver

They should be registered, and subject to random swabs for caffeine abuse. They're such cranky beggars, i think it's all in the coffee!
/tongue-in-cheek

I cycle and I drive.
I have several bikes and several vehicles.

Overtaking a group of cyclists can be a challenge.
When cycling in a group of say 12-15, and a vehicle wants to pass us, we generally bunch up close and tight 2 abreast if the conditions allow. Other times eg a narrow road, we go single file.
The idea being the vehicle will take less time to pass a group bunched 2 wide and 7 long, than 1 wide and 14 long.
We always cycle politely with awareness of the traffic around us.
i know others don't.

Same with vehicle drivers. Most are polite and share the road. A few don't.

its the minority on both sides that create all the angst.


I can't envisage how mandatory registration of bicycles will work.
Nor can I see it happening.

As the saying goes, if cycling is so good for us, why do cyclists usually look so miserable?

There have been a couple of incidents of cyclist v bus in Perth one where the cyclist rode into the back of the stationary bus with no helmet on. Somthing I noticed in these and other incidents was that the cyclist was dressed in black or dark clothing with a dark bike, they are hard enough to keep track of when they get outside of your direct line of sight so why make it harder especially in poor light? Maybe making it manditory for high vis clothing and lights could save some of these accidents it's about safety not fashion.

Originally Posted by Sitec

The slow car or slow truck would be going faster than the cyclists, and are a lot more visible..

Passing a vehicle with less than a meter to spare is never good, but at least the occupants are in a safe solid vehicle. They'd also be traveling quite a bit faster.

That 'only difference' is a big difference. Having to make the decision to avoid a group of cyclists or oncoming traffic is a decision I hope I never have to face.

I think your comments are reflective of the thought process of a large proportion of drivers. I don't believe that it is a good attitude, for a number of reasons - it indicates a tendency to take risks at the expense of others - ( by the way I am far from "holier than thou" & have made my share of poor decisions - just able to better analyse now).

What would the outcome be if:

There was a clear lane to use (even if it was the other side of the road)?

There was oncoming traffic & you used your judgement, when approaching the traffic on your side of the road, to adjust your speed accordingly so that you could make a safe pass?

There was oncoming traffic & you squeezed past between the other vehicles with less than a meter & clipped the oncoming traffic?

There was oncoming traffic & you squeezed past between the other vehicles with less than a meter & clipped the vehicle you where passing, spinning them into the oncoming traffic / armco?

There was oncoming traffic & you squeezed past between the people on the bikes with less than a meter & clipped them or caused them to hit the Armco due to the air turbulence as you passed?

In my closing note, I would have to say that if you were ever in that situation, I hope that you would choose to protect the lives of the other road users as well as your own / family /crew.

Originally Posted by 4range

I think your comments are reflective of the thought process of a large proportion of drivers. I don't believe that it is a good attitude, for a number of reasons - it indicates a tendency to take risks at the expense of others - ( by the way I am far from "holier than thou" & have made my share of poor decisions - just able to better analyse now).

What would the outcome be if:

There was a clear lane to use (even if it was the other side of the road)?

There was oncoming traffic & you used your judgement, when approaching the traffic on your side of the road, to adjust your speed accordingly so that you could make a safe pass?

There was oncoming traffic & you squeezed past between the other vehicles with less than a meter & clipped the oncoming traffic?

There was oncoming traffic & you squeezed past between the other vehicles with less than a meter & clipped the vehicle you where passing, spinning them into the oncoming traffic / armco?

There was oncoming traffic & you squeezed past between the people on the bikes with less than a meter & clipped them or caused them to hit the Armco due to the air turbulence as you passed?

In my closing note, I would have to say that if you were ever in that situation, I hope that you would choose to protect the lives of the other road users as well as your own / family /crew.

You do realize he was driving an emergency vehicle with lights and sirens. If I was in a car, I'd be off the road. If I was on a bike, I'd be off the road. I think there is a law about that.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

As the saying goes, if cycling is so good for us, why do cyclists usually look so miserable?

They're singing on the inside.

Originally Posted by 4range

With all due respect (noting that I believe the cyclists should have formed single file - based on the information you have given), why is it different to passing a slow car or another slow truck ?

I don't believe it would be any safer passing another vehicle with less than a meter to spare.

perhaps the only difference is that a person in a vehicle is more likely to survive being hit, than a cyclist, if it all goes wrong during the overtake.

my 2 cents

Emergency vehicle under lights and siren = get the hell out of the way no matter what the mode of transportation and ironically would be easiest to do by a cyclist. As pointed out already, a car or a truck can go much faster than a bicycle. (also noting that I believe in equal road rights for all)