"Read the Highway Code!": Confrontational close pass van driver fined £220; Bernal needs second spinal operation; Pidcock's rainbow bands; "Particularly British" anti-cycling sentiment; G rumbled by Phil Gaimon; But cyclists + more on the live blog

hirsute wrote:

Shame the horse didn't sit on the bonnet !

I think there's an h missing from that sentence.

I believe that 2 horses were killed after being hit by cars in January. Sorry can't find the source at the moment. Still some drivers will say that temperamental horses shouldn't be allowed on the road. If that was true then why do we let temperamental drivers on the road?

IanMK wrote:

I believe that 2 horses were killed after being hit by cars in January. Sorry can't find the source at the moment. Still some drivers will say that temperamental horses shouldn't be allowed on the road. If that was true then why do we let temperamental drivers on the road?

From the BristolPost article, the horse was understandably quite spooked by the incident and took at least a week to get over its fear of traffic. It's just so unnecessary - why react with anger just because you've been careless?

hawkinspeter wrote:

IanMK wrote:

I believe that 2 horses were killed after being hit by cars in January. Sorry can't find the source at the moment. Still some drivers will say that temperamental horses shouldn't be allowed on the road. If that was true then why do we let temperamental drivers on the road?

From the BristolPost article, the horse was understandably quite spooked by the incident and took at least a week to get over its fear of traffic. It's just so unnecessary - why react with anger just because you've been careless?

"How very DARE you criticise my driving!"

People hate having someone see their mistakes (and disappointedly shake their head at them) almost as much as they hate someone touching their car...

It's a long-held conundrum for me: if that's how drivers behave when they're in the wrong, what do they do when they're in the right?

Actually, one of the comments BTL on the Bristol Post article is someone saying horses shouldn't be allowed on roads and should be kept in fields.

brooksby wrote:

Actually, one of the comments BTL on the Bristol Post article is someone saying horses shouldn't be allowed on roads and should be kept in fields.

So they didn't suggest the same would be true of drivers that don't have the right temperament to be let loose amongst vulnerable road users 

brooksby wrote:

horses Cars shouldn't be allowed on roads and should be kept in fields showrooms.

That's better.....

t

brooksby wrote:

Actually, one of the comments BTL on the Bristol Post article is someone saying horses shouldn't be allowed on roads and should be kept in fields.

Yeah, because roads were built for cars, not horses...

Steve K wrote:

brooksby wrote:

Actually, one of the comments BTL on the Bristol Post article is someone saying horses shouldn't be allowed on roads and should be kept in fields.

Yeah, because roads were built for cars, not horses...

I've always thought this was a very odd way to see things. I actually got in to an argument with a troll on Facebook about this, something I normally avoid. Basically, they seem to believe that because at some point in the last century somebody slapped a tarmac (or concrete) surface on an ancient byway, that might have been there for millenia, they claimed it in perpetuity for the exclusive use of the car. It's like a modern colonialism.

IanMK wrote:

I've always thought this was a very odd way to see things. I actually got in to an argument with a troll on Facebook about this, something I normally avoid. Basically, they seem to believe that because at some point in the last century somebody slapped a tarmac (or concrete) surface on an ancient byway, that might have been there for millenia, they claimed it in perpetuity for the exclusive use of the car. It's like a modern colonialism.

I think you'll find that it was cyclists that started the whole tarmac thing.

Nice sarcasm from Steve K.

Pressure to get roads "metalled" unfortunately came from cyclists in the UK and USA (I've not read anything about our near neighbours).

Should we blame cyclists for making roads fit for cars to drive on?  Well, maybe.  Metalled roads are sensible for all wheeled traffic, but not for horses and less so for pedestrians*.  We could blame car drivers for bringing arrogant aggression and astonishing pollution to our roads.

* smooth, drained, turf paths are ideal for pedestrians.

IanMK wrote:

Steve K wrote:

brooksby wrote:

Actually, one of the comments BTL on the Bristol Post article is someone saying horses shouldn't be allowed on roads and should be kept in fields.

Yeah, because roads were built for cars, not horses...

I've always thought this was a very odd way to see things. I actually got in to an argument with a troll on Facebook about this, something I normally avoid. Basically, they seem to believe that because at some point in the last century somebody slapped a tarmac (or concrete) surface on an ancient byway, that might have been there for millenia, they claimed it in perpetuity for the exclusive use of the car. It's like a modern colonialism.

Yeah for example the B6318 between Newcastle and Greenhead and then a section of the A69 from Greenhead to near Brampton...... lots of sections on that road are suspiciously straight...... and track near to Hadrians Wall.

It's almost like the Romans were ahead of their time building their straight roads for motor cars 1900 years ago

Waltham Abbey https://www.yourhorse.co.uk/news/two-horses-die-riders-injured-waltham-a...

There have also been several horses killed without riders, ie they were roaming by themselves, that dont make the news except in road closure bulletins.

hawkinspeter wrote:

According to the Bristol Post, some poor horse rider got threatened by a driver so it's not just cyclists getting abuse:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/horse-rider-upset-scared-after-6582770

Quote:

She said she was out horse riding with a friend when a car reversed out of a parking bay without looking behind, nearly hitting the horses.

Ms Falango said the woman - who she said was driving an Audi TT - then started swearing at them and followed them down the High Street.

The horse rider said: "She was revving the engine and drove at my horse's hind legs, swerving at last minute but brushing her tail with the car.

"My youngster nearly sat on her bonnet with fright.

"This could have been a serious accident and people like this should be punished.

"We both wore Hi Vis and are responsible, polite riders."

Ms Falango, from Stoke Gifford, said she was left upset and scared after the incident as she has had problems before but it has always been on main roads.

The 39-year-old said she was very surprised by what happened, adding that she was not expecting to see a "hooligan" like that on a Sunday morning on Chipping Sodbury's High Street.

Re. the 'high vis'  - I'm sorry but if you can't see a bloody horse and rider in daylight WITHOUT HIGH VIS  then you shouldn't be within a million miles of a driving license...

EddyBerckx wrote:

Re. the 'high vis'  - I'm sorry but if you can't see a bloody horse and rider in daylight WITHOUT HIGH VIS  then you shouldn't be within a million miles of a driving license...

Especially as there were two of them. If you're going to reverse out of a parking space (bad idea), then at least look properly before you do it.

Edit: Found what I think is a picture of the horse, though it's difficult to see if anything is there at all

hawkinspeter wrote:

EddyBerckx wrote:

Re. the 'high vis'  - I'm sorry but if you can't see a bloody horse and rider in daylight WITHOUT HIGH VIS  then you shouldn't be within a million miles of a driving license...

Especially as there were two of them. If you're going to reverse out of a parking space (bad idea), then at least look properly before you do it.

Edit: Found what I think is a picture of the horse, though it's difficult to see if anything is there at all

peter!  I think you forgot to paste in the actual picture of a horse!

brooksby wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

EddyBerckx wrote:

Re. the 'high vis'  - I'm sorry but if you can't see a bloody horse and rider in daylight WITHOUT HIGH VIS  then you shouldn't be within a million miles of a driving license...

Especially as there were two of them. If you're going to reverse out of a parking space (bad idea), then at least look properly before you do it.

Edit: Found what I think is a picture of the horse, though it's difficult to see if anything is there at all

peter!  I think you forgot to paste in the actual picture of a horse!

You might need to increase the contrast and/or brightness on your monitor, but here's where you should be looking:

OK.  To be fair, it was very hard to spot!

I would have gone down the sarcasm line to highlight how blooming obvious the creature was. 

brooksby wrote:

OK.  To be fair, it was very hard to spot!

What a loada pony!

Where? That just looks the same as the first image you posted to me.

mdavidford wrote:

Where? That just looks the same as the first image you posted to me.

I think it's a problem with camera jitter - I was trying to get a stable background

Black horse not wearing a helmet; no wonder drivers can't see it.

"Why don't you just get an elephant?!"

Captain Badger wrote:

Nice one CopnorCyclist. 

Some of the replies, STILL trying to make out the rider was wrong????

Yeah, the level of those replies That guy with the tatts and bald head seemed to know some new medical stuff about the damage riding a bike can do to your sex life too.

One reply still insists the cyclist breached the HC but is unable and unwilling to state how . I know - because there was no breach.

It's encouraging that the police took action on this.

I was on the receiving end of a similar incident last week. I've just phoned up the police for an update and they're awaiting a response to the NIP and said it could take 5 months for an outcome. So that does sound like they're taking this sort of intimidating driving seriously.

What needs to happen is the police forces co-ordinate for a month where they crack down on these offences. Then follow up with a DfT publicity campaign showing the consequences of these actions, with some statistics that make it sound like it's very likely you'll get prosecuted. That may have some chance of changing behaviours.