You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I'm not adding a link as its on the Daily Wail and The MIrrors site, but the Alliance of British Drivers, FairFuelUK and Motorcycle Action Group, operating under Voters For Motors, are reportedly meeting today to formulate a plan to scrap the new rules in the Highway Code update!
Be careful out there!
Motorcycle Action Group
Of all the people who may benefit from more careful drivers and hierarchy of care....
The comments on the online articles really do make you wonder about the mentality of the people that left them.
Even motorcyclists hate MAG.
Can you imagine if they succeed?
It would be worse than not having had it in the first place - simply emboldens the ****-wits.
I understand how the media can twist it to wind up those not with the motivation to think it through themselves, but I cannot grasp why anybody who has put any actual thought into it can take issue with the changes. There is no advantage to any of these groups if the changes were to be revoked.
The FairFuel UK bloke was on Politics Live at lunch time & the usual stuff was trotted out.
War on motorists, cycling in middle of the road, riding abreast - mentioning stuff that is already in the Highway Code.
The tory MP Siobhan Bailie managed to speak about 'the fast ones in lycra' while a Daily Telegraph editor (Chris Hope?) said he understood why motorists were unhappy as they paid road tax......
Gaaaaaah!!
The Labour MP who I think is shadow secretary for Northern Ireland spoke quite well about finding common ground & seemed to understand the hierachy of road users & that it was right for the more squishy road users (my words, not his) to have more protections etc.
And the editor of the Sheffield Star Nancy Fielder spoke quite well about how it always ends up being an us vs them fight rather than people getting on & sharing the road space.
No one really seemed to have a grasp of the changes though, what was new, what was just updated & it was a bit of a waste of time.
Fairfuel bloke Howard Cox was as red-faced & angry as you might imagine.
It's on iPlayer from about 30mins if any one is interested.
What's needed is assumed liability in the case of a car hitting a cyclist or ped, or otherwise more vulnerable road user.
I can hear the shreiks of 'freedom' from the daily mail massive already, heheh.
I noticed today that the already super-angry drivers around my way are, if anything, even angrier at the sight of cyclists on the road. I think it's backfired massively.
Isn't fair fuel basically road haulage association in disguise?
Isn’t fair fuel basically road haulage association in disguise?
Yes, Howard Cox sometimes mistakenly retweets himself from FairFuel rather than switching accounts and retweeting from RHA. That ****er crops up whenever the media want to do a "war on motorists" piece. He's very anti cyclists, LTNs, road safety campaigns, smart motorways, congestion charging etc.
Even motorcyclists hate MAG.
I was a member bitd, really are a sorry bunch these days, but railing against the latest hwc really takes the biscuit.
Last time I looked at what MAG were about, admittedly a few years ago, they were still talking about repealing the helmet laws ffs! Intransigent dinosaurs.
. I think it’s backfired massively.
Had a lad at work yesterday (he's as thick as a submarine door) banging on about how "it says you have to give 2m space when overtaking cyclists, I always get as close as I can cos they shouldn't be allowed on the roads cos they don't pay road tax". Another lad pointed out that as his car has extremely low emissions, he doesn't pay tax so surely he shouldn't be allowed on the roads either, he had no argument other than to say he would now pass as close and FAST as he can whenever he sees a cyclist on the road, you just can't reason with morons like that no matter how you put your point across
I was a member of MAG for a few years. There. I’ve said it. I left when there was an employment tribunal case that they lost, it involved allegations of bullying. The decision was never accepted and MAG wound up and became a different entity but the same. Read it online, not difficult to find, you’ll perhaps see that some of them are nice people and some nasty?
War on motorists
Why would the government do that? Most of them are motorists themselves...
I can’t quite put my finger on it but there is a sort of assumption that everyone is a car driver in a rush.
There are car drivers in a rush and as we can see here they are organised and vocal. People pushing a pram to school, drivers who do care, a guy on a mobility scooter getting a pint of milk, people who can’t afford cars, a bunch of 11 year olds walking home from school all exist in huge numbers. But they aren’t a loud media trained collective. So there views don’t get aired in the same way
Non of these rules should be a shock, all bloody common sense !
What's really farcical about all this is that most of the "changes" are in fact simply making explicit what had previously been implicit in the Highway Code.
One of the things that always winds up the red faced loons is "two abreast", but it was already there in Rule 66 - "never ride more than two abreast". If anything the new version advises cyclists to be more observant and "compliant" by adding in the new Rule 66 - "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so".
Try quoting that back at them.
What’s really farcical about all this is that most of the “changes” are in fact simply making explicit what had previously been implicit in the Highway Code.
Very much so. Which makes you wonder if the spokespeople for these motoring organisations understood the old HC. You'd think that would be an embarrassing position to take on a public stage if they did not, as appears to be the case.
Rule 66 – “never ride more than two abreast”
It was never ride more than two abreast when it's busy. You could ride more if it's safe to do so.
but the Alliance of British Drivers, FairFuelUK and Motorcycle Action Group,
It's essentially the same small group of idiots who find gullible idiots to send them money, it would be far more useful if there was an active campaign of complaints to the broadcasting regulator every time they are on pointing out they don't represent the group's they claim to speak for and are essentially fake news organisations
fossy
Full MemberNon of these rules should be a shock, all bloody common sense !
No i was assured on facebook that riding as far to the left as possible so that HGVs don't have to move to go round you is common sense.
I failed to turn the other cheek today. A Facebook 'friend' who regularly posts anti-cyclist stuff (generally fairly tame but perpetuating the stereotypes nonetheless) posted this...
[img] 
[/img]
Normally I ignore or try to engage in reasoned debate but for some reason it properly wound me up today, so I childishly threw this together and counter posted...
[img] 
[/img]
I feel a bit dirty.
"Old" Rule 66
never ride more than two abreast and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding around bends
What full-face and body armour for…
getting clipped by a land-rover on a B road?
Genuine question on updated rule 170;
“Take extra care at junctions. You should…
give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way (see Rule H2)”
Does leaving a roundabout count as turning into a road? None of the pictures show roundabouts in relation to this rule, but it feels like you enter a road when you leave one!
No, it's perfectly legal to mow them down.
A roundabout is a junction, so yes, of course 170 applies.
This rule hasn’t really changed much.
It’s just removed the major/minor roadway aspect.
No, it’s perfectly legal to mow them down.
You'll not be mowing anybody down if they're just waiting to cross.
I did wonder the same question myself, as it's a whole different kettle of fish in terms of dynamics. It is of course quite normal in many countries, and I think it is something we should aspire to here, but in the UK I would be reluctant to stop in a roundabout for fear of somebody crashing into me. They're generally quite hostile places with a lot of people trying to prove a point. I reckon there's a long way to go before it becomes the norm to give way to pedestrians on the exit of a roundabout and will take a nationwide campaign for it happen.
Easy way for protestors to stop all traffic. Queue of people at each exit either waiting to cross or crossing, going around all day. No need for super glue!😂
And the editor of the Sheffield Star Nancy Fielder spoke quite well about how it always ends up being an us vs them fight rather than people getting on & sharing the road space.
She's done more to wreck Sheffield and it's safer roads than anyone else in the area.