Do these 'baseball bat' van stickers incite violence against cyclists?

L.Willo wrote:

Sigh. What the law requires is one thing. What I require is another.

If I invite you into my car and you refuse to wear a seatbelt, I will very quickly invite you to get the hell out of my car which will not move until you have done so.

You see, the law might not require it, but when you get in my car, I take responsibility for your safety and do everything in my power not to put you in danger. Even if you do not want to help yourself.

People outside my car? I do not want an accident with you because that puts me and my passengers at risk but how you drive / cycle is entirely your own responsibility not mine and if your stupidity puts me in a situation where I have to choose between your safety and the safety of my passengers ... sorry, you lose.

Repeat. Why are you using an example where the other person is riding dangerously.

You've argued that you have no duty of care towards other road users. How they behave would be irrelevant to that point.

Such a shame as your car sounds like a great place to be. I'm gutted. 

L.Willo wrote:

Smudgersmith15 wrote:

I love how the very first line in your PowerPoint presentation is woefully inaccurate. You are not responsible for the other adults in your car wearing a seatbelt. They are.

Sigh. What the law requires is one thing. What I require is another.

If I invite you into my car and you refuse to wear a seatbelt, I will very quickly invite you to get the hell out of my car which will not move until you have done so.

You see, the law might not require it, but when you get in my car, I take responsibility for your safety and do everything in my power not to put you in danger. Even if you do not want to help yourself.

People outside my car? I do not want an accident with you because that puts me and my passengers at risk but how you drive / cycle is entirely your own responsibility not mine and if your stupidity puts me in a situation where I have to choose between your safety and the safety of my passengers ... sorry, you lose.

L.Willo wrote:

Smudgersmith15 wrote:

I love how the very first line in your PowerPoint presentation is woefully inaccurate. You are not responsible for the other adults in your car wearing a seatbelt. They are.

Sigh. What the law requires is one thing. What I require is another.

If I invite you into my car and you refuse to wear a seatbelt, I will very quickly invite you to get the hell out of my car which will not move until you have done so.

You see, the law might not require it, but when you get in my car, I take responsibility for your safety and do everything in my power not to put you in danger. Even if you do not want to help yourself.

People outside my car? I do not want an accident with you because that puts me and my passengers at risk but how you drive / cycle is entirely your own responsibility not mine and if your stupidity puts me in a situation where I have to choose between your safety and the safety of my passengers ... sorry, you lose.

Oh you tiresome, tiresome specimen. If you were the least bit amusing, then there might be a point to you. But your comments are as po faced as they are wrong headed. Are you Alan Shearer?

L.Willo wrote:

Sigh. What the law requires is one thing. What I require is another.

If I invite you into my car and you refuse to wear a seatbelt, I will very quickly invite you to get the hell out of my car which will not move until you have done so.

I feel your being un nessecerily hostile, if said person happened to be incapable of putting on said seatbelt inviting them into your car knowing you will simply tell them to get out seems a bit silly.

Would be fun to see the arguement though.

L.Willo wrote:

You see, the law might not require it, but when you get in my car, I take responsibility for your safety and do everything in my power not to put you in danger. Even if you do not want to help yourself.

Law does require it actually https://www.gov.uk/seat-belts-law/overview

L.Willo wrote:

People outside my car? I do not want an accident with you because that puts me and my passengers at risk but how you drive / cycle is entirely your own responsibility not mine and if your stupidity puts me in a situation where I have to choose between your safety and the safety of my passengers ... sorry, you lose.

So you are saying yo uwould delibratly cause an accident becuase it suited your needs? I just hope you live no where near me

L.Willo wrote:

 

... to put your life in the hands of others. Until one day you meet someone who refuses or is too incompetent to play ball and then you are dead.

 

every time you venture out onto the roads without a steel safety cage you do this, because no amount of defensive cycling will save you from the driver who ploughs into you from behind because they can't wait for you to pass the pinch point first, or are texting or are drunk.

your reducto ad absurdum points do not alleviate your responsibility for the safety of all roads users, yes some actions are so bad you shouldn't be responsible for them, but your attitude that you will just plough through any cyclist who does something stupid as you are obviously unaware of what is going on around your car and so can't be certain whether or not you can apply the brake without the car behind hitting you borders on the sociopathic.

wycombewheeler wrote:

L.Willo wrote:

 

... to put your life in the hands of others. Until one day you meet someone who refuses or is too incompetent to play ball and then you are dead.

 

every time you venture out onto the roads without a steel safety cage you do this, because no amount of defensive cycling will save you from the driver who ploughs into you from behind because they can't wait for you to pass the pinch point first, or are texting or are drunk.

your reducto ad absurdum points do not alleviate your responsibility for the safety of all roads users, yes some actions are so bad you shouldn't be responsible for them, but your attitude that you will just plough through any cyclist who does something stupid as you are obviously unaware of what is going on around your car and so can't be certain whether or not you can apply the brake without the car behind hitting you borders on the sociopathic.

Look, if I take responsibility for my safety while I am driving / cycling, perform that activity conscientiously ... if you do the same, the chances are we will never meet in an accident.

I cannot do anything about the way that you drive / cycle so my focus is quite rightly on my side of the bargain. That is the only thing I can control. 

I think it is naive in the extreme to think that motorists are driving around with the mindset: ooh there's a vulnerable wobbling cyclist, let me go out of my way to keep him safe ..... more like, that cyclist looks like an accident waiting to happen, let me give him a very wide berth to make sure it's not my day he ruins.

The same re: errant pedestrians in Jimmy Ray Will's example.

On the road, you look out for No. 1. first. 

L.Willo wrote:

Look, if I take responsibility for my safety while I am driving / cycling, perform that activity conscientiously ... if you do the same, the chances are we will never meet in an accident.

 

I cannot do anything about the way that you drive / cycle so my focus is quite rightly on my side of the bargain. That is the only thing I can control. 

I think it is naive in the extreme to think that motorists are driving around with the mindset: ooh there's a vulnerable wobbling cyclist, let me go out of my way to keep him safe ..... more like, that cyclist looks like an accident waiting to happen, let me give him a very wide berth to make sure it's not my day he ruins.

The same re: errant pedestrians in Jimmy Ray Will's example.

On the road, you look out for No. 1. first. 

And you're doing it again.

What does the other road users behaviour have to do with whether or not you have a duty of care toward them?

L.Willo wrote:

Look, if I take responsibility for my safety while I am driving / cycling, perform that activity conscientiously ... if you do the same, the chances are we will never meet in an accident.

thats true

L.Willo wrote:

I cannot do anything about the way that you drive / cycle so my focus is quite rightly on my side of the bargain. That is the only thing I can control. 

this is the part I have a problem with, when the green man comes up do you cross immediately, or do you look at the road and check no cars are going to run the lights and run you down? if the former you have been lucky so far, if the latter then why can't you apply this same level of anticpation for the unexpected when driving? It seems like kit is simply because you feel your life is more important than others.

wycombewheeler wrote:

L.Willo wrote:

Look, if I take responsibility for my safety while I am driving / cycling, perform that activity conscientiously ... if you do the same, the chances are we will never meet in an accident.

thats true

L.Willo wrote:

I cannot do anything about the way that you drive / cycle so my focus is quite rightly on my side of the bargain. That is the only thing I can control. 

this is the part I have a problem with, when the green man comes up do you cross immediately, or do you look at the road and check no cars are going to run the lights and run you down? if the former you have been lucky so far, if the latter then why can't you apply this same level of anticpation for the unexpected when driving? It seems like kit is simply because you feel your life is more important than others.

This is the person who claims that in 20 years of cycling, he's never had a hear miss: "not even close". He's got it nailed.

...or he's full of shit and has a comically simplistic view of the world.

L.Willo wrote:

 

On the road, you look out for No. 1. first. 

As you are clearly not an advanced  driver, let me recommend Roadcraft to you (ISBN: 0-11-340858-7)

Chapter 1 is pertinent

L.Willo wrote:

No one is responsible for me when I am on the road, 2 wheels or 4. I am responsible for my own safety. That is my job, no one else's.

Everyone is responsible for everyone else's safety when using the roads. As an earlier commenter said its called "driving with due care and attention".

They drill this into you on constrution sites and these are as dangerous as the roads.

L.Willo wrote:

Yes. Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

Rule 144
You MUST NOT...
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.
Law RTA 1988 sects 2 & 3 as amended by RTA 1991

Jitensha Oni wrote:

L.Willo wrote:

Yes. Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

Rule 144
You MUST NOT...
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.
Law RTA 1988 sects 2 & 3 as amended by RTA 1991

That's  it in a nutshell.  What many motorists forget is that when they receive their licence to use the public roads it is an endorsement of their skills and abilities to operate a piece of machinery that if mishandled can cause the death or serious injury of themselves and other road users.  We all need to take responsibility for ourselves and others when on the roads. Older copies of the Highway Code had the words care, consideration and courtesy included in the opening paragraph. Maybe they should be brought back. As an aside. The old NI licence had the same words on the opening page. These were dispensed with when the plastic card and counterpart were introduced. 

giff77 wrote:

Jitensha Oni wrote:

L.Willo wrote:

Yes. Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

Rule 144
You MUST NOT...
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.
Law RTA 1988 sects 2 & 3 as amended by RTA 1991

That's  it in a nutshell.  What many motorists forget is that when they receive their licence to use the public roads it is an endorsement of their skills and abilities to operate a piece of machinery that if mishandled can cause the death or serious injury of themselves and other road users.  We all need to take responsibility for ourselves and others when on the roads. Older copies of the Highway Code had the words care, consideration and courtesy included in the opening paragraph. Maybe they should be brought back. As an aside. The old NI licence had the same words on the opening page. These were dispensed with when the plastic card and counterpart were introduced. 

quite! any numpty can drive a car around under control and not hit any stationary objects. The difficulty comes in allowing for the actions of others, some of whom may make mistakes because, you know, they are human.

Jitensha Oni wrote:

L.Willo wrote:

Yes. Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

Rule 144
You MUST NOT...
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.
Law RTA 1988 sects 2 & 3 as amended by RTA 1991

... does not mean the same thing as you MUST take responsibility for the safety of all other road users. Be reasonably considerate, not a problem.... take responsibility for your safety? Get out of here! That's your job.

L.Willo wrote:

Yes. Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

Google 'duty of care'

No need to thank me

L.Willo wrote:

Yes. Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

How about this bit from the Highway Code:

"Road users requiring extra care (204 to 225)"

Andthis:

"Rule 204

The most vulnerable road users are pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and horse riders. It is particularly important to be aware of children, older and disabled people, and learner and inexperienced drivers and riders."

L.Willo wrote:

How is a driver responsible for the safety of anyone but himself and his passengers?

Not sure if trolling or indescribably stupid.

Bez wrote:

L.Willo wrote:

How is a driver responsible for the safety of anyone but himself and his passengers?

Not sure if trolling or indescribably stupid.

One does not exclude the other... in fact, they are often seen together.

L.Willo]</p>

<p>[quote wrote:

How is a driver responsible for the safety of anyone but himself and his passengers? It is absolutely unjust to expect anyone to assume responsibility for the actions of others that they cannot control.

err, did you not read the Highway Code when getting your licence? You DO have one don't you?

L.Willo wrote:

It is absolutely unjust to expect anyone to assume responsibility for the actions of others that they cannot control.

Having a duty of care to avoid killing/injuring other people is not the same thing as being made to assume responsibility for their actions.

Quote:

Please direct me to the part which says that I am responsible for the safety of other road users.

Start at page 1, then read to the end.

Dimwit.

L.Willo wrote:

Quote:

Yellow "cyclists stay back" stickers have become infamous in recent years with many cyclists of the opinion that the wording implies it is only the person on the bike and not the driver who is responsible for the former’s safety.

- See more at: http://road.cc/content/news/191960-do-these-baseball-bat-van-stickers-in...

How is a driver responsible for the safety of anyone but himself and his passengers? It is absolutely unjust to expect anyone to assume responsibility for the actions of others that they cannot control.

Shockingly irrational thing to say. That reveals a lot about your ability to think clearly. I cringed hard at that.

Kind of feel bad for you there!

L.Willo wrote:

How is a driver responsible for the safety of anyone but himself and his passengers? It is absolutely unjust to expect anyone to assume responsibility for the actions of others that they cannot control.

I know you're the resident self-hating cycling troll, but that's a new level of stupid even for you.