And by driving in a funeral procession, I don't expect to be given extra priority over and above that given by the Highway Code.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Meanwhile in Nottingham - victim blaming - bad police action
(49 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
He is not aware of the importance of this event to the people concerned who are deeply upset watching their loved one disappear down the road
Whether deeply upset or not, these two in the car feel empowered and entitled by their immediate circumstances to violently bully the cyclist to the ground, then follow it up toe to toe, for the heinous crime of being in their way.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"... holds up the third, and forth and fifth cars in the procession, by travelling in the middle of the road"
Of course without a rear facing camera it's actually impossible to know if he was the cause of the gaps, or if they were already there, so I guess we can't actually say one way or the other.
Another interesting thing to know would be the speed of the cyclist, and the speed of the 'procession' going past him. The actual funeral cars look like they're shifting (and one definitely races to get through before the pinch).
Quick question. Funeral procession proceeding down the street, with half of it over a junction the lights go red, should the traffic that then has a green light show respect by not going and letting the rest of the procession go through red? (you're right in that a cyclist is likely to 'get in the way' in a different way to a car which the procession won't be able to overtake, but what I guess I'm wondering is there are situations in which a procession could be allowed to proceed by the other traffic if it so chose and is it disrespectiful of that traffic not to let it so proceed?).
I think we're all agreed that the driver and his passenger were morons, and needlessly put someone's life at risk (after all, they then wasted a lot more time shouting at the cyclist than they were losing seeing their loved one 'disappear up the road'). What we're at odds about is whether the cyclist was disrespectful (at all, or enough) to warrant the police rebuke - none of us are saying that he deserved what happened to him, and while it might look it, agreesing with the police statement is not necessarily saying that he should have been hit).
Posted 10 years ago # -
Having just watched it I have to say I think there is absolutely no way that the funeral should have been in any way a mitigating factor.
Even if you say that he saw the first car, as others say, how long is reasonable for you to assume that no other cars are part of that procession?
Also the passes are ridiculous and would be practically worthy of a video in their own right. Besides, if it's a procession, the cars are hardly likely to be speeding so why put pressure on what is clearly a busy road with obstacles and pinch points? You're hardly going to lose sight of it. I appreciate it's a difficult time, but I'm sure my loved ones would have been far more upset if they thought that on their Great Send Off I knocked someone down and then blamed it on the circumstances.
Because it's always the circumstances, isn't it - never the driver being at fault. Whether it's eating sandwiches, stressful personal times (as in two twitter cases from today) or this "I was in a funeral procession, Guv'nor!" there always seems to be some reason as to why it's acceptable for a motorist to knock down a cyclist.
Posted 10 years ago # -
there always seems to be some reason as to why it's acceptable
every excuse under the sun
including the sun itself
Posted 10 years ago # -
You could be stronger in your condemnation - perhaps add a fourth 'wrong' or go bold.
"...deliberately/thoughtlessly/whatever holds up the third, and forth and fifth cars in the procession, by travelling in the middle of the road"
I think it's option c: 'whatever', more specifically 'sensibly' because he was wanting to turn right, is entitled to ride wherever he likes along the carriageway and had already had his presence and rights ignored on the approach to a pinch-point.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I refuse to accept any notion that being in a funeral precession somehow entitles a person to immunity from normal sensible driving standards. No that wasn't sarcasm, I wouldn't be at all happy about the passes at the pinch points, funeral or not. I genuinely believe the majority of drivers would hold back through there especially given the cyclist has made their right-turning intentions abundantly clear. Does that mean all road users should show no respect to funerals? Of course not. Does that mean it's open season on people that one way or another 'disrupt' a precession? Nope.
Heck the more I watch it the more I'm shocked at the behavior of the main funeral cars. Every precession I've ever seen has been a very slow and considerate affair. Never, ever seen that sort of aggression.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
Quick question. Funeral procession proceeding down the street, with half of it over a junction the lights go red, should the traffic that then has a green light show respect by not going and letting the rest of the procession go through red?
"In a highway code sense, no, but I would say yes.
I can say from personal experience of my mum's funeral that when we went onto the Lizzie Brice round about from the Dual Carriageway in Livingston, all of cars on the round about stopped to allow the entire procession through even though they did of course have right of way. That was...'nice'.
I personally allow others in that position the same respect.
Posted 10 years ago # -
At my mum's funeral there were two people dressed a bit like Charlie Chaplin waiting at the bus stop by the junction to the cemetary. One of them stood in the middle of the lane, so everyone had to go over to the oncoming lane to turn off.
I think very large quantities of drugs were involved, judging by facial expression and road position. I wasn't in any way happy with the disrespect.
No-one ran them over.
I don't accept funeral as a mitigating factor for punishment driving.
Posted 10 years ago # -
So the cyclist is attempting a right turn which obviously requires him to move across the flow of cars. He signals right but appears not to notice that he has a car behind him and that it isn't giving way. So no surprise that when he then moves out into path of said car he gets knocked off. I see lots of things wrong with the driver's and passenger's reactions but I don't see anything wrong with the police view that the cyclist was partly to blame.
Posted 10 years ago # -
We all know that there comes a time in every right turn made in moving traffic when a cyclist has to fully commit to the manoeuvre, ie. moving from a weak to a strong primary, and hope that the clear hand signal is respected.
The police view that the cyclist was partly to blame means that we are all out there on a wing and a prayer.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"but I don't see anything wrong with the police view that the cyclist was partly to blame."
We've officially gone to hell in a handcart. Check traffic as you should; protect yourself through a pinch point as you should; signal as you should; get driven into is your own fault. We might as well give up now.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"We might as well give up now."
I'm sure WC means that in a wider context, but perhaps for this discussion too(?)
Too civil to be closed, but it's going round in circles.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Indeed, both senses. Circular without input from the actual cyclist and driver involved. Pointless to debate further.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I was behind a Co-op hearse for a bit of the way home this evening. At no point did anyone it passed doff anything or cease their walking in order to stand respectfully still. At one point it was even travelling at 22mph.
Posted 10 years ago # -
At no point did anyone it passed doff anything or cease their walking in order to stand respectfully still.
Probably all too busy catching up with soshul meeja on their mobys.
Posted 10 years ago # -
So no surprise that when he then moves out into path of said car he gets knocked off.
With my motoring hat on, I'm glad to read this carte-blanche to hit anyone from behind who isn't well tucked up against the kerb. Previously I thought if I had time to sound my horn for a few seconds and then drove through someone it was doubly my fault (compared with the usual situation that if you slam your motor into the back of another motor you're more or less automatically at fault).
Posted 10 years ago # -
Ah, but Dave you appear to have missed the important mitigating factors which clearly influenced PC Copper's actions.
1. The cyclist was in the way. I mean, that's tantamount to an offence, isn't it? It isn't? Well frankly I'm surprised in this day and age, that it is not.
2. They were mourners. Can't blame them for deliberately ramming a cyclist for goodness' sake. I mean, being in mourning and then having to deal with one of those self-righteous, arrogant lycra louts is enough to provoke a strong reaction in otherwise law abiding, hard-pressed motorists. I mean, if you're going to wage war on the motorist, you can expect to get hurt, can't you?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Especially when the 'cortage effect' extends to all cars for several minutes behind the hearse.
TBH until I read this topic I wouldn't have considered that a hearse required any special actions on my behalf (as a driver or a cyclist) but how wrong I was.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
